The study applied stratified random sampling approach in which 12 resident participants (7 men, 5 women) were interviewed. The residents were from Maine Medical Center Internal Medicine residency. The researchers used interview method in data collection where the interviewees were asked five questions. Moreover, the researcher’s audiotaped the interviews and the transcribed them before analyzing the transcripts using qualitative techniques
The coherence between the aim, the design, and methods
The title of the study was “Receptivity of Feedback Tempered by Sender Credibility.” The stated aims of the study were “To characterize the perceptions of the residents of the effective feedback” and “What are the sender’s aspects causing the residents to discount such feedback.” The aims of the study was not coherent with the stated aim of the study. The most significant area that the study was to look at the researchers was the credibility of the sender, but the study digressed to other aspects hence on focusing on a small amount of the credibility of the sender.
The given approach the study used is also not coherent to the aims of the study. This is because it did benchmark in the study where the aims is to be placed in the paper. It makes the assumption that the introduction’s last sentence is the aim. From the study, the key aims of the study all have the feel of the interpretivist, and they include perception, characterize, aspects of the sender, and effective feedback.
Moreover, it moves on to stratified random sampling which is more consistent with the positivist. This section shows high coherence between the aim of the design and method of study. To begin, the study used stratified random sampling approach in selection of the resident participants. This approach ensured inclusiveness both vertically amongst the postgraduate students from year one to year three, moreover, gender balance was paramount with five women and seven men from the Maine Medical Center Internal Medicine residency
The study used closed question survey that has restricted options. “The positive feedback is powerful.” The question is what makes it powerful while the closed questions in the survey prevented it from being explored, hence no coherence.
Coherence was also shown from the study title and the methods of data collection. The researchers used structured quests in interviews. Coherence is shown from the content of the interview questions which was majorly about “Feedback,” such as the definition of feedback, how to now that they are receive , an document he feedback, what cystitis an effective feedback. Moreover, other questions also asked about how what would cause an individual to perceive a person giving feedback as a source that is unreliable, and lastly how a person can improve their performance if they are given an effective feedbacks. All these interview questions are related to the aim of the study and hence shows coherence.
Moreover, the methodology has been thorough in collecting of the data needed for the study. For instance, the study used variety of methods in data collection such as the use of interviews, audio tapes and then transcribed the respondents. By using interviews, the researchers were able to get firsthand information which was helpful in the data analysis. Moreover by using the audio tapes, the researchers were able to record the responses of the interviews for future references and for clarification in any case there was daunts in the data provided. This shows robustness and vigor of the methods use in the study.
The study also used the survey methodology and at the same time used interview survey methodology. This according to International Conference on Travel Survey Methods, Stopher & Stecher (2006), are interchangeable. However, the study could have used analytic or descriptive methodology instead of survey methodology because it is about relationship between something such as fixed population (Fowler, 1993). Similarly, the methods for data collection are fixed, meaning that they are collecting data from the same population to see if there is a relationship between something or if the thesis an association. There was no causal relationship that is some sort of relations between two things that they wanted to find out about.
From the findings of the study, they were full of robustness also. The researchers categories the findings from their interviews into three core themes which included first, the perceptions of the residents of effective feedback, second, the areas that impacted on the sender’s credibility, and lastly n the factors that facilitated the performance of the residents from the feedback. However, something does not seem right as the study tries to characterize the perception, under the theme where it looked at feedback and perception. This is because, as American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (2013) argued, studies using stratified random sampling approach is to allow generalization in most instances.
Moreover, the closed interview questions above needed more information to decide their content. For instance, n question one, it was phenomenology, “what is the feedback and what does it entail? “In question two, it is ethnographic about their peers. Moreover, rate applied grounded theory was not appropriate as the respond dens had the and already in their hand and hence were not generating any new theory
From the close examination of the interview questions and the findings, there is no coherence. This raises the question of the main point of the research. Moreover, interview question four compared to the aim of the study was very complex. Moreover, the question has strong assumption that the respondende5s discount feedback this are given back to them. Moreover, a close examination of the last question has very little to do with the stranded aim of the study
Briefly, from the aims, methodology, and the findings, the researchers did not achieve their aims since they did not take the pass tons not accent. Moreover, the researchers did not have any understating of the social science research. Therefore, they need to be more transparent so as to demonstrate rigor in their studies.
From the study, one of the researchers stated that the double coding analysis used in the study were nor sent back to the individual interviewees for checking. This affects the r credibility and truthfulness of the study, rigor of the study and interval validity. According to Gray (2004), there are three methods of ensuring internal validity in the social science eraser. They include, member checking, deviate cases or investigate people and therefore the other researchers should be encouraged to code it so as to increase the validity. Lastly, is looking at the triangulation data that is looking at the same phenomena and examining his receptivity to feedback but also spending some time in class observing them.
To look for the truth ad top ensure reliability, another person should also be gotten to code the data so as to increase its reliability. Bing-You Paterson & Levine (1997) stated that the lack of transparency between the researcher conducting study and their relationship and compromised the quality. In general, the findings of the study lack robustness. It could have been useful including the themes in data frequency. Moreover, it should have been interpretivists that are discussing theme development. In content analysis, the study is more of the quantitative approach to language because sometimes the lines are blurred
Strengths, flaws and deficits in the study
The first strength of the study is that they used semi-structured interviews which were good in obtaining richer data. The semi structured techniques; the interview is very effective since in interviewing takes about 45 minutes to 1 hour (Fowler, 1993). Secondly, by discussing feedback is itself a strong, when the views of the students are considered. Moreover, the themes were also strengths of the study since the discussion of the findings tended to focus on the discussion of the themes.
The balanced narrative of both negative and positive responses took not accusing avoids views. This was helpful as it led to authenticity ad to its transparency. According to Gray (2004), a researcher can see quotes that which is unhelpful especially if it does not have anything to do with the theme.
The study also strived to be reliable by using due to coding. Lastly, as much as the study did not mention rate of response from the participant, the assumption is that there was 100% rate of participation. The only deficit of flaw in the study was that given that there’s study cannot be reproduced, there are concerns about the methodology used.
Assumptions made by the researches in the study
(i) the following are some of the assumptions by the following paper.
ii) From the title of the reticle, the essay assumes that the researchers think that by research they he “perfect sender.”
(iv)The study did not, mentions anything, about the title of the paper, “tempered by server’s credulity” was not mentioned little time the end.
(v) One of the author’s n the study had already developed guidelines, therefore, the assumption I that the researchers designed a theory and came up with a theory he had developed
(vi) The essay assessed that the tiny effect of the sender’s perceptions is negative. Going into the study looking for negative feedback and not open minded. Going in with pre-determined thoughts
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. (2013). Stratified random sampling. New York: AICPA.
Bing-You, R. G., Paterson, J., & Levine, M. A. (January 01, 1997). Feedback falling on deaf ears: residents’ receptivity to feedback tempered by sender credibility. Medical Teacher, 19, 1, 40.
Fowler, F. J. (1993). Survey research methods. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Gray, D. E. (2004). Doing research in the real world. London: Sage Publications.
International Conference on Travel Survey Methods, Stopher, P. R., & Stecher, C. (2006). Travel survey methods: Quality and future directions. Amsterdam: Elsevier.