This discussion covers readings from Sessions 3 & 4.
In Session 3, our goal is to learn how to conceptualize the research and propose hypotheses. Hypotheses are plausible explanations to the research questions, which will be tested by using empirical data collected from systematic observation so that we can finally answer our research questions. Thus, conceptualization is an intermediate step between the research question and data collection, which will guide your data collection.
You may ask: what is the use of the literature review? Literature review helps you further specify your research questions and develop your conceptual framework. Thus, you should do it at the same time when you specify your research question and develop the conceptual framework.
After the conceptual framework is set up, the next step is to operationalize the conceptual framework. One thing we need to do is to find indicator(s) for each concept in the hypotheses so that we can collect data to test them. Particularly, many public administration concepts are very abstract (e.g. democracy, bureaucracy, trust, transparency, & collaboration etc.). How can we observe them in the real world? That is why we need indicators to measure those concepts (Session 4).
Please answer the following questions using readings from Sessions 3 & 4.
1. According to Johnson and Reynold Chapter 3, what are the major three steps in setting up the conceptual framework (after specifying the research question)? Please use one sentence to summarize what we do in each step (0.5pt). (Hint: you can also find these steps in Session 3 lecture slides).
2. According to Johnson and Reynold (chapter 4), what is a measurement? In Babbie Chapter 5, what are the different levels of measurement? Please give an example for each level of measurement. Why do we differentiate levels of measurement? (0.5 pt).
3. Research article critique: Please evaluate the hypotheses and measurements in Tang & Ho (2019).
1) What are the dependent variables, independent (explanatory) variables, and control variables in this paper?(0.5 pt). You can check Session 3 slides for the meaning and examples of these variables.
2) According to the 6 criteria for good hypotheses in Johnson and Reynolds Ch.3, do you think the hypotheses in this article well-written? Is each concept (dependent variable/independent variable) clearly defined? (please evaluate each hypothesis). Any suggestions for improvement? (2pts) (Hint: You can check Session 3 lecture slides. I have used Krause et al. (2016) as an example to assess the quality of the hypotheses in that paper).
3) What is the measurement(s) for each key variable (i.e. dependent variables and explanatory variables)? What levels of measurements are they? (0.5 pt)
– Dependent variables
– Explanatory variables/Independent variables
4) Use the criteria in Babbie Ch5 and Johnson & Reynolds Ch4 to evaluate the quality of these measurements. Are they precise, reliable, and valid? Any suggestions for improvement? (please evaluate each dependent variable and explanatory variable)(2pts) (Hint: Criteria for measurements can also be found in Session 4 lecture slides).
