Mr.

Peter ‘PJ’ Gisbey

This paper is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Quantitative

Research Methodology R2 (Unit 4-2)

Swiss Management Centre University

School of Management

Dr. Ted Sun

February 28, 2015

Quantitative Research Design Project: Part II

Population description:

The notion of ‘population’ in research work may be understood as concerning the

subjects or data items that could be included in the study, given the relevant specific
circumstances (Polit & Hungler, 1999, p. 37). In the study of interest, there are two
relevant populations.

The first one is the set of available records concerning GNI per capita, which can be
viewed as the best indicator of economic development (Wenneker, Van Del, Thurik &
Reynolds, 2005, p. 9), covering both the UK and New Zealand. The relevant secondary
data source will be the World Bank.

The second one is the set of available records concerning the stock of ‘affordable housing’
concerning both the UK and New Zealand. ‘Affordable housing’ may be defined as the
total amount of housing in the country affordable to households with incomes below 30%
of the relevant area median income (Nelson, 1994, p. 401). The relevant secondary data
sources will be the UK Government and the New Zealand.

Sampling size and access to participants:

The process of selecting a portion of the population to represent the entire population is
known as sampling (LioBiondo-Wood & Haber, 1998, p. 250; Polit & Hungler, 1999, p.
95).

In general, the larger the sample size, the better (LioBiondo-Wood & Haber, 1998, p.
263-264). However, amongst other things, cost and time constraints may be overriding
considerations to bear in mind.

For both the UK and New Zealand, it is thought that all available comparative data from
2009 should be used, as this would give at least five clear years of data up until the
present (in other words, 2009-2013, assuming that the data for 2014 is not yet ready or
available).

Regarding housing affordability, there is no need for access to individuals in specific

households, given the anticipated use of the relevant secondary data freely provided by
the UK government, New Zealand government and the World Bank (in the public
domain).
But access to participants regarding gathering of primary data will, of course, be rightly
required. Convenience sampling is deemed suitable for the study of interest (De Vos,
1998, p. 191). Informed consent is both desirable and necessary (Sade, 2003, p. 325-326).

Instrument selection:

i) Regarding secondary data, recent data (post-2009) will be gathered

concerning housing affordability and the level of economic development (GNI
per capita) as already indicated;

ii) Regarding primary data, a 5-point Likert Scale questionnaire will be devised
concerning the extent to which participants agree or disagree that there is a
general lack of affordable housing in their countries (and relevant regions).

Validity and reliability of the instrument:

An instrument’s validity can be regarded as the assessment of how much “…the

instrument actually reflects the abstract construct being examined” (Burns & Grove, 2001,
p. 814).

An instrument’s reliability reflects how well it measures the relevant attribute and how
easy it is to replicate the relevant results (Polit & Hungler, 1999, p. 255; De Vos, 1998, p.
85).

Regarding the proposed use of questionnaires in this study, it is suggested that the
completed papers are divided into two identically numbered sets (or approximately so)
and then independently assessed to verify any relevant correlative properties.

Given the various advantages associated with secondary data, especially regarding cost
and time, this instrument is felt to be suitably valid and reliable, despite the associated
disadvantages (Sorensen et al., 1996, p. 435).

The research literature indicates that Likert scales questionnaires with response categories
above four points perform attain significantly higher indicative scores for validity and
reliability than those with response categories less than five points (Preston & Colman,
2000, p. 1). So the 5-point Likert scale instrument chosen is felt to be suitably valid and
reliable.
Procedures of data collection (both primary and secondary data):

Generally, data will be collected in accordance with generally accepted principles of

“…beneficience, respect for human dignity and justice” (Polit & Hungler, 1999, p. 153-
159).

As already suggested, there will be “within-method” triangulation (Denzin, 1978, p. 301).

Specifically, regarding secondary data, the relevant data will be retrieved from the
relevant official archives of the UK government, New Zealand government and the
World Bank. The research literature lends support to this approach, suggesting it is both
flexible and easy (Sheridan & Tennison, 2010, p.4). Crucially, it will be important to also
determine the purpose of the original data collection in order to judge the quality of the
relevant data and the likely level of bias (Sorensen, Sabroe & Olsen, 1998, p. 435).

Specifically, regarding primary data, a web survey will be used, in light of the reported
claims concerning the cost-effectiveness of doing so (Couper, Traugott & Lamias, 2001,
p. 230).
References

Burns, N., & Grove, S. (2001). The Practice of Nursing Research: Conduct, Critique and
Utilisation. WB Saunders, Philadelphia

Couper, M. P., Traugott, M. W., & Lamias, M. J. (2001). Web survey design and
administration. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65(2), 230-253.

Denzin, N.K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods.
New York: McGraw-Hill

De Vos, A. S., Strydom, H., Fouche, C. B., & Delport, C. S. L. (1998). Research at grass
roots. Pretoria: Van Schaik.

LoBiondo-Wood, G., & Haber, J. (1998). Nursing research: Methods and critical
appraisal for evidence-based practice. Elsevier Health Sciences.

Pilot, D. F., & Hungler, B. P. (1999). Nursing research: principles and methods.
Phildelphia: JB Lippincott Company.

Preston, C. C., & Colman, A. M. (2000). Optimal number of response categories in rating
scales: reliability, validity, discriminating power, and respondent preferences. Acta
Psychologica, 104(1), 1-15.

Sade, R. M. (2003). Publication of unethical research studies: the importance of informed

consent. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 75(2), 325-328.

Sheridan, J., & Tennison, J. (2010, April). Linking UK Government Data. InLDOW.

Sorensen, H. T., Sabroe, S., & Olsen, J. (1996). A framework for evaluation of secondary
data sources for epidemiological research. International Journal of Epidemiology, 25(2),
435-442.

Wennekers, S., Van Wennekers, A., Thurik, R., & Reynolds, P. (2005). Nascent
entrepreneurship and the level of economic development. Small Business
Economics, 24(3), 293-309.