4:1 Quantitative research

Benefits of quantitative methods include cost-effectiveness, quick response rates, easily analysed, measurability. Suitable for studies with very specific hypothesis and a lot of prior knowledge. Limitations of quantitative methods include oversimplification. People’s behaviours can be more difficult to measure without additional explanations as one and the same question could be interpreted differently, thus generate different answers based on interpretation. Additionally, superficial information, no answers to “why”; opportunity cost of relevant information.
Benefits of using qualitative methods are ability to capture unexpected information, deeper analysis through open-ended questions, suitable for exploratory studies. Limitations of qualitative methods are time-consuming, costly.
The paper “The relationship between Kolb's experiential learning styles and Big Five personality traits in international managers” by M. Li and S. J. Armstrong uses several questionnaires to support their hypothesis that a correlation exist between said learning styles and personality traits.

269 international managers completed two questionnaires; NEO Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) and Kolb's Learning Style Inventory (KLSI 3.1). Regression analyses indicated that extraverted managers have a “preference for learning by engaging in concrete experience rather than abstract conceptualization; to transform experience via active experimentation rather than reflective observation; and tend to have an accommodative learning style.” The study concluded that Kolb's experiential learning style construct is associated with personality, but also distinct from personality.
The benefit of using questionnaires in this study is that the hypothesis is very specific. A risk when testing personalities and learning styles using quantitative methods is that the complexity of people can get lost in between the data and analyses. Also, as mentioned by the authors; bias of social desirability, halo effects, and acquiescence are potential weaknesses of self reported data. Nevertheless, I found this an good study for the method used.

The researchers took into consideration to correct for potential additional factors such as gender, cultural background and exposure, work experience and education level. They also motivated their choice of method by backing it up with sources preferring this method before alternatives. An improvement could be to correct for seasonality or weather - would answers be different during winter compared to summer for example?
Although I already knew a lot about quantitative research, the study refreshed some terminology such as acquiescence. In reflection, the course “Theory and method for media technology” at KTH to a great extent up until the point of writing has focused on learning methods “abstract conceptualization” and “reflective observation” rather than concrete experience and active experimentation. It could be interesting to investigate whether, with support of the study, it could be proven that extrovert students of this course struggle more than introverts.



By reading “IEEE VR 2012 - Drumming in Immersive Virtual Reality””, I learned more about how IVR affects people and their behaviour in certain situations. The study had as purpose to prove that differences exist between the real and a virtual body affected participants’ behaviours and attitudes. The hypothesis was that the body form would impact behaviour, following the idea of the Proteus effect. The text references previous studies to support its hypothesis, but foremost offers its own data.



Experimental design was used between groups- and participants. The study included 36 caucasian people drumming in IVR, where the participants first get acquainted with a particular African drumming style by watching a video where people from diverse cultural backgrounds demonstrate the drumming. In the next stage, IVR is introduced where all participants see two white hands that is thought to extend a virtual part of their body, facilitating practice of the drumming. In the next stage, either a caucasian formally dressed body is supplied or a dark skinned casually dressed. After the experiment, participants answered an 8-item questionnaire (quantitative) about the experience, then a short interview was recorded (qualitative), then they were asked to complete a demographic questionnaire (quantitative) and a personality test (quantitative).



The sample of 36 participants could be discussed. The recruitment of participants was done on “the university campus”. It could be argued that a majority of people with racial biases do not get a higher education. Therefore this, to some extent, invalidates the data. It would have been a stronger study with a more diverse group with regards to education background. It also did not specify why 2 samples were invalidated.



The additional Asian “supportive avatar” could also have some influence on the study and serve as distraction, which could have benefited of been avoided. They could have dressed the avatar so that their race would not be identified, for example, to avoid bias. Or they could have kept the sound but not had another avatar there.



It could also be criticized that the first part of the experiment offered white hands to all participants, in the next stage when half of them got the black body it is possible that some could have made a connection between what the study was about and therefore invalidated the study.



Nevertheless, the study has addressed and excluded a number of potential other factors which strengthens the hypothesis. It also strengthened the study that it combined quantitative with qualitative research.