RESEARCH METHOD FOR TOURISM

Nov 24, 2021 | 0 comments

Nov 24, 2021 | Essays | 0 comments

The approach to the research methodology is the inductive approach. According to Chandra & Sharma (2013, p.13), this approach entails starting with an observation or measures which is precise in nature, begin to identify regulations and patterns, formulate some uncertain hypothesis that when further explored we end up developing general theories and conclusion. In line with Mustafa (2012, p.8) view on inductive approach, Brunt and Hooton emulate this by starting with the research paper with the uncertain hypothesis by discussing both the positive and negative view of tourism and goes further to describe the impact that tourist-related crime has to the British resort hotel. The author tends to deduce meaning from both the secondary and primary data in order to establish a pattern as well as the relationship that emerge in the research in giving information on both the negative and positive impact that tourism brings.
*Research method:* The author adopted both quantitative and qualitative research method
*Quantitative Research Method*
Neuman, (2018, p.11) describes this research type as a method that put emphasis on objective measurements and numerical data analysis via questionnaires, survey, and poll or even through operation of the existing statistical data through a technique that is computational in nature. The focus of this research method is on gathering data that is numerical and then generalizing to explain a certain occurrence or simplifying it across the group of people (Agarwal & Tailor 2009, p.17). The sources of quantitative data include:
· Surveys: which can be conducted either online, one on one or by phone. It entails designing the same question and the question is asked in the same way to a large number of participants (Goddard & Melville 2011, p.10)
· Secondary data: Goddard & Melville (2011, p.10) explain that this entails using data that has already been processed into information. A good example is using information or data from a government institution.
· Observation: this entails observing a particular a number of times and capture a pattern or a behavior that can be translated in numerical form then use it (Goddard & Melville 2011, p.10).
It is evident that the authors used secondary sources when they used data from Cornwall and Devon police. Data from the British crime survey as well as Crime Disorder Unit were also part of the secondary data used. The author also stated of using interviews the author also used observation to gather primary data which was helpful in providing destination information and insights into behavior pattern in the resort. On till the primary sources of data, the author also used Interviews by the use of a quantitative questionnaire which was distributed to the resident who lived near the resort.
*Strength of quantitative research method*
· It allows formulation of a hypothesis that is statistical in nature and that does not give room for emotional design (Neuman 2018, p. 12).
· According to Mustafa (2012, p.12), it allows sound implementation through its nature of being probabilistic and predictability, therefore, it demands evaluation of the quantitative hypothesis.
· Neuman (2019, p. 12) states that the quantitative research method enables evaluation of numerous hypothesis and datasets in a more accurate as well as faster way than how human brain perform.
· The method is capable of automating time-consuming implementation which is manual therefore it is exponentially faster (Mustafa 2012, p.12).
· A quantitative approach is also standardized, meaning the research can be simulated analyzed and used in comparison to similar studies. Agarwal & Tailor (2009, p. 7) approves this by stating that quantitative methods enable us to summarize wide sources of information and enhance the comparisons across categories over time
· It is capable of allowing the accuracy of results and greater objectivity. Basically, this research method designed to offer summaries of data that support a generalization about an occurrence that is under study. for this to be accomplished the quantitative research have got a limited number of variable and in many occasion, it employs prearranged procedures to ensures reliability and validity (Agarwal & Tailor 2009, p. 7).
· Quantitative research eliminates individual bias as researchers employ the subjects that are unfamiliar to them and there is also a distance between the researcher and the participating subjects design (Neuman 2018, p. 12).
*Weaknesses*
· According to Agarwal & Tailor (2009, p. 8), quantitative research collect a much slimmer and at times artificial dataset.
· The results from the research are limited as it is subjected to numerical descriptions rather than a narrative that I detailed and generally it offers a less sumptuous account on the perception of individuals (Mustafa 2012, p.12).
· The environment in which the research is often carried out is usually artificial as well as unnatural environment with the aim of applying some degree of control to the exercise (Neuman 2018, p. 13). In the real world, this degree of control might be absent hence yielding laboratory result instead of real-world results.
· According to Agarwal & Tailor (2009, p. 8), the current answer might also not be a reflection of how the participant feels about the subject matter and in some cases, it might just be the closest to the match.
· The standardized questions by researched have got a potential of leading to bias and false representation, in a situation where data actually replicates their view instead of the participating subject (Neuman 2019, p. 13).
*Qualitative research method *
Contrary to the quantitative method, qualitative research method focuses on the behavior, attitude and feelings in a deeper depth (Weinberg 2002, p.5). According to Gelissen (2012, p. 8). the analysis is usually on the basis of a grounded theory practice, reactions to the questions related to “why” and finally it focusses greatly on individual cases.
The sources of qualitative research include:
· Questionnaires/surveys: besides having a series of the same question, there are prompts for the aim of gathering more information from the respondents (Weinberg 2002, p.5).
· Interviews: according to Mustafa (2012, p.22), this entails a conversation between the interviewer and the interviewee who can be one or a more people. The interviewer asks a question to obtain information from the interviewee.
· Focus group: Weinberg (2002, p.5) state that this entails a group of people being asked about their feelings towards a concept, idea or even a product.
· Observation: a single participant or a group of the participant are influenced by the researcher, for instance, they are requested to perform a specific task and then observation is made based on their behavior or attitude that they portray (Weinberg 2002, p.5).
· Discourse analysis: Gelissen (2012, p. 8) stated that this is a universal term for a number of methods that are used for analyzing spoken and written signed language use.
*Strengths*
· Provides details and depth: – qualitative research gives deeper insight into the research and analyzing ranks and lays on feelings, attitudes and behaviours (Gelissen 2012, p. 9).
· Build openness: people are always encouraged to expound on their answer and in that, it can lead to the opening up of new areas that initially was not into consideration (Weinberg 2002, p.5).
· Triggers people’s individual experiences: a detailed image can be developed about why people take a certain action and the feelings that they usually have when they do that action (Weinberg 2002, p.5).
· Tends to avoid pre-judgments: this occurs when used hand in hand with quantitative data collection, it can provide more information about a particular response that was given (Gelissen 2012, p. 9).
*Weaknesses*
· According to Mustafa (2012, p.24) usually, fewer people studied: the qualitative research is time-consuming and also needs more in regards to the staff required and the budget hence the sample size is usually reduced to a smaller size.
· Difficult to generalize: according to Weinberg (2002, p.6).the fact that the sample size would be squeezed because of the time it takes, the results out of the research cannot be generalized to that of the entire population. The researchers usually use the exact number rather than the percentage
· Difficult to make systematic comparisons. This is due to the fact that the response given in qualitative research is usually wide and divergent as well as subjective making it hard for a systematic comparison (Gelissen 2012, p. 11).
· Subject to the researcher’ skills: it I dependent on the skills and experience of the researchers especially when conduction observation, interviews and focus groups (Weinberg 2002, p.15)
The author conducted a qualitative interview alongside quantitative t for the purpose of getting more insights and different point of views from the responded
*Sampling Strategy*
The researchers examined through observations the traits and characteristics to determine their parameters of research (Mustafa 2012, p.23). As per Mustafa (2012, p.23), They needed a sample, a sample population of individual units who shared a level of commonality. The researchers selected individuals from whom they utilized to collect the required data through the use of questionnaires. The individuals who were selected for questionnaires are the research group’s representative sample. Their representative sample enables the researchers to obtain study results to be generalized to the target population as a unit; as a whole (Chandra & Sharma 2013, p.15). The researcher utilized a procedure of random selection to make a choice of participants. Furthermore, Chandra & Sharma (2013, p.15) points out that, the group of individuals of units that have the legitimate chance of selection by the researcher is more often than not referred to as the sampling frame.
This particular research group utilized a local association of tourism and commerce, by ailing the questionnaires to them. In total their questionnaires were seven hundred. The questions made specifically to capture the target sample within the population. The questionnaires were distributed strategically; to capture and attract the objected sample population; particularly those who had been victims or had been affected by these victimized as a result of crimes within their location. They utilized a non-probability sampling technique which does not function in the reliance on randomized strategic methods in the selection of members.
*Strengths*
– According to Neuman (2018, p.15) utilizing a non-probability sampling method enabled a deriving of control alongside the researcher’s judgement, a judgement concluded from the researchers’ observations. – Utilising a non-probability sampling method the research has the capability to base the research on the availability as well as interviewer judgement. This particular technique is highly convenient (Neuman 2018, p.15). – Moreover, Neuman (2018, p.16) points out that the researcher’s choice of sampling strategy eliminated excess costs as well as saves time in the preparation of the target sample.
*Weaknesses*
· Agarwal and Tailor (2009, p.10) indicated that this particular sampling technique brought about an element of uncontrolled variability as well as a significant level of bias.
· This particular method that was adapted stands highly dependent on a build in population’s knowledge of the researcher as well as the eliminating of utilization of any tools that were inferential parametric statistical in relation to generalization (Agarwal and Tailor 2009, p.10).
· Lastly, having significant reliance on the intuition as well as hunch concluded by the researcher is not effective in gaining accuracy in data collected.
*Methods of Data Collection*
The researchers, in this case, utilized three major methods and techniques in the research’s data collection and analysis to determine and derive the objected information. The researchers utilized observations, questionnaires as well as in-depth interviews to derive the intended and needed data.
The researchers were given the opportunity to utilize their senses and entirely makes examinations of individuals within their natural environment and situations. The additional use of questionnaires and in-depth interviews strengthened the quality of data collected. As Gelissen (2012, p.15) points out the chosen methods of data collection were inexpensive and thus highly cost-effective for the research group, they were highly practical and even flexible through various components such as being open-minded. Furthermore, the data collection methods proved scalable and more importantly provided quick feedback as compared to other methods of data collection. Nevertheless, the use of in-depth interviews personalized the experiences and therefore created an environment that made the community comfortable and more willing to share information.
Unfortunately, these chosen data collection methods have a number of demerits. For starters, the methods gave way to a significant level of bias from the population. Furthermore, the questionnaires and interviews may derive information from a point of misunderstanding and misinterpretation thus substantially compromising the quality of data collected.
Utilizing a qualitative research method would have been highly beneficial; it would have considered the existing social constructivist paradigm that makes a substantial emphasis on reality’s socially constructed nature.
Reference List
AGARWAL, N. P., & TAILOR, R. K. (2009). *Quantitative research methods*. Jaipur, India, Prateeksha Publications.
CHANDRA, S., & SHARMA, M. K. (2013). *Research methodology*.
GELISSEN, J. (2012). *Qualitative research methods*.
GODDARD, W., & MELVILLE, S. (2011). *Research methodology*. Kenwyn, South Africa, Juta & Co.
MUSTAFA, A. (2012). *Research methodology*. India, AITBS Publishers.
NEUMAN, W. L. (2018). *Social Research Methods Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches*. Pearson.
WEINBERG, D. (2002). *Qualitative research methods*. Oxford, OX, Blackwell Publishers.