Brief lecture notes on research designs

Concepts of research design

Decisions regarding what, where, when, how much, by what means
concerning an inquiry constitute a research design.

“A research design is the arrangement of conditions for collection and analysis

of data in a manner that aims to combine relevance to the research purpose with
economy in procedure.”
In fact, the research design is the conceptual structure within which research is
conducted; it constitutes the plan for the collection, measurement and analysis
of data.

More explicitly, the design decisions happen to be in respect of:

 What is the study about?
 Why is the study being made?
 Where will the study be carried out?
 What type of data is required?
 Where can the required data be found?
 What periods of time will the study include?
 What will be the sample design?
 What techniques of data collection will be used?
 How will the data be analyzed?
 In what style will the report be prepared?

Keeping the above stated design decisions, one may split the overall design into
the following parts:

a. The sampling design which deals with the method of selecting items to
be observed for the given study;
b. The observational design which relates to the conditions under which
the observations are to be made;
c. The statistical design which concerns with the question of how many
items are to be observed and how the information and data gathered are to
be analyzed; and
d. The operational design which deals with the techniques by which the
procedures specified in the sampling, statistical and observational
designs can be carried out.

Therefore, the important features of a research design as under:

i. It is a plan that specifies the sources and types of information
relevant to the research problem.

1
 ii. It is a strategy specifying which approach will be used for gathering
and analyzing the data.
iii. It also includes the time and cost budgets since most studies are done
under these two constraints.

Importance of a research design

 It facilitates the smooth sailing of the various research operations, thereby
making research as efficient as possible yielding maximal information
with minimal expenditure of effort, time and money.
 It's a plan in advance of data collection and analysis for the research
project and stands for advance planning of the methods to be adopted for
collecting the relevant data and the techniques to be used in the analysis,
keeping in view the objective of the research and the availability of staff,
time and money.
 The design helps the researcher to organize his ideas in a form whereby it
will be possible for him to look for flaws and inadequacies.

Characteristics of a good design

A good design is often characterized by adjectives like flexible, appropriate,
efficient, economical and so on. Generally, the design which minimizes bias
and maximizes the reliability of the data collected and analyzed is considered
a good design.

The design which gives the smallest experimental error is supposed to be the
best design in many investigations. Similarly, a design which yields maximal
information and provides an opportunity for considering many different aspects
of a problem is considered most appropriate and efficient design in respect of
many research problems.

Thus, the question of good design is related to the purpose of the research
problem and also with the nature of the problem to be studied.
A design may be quite suitable in one case, but may be found inadequate in one
respect or the other in the context of some other research problem.
One single design cannot serve the purpose of all types of research problems.

If the study happens to be an exploratory or a formulative one, wherein the

major emphasis is on discovery of ideas and insights, the research design
most appropriate must be flexible enough to permit the consideration of
many different aspects of a phenomenon.
When the purpose of a study is accurate description of a situation or of an
association between variables (or in what are called the descriptive
studies), accuracy becomes a major consideration and a research design

2
 which minimizes bias and maximizes the reliability of the evidence collected
is considered a good design.
Studies involving the testing of a hypothesis of a causal relationship
between variables require a design which will permit inferences about
causality in addition to the minimization of bias and maximization of
reliability.

It is only on the basis of its primary function that a study can be categorized
either as an exploratory or descriptive or hypothesis-testing study and
accordingly the choice of a research design may be made in case of a particular
study.

Besides, the availability of time, money, skills of the research staff and the
means of obtaining the information must be given due weightage while working
out the relevant details of the research design such as experimental design,
survey design, sample design and the like.

Important concepts relating to research design

Before describing the different research designs, it will be appropriate to explain
the various concepts relating to designs so that these may be better and easily
understood.
 Dependent and independent variables
 Extraneous variables
 Control
 Confounding relationship
 Research hypothesis
 Experimental and non-experimental hypothesis-testing research
 Experimental and control groups
 Treatments
 Experiment
 Experimental unit(s)

3
Types of designs

Different research designs can be categorize broadly as:

In case of exploratory research studies
In case of descriptive and diagnostic research studies
In case of hypothesis-testing research studies

Exploratory research studies:

Exploratory research studies are also termed as formulative research studies.
The main purpose of such studies is that of formulating a problem for more
precise investigation or of developing the working hypotheses from an
operational point of view.

The major emphasis in such studies is on the discovery of ideas and insights.
Generally, the following three methods in the context of research design for
such studies are talked about:
(a) The survey of concerning literature
(b) The experience survey
(c) The analysis of ‘insight-stimulating’ examples

(a) The survey of concerning literature happens to be the most simple and
fruitful method of formulating precisely the research problem or developing
hypothesis. Hypotheses stated by earlier workers may be reviewed and their
usefulness be evaluated as a basis for further research. It may also be considered
whether the already stated hypotheses suggest new hypothesis. In this way the
researcher should review and build upon the work already done by others, but in
cases where hypotheses have not yet been formulated, his task is to review the
available material for deriving the relevant hypotheses from it.

(b) Experience survey means the survey of people who have had practical
experience with the problem to be studied. The object of such a survey is to
obtain insight into the relationships between variables and new ideas relating to
the research problem. For such a survey people who are competent and can
contribute new ideas may be carefully selected as respondents to ensure a
representation of different types of experience. The respondents so selected may
then be interviewed by the investigator.
The researcher must prepare an interview schedule for the systematic
questioning of informants. But the interview must ensure flexibility in the sense
that the respondents should be allowed to raise issues and questions which the
investigator has not previously considered. Generally, survey may last for few
hours. Hence, it is often considered desirable to send a copy of the questions to
be discussed to the respondents well in advance. This will also give an
opportunity to the respondents for doing some advance thinking over the

4
various issues involved so that, at the time of interview, they may be able to
contribute effectively. Thus, an experience survey may enable the researcher to
define the problem more concisely and help in the formulation of the research
hypothesis.

(c)Analysis of ‘insight-stimulating’ examples is particularly suitable in areas

where there is little experience to serve as a guide. This method consists of the
intensive study of selected instances of the phenomenon in which one is
interested. For this purpose the existing records, if any, may be examined, the
unstructured interviewing may take place, or some other approach may be
adopted. Attitude of the investigator, the intensity of the study and the ability of
the researcher to draw together diverse information into a unified interpretation
are the main features which make this method an appropriate procedure for
evoking insights.
One can mention few examples of ‘insight-stimulating’ cases such as the
reactions of strangers, the reactions of marginal individuals, the study of
individuals who are in transition from one stage to another, the reactions of
individuals from different social strata and the like. In general, cases that
provide sharp contrasts or have striking features are considered relatively more
useful while adopting this method of hypotheses formulation.

Research design in case of descriptive and diagnostic research studies

 Descriptive research studies are concerned with describing the characteristics
of a particular individual, or of a group, whereas diagnostic research studies
determine the frequency with which something occurs or its association with
something else.
 The studies concerning whether certain variables are associated are examples
of diagnostic research studies. As against this, studies concerned with
specific predictions, with narration of facts and characteristics concerning
individual, group or situation are all examples of descriptive research
studies. Most of the social research comes under this category.

In descriptive as well as in diagnostic studies, the researcher must be able to

define clearly, what he wants to measure and must find adequate methods for
measuring it along with a clear cut definition of ‘population’ he wants to study.

Case Studies/Case Reports/Case Series

A case study is the in-depth examination of the single instance of some social
phenomenon, such as a village, a family, or a juvenile gang. Alternatively, a
case study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon
within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between
phenomenon and context are not clearly evident.

5
Case studies are most useful for descriptive/exploratory research e.g., field
research. From the field notes (or other type of data) you can examine the logic
of change over time and compare the results of the study with others described
in the literature.
Validity is a strength (because of the naturalness of the research setting).
Generalizations to other groups is difficult.

Case report: a careful, detailed report by one or more clinicians of the profile
of a single patient. The individual case report can be expanded to a case series,
which describes characteristics of a number of patients with a given disease.

Cross-sectional Study Design

Cross sectional design is based on observations made at one point in time e.g.,
survey research. In particular, when the data collection strategy is broader in
scope and involves systematic data collection then use the term cross sectional
instead of case study.
With cross sectional designs it is difficult to make inferences about processes
that occur over time and hence cause and effect. Usually such studies are done
for exploratory and descriptive research, but sometimes also for explanatory
studies.
The generalizability of such studies is good -- because they are representative of
given populations (e.g., when data has been collected systematically, and some
probability sampling technique has been employed)

For factors that remain unaltered over time, such as sex, blood group, etc., the
cross-sectional survey can provide evidence of a valid statistical association. A
cross-sectional study can be either analytical or descriptive, according to its
purpose.
If data are collected both on exposures and outcomes of interest, and if the data
are analyzed so as to demonstrate differences either between exposed and non-
exposed groups, with respect to the outcome, or between those with the
outcome and those without the outcome, with respect to the exposure, then this
is an analytical cross-sectional study.

If the information collected is purely of a descriptive nature, not involving the

comparison of groups formed on the basis of exposure or outcome status, then
this is a descriptive cross-sectional study.

Often a cross-sectional study may have both descriptive and analytical

components.
Nowadays, there is an increasing emphasis on the value of longitudinal studies
in which observations are repeated in the same community over a prolonged

6
period (i.e., longitudinal studies provide the required data at more than one
point in time unlike cross- sectional surveys).

Ecological Studies:
Data from entire populations are used to compare disease frequencies between
different groups during the same period of time or in the same population at
different points in time.
Example: Countries with low cigarette consumption have lower lung cancer
rates than those countries with high cigarette consumption.
The difference between research designs in respect of the above two types of
research studies can be conveniently summarized in tabular form as under:

Analytic studies
Analytic studies may be defined as studies used to test hypotheses concerning
the relationship between a suspected risk factor and an outcome and to measure
the magnitude of the association and its statistical significance.
This designs can be divided into two broad design strategies:
 Observational
 Intervention.

Hypothesis-testing research studies

Hypothesis-testing research studies (generally known as experimental studies)
are those where the researcher tests the hypotheses of causal relationships
between variables. Such studies require procedures that will not only reduce
bias and increase reliability, but will permit drawing inferences about causality.

7
Usually experiments meet this requirement. Hence, when we talk of research
design in such studies, we often mean the design of experiments.

Observational studies
 No human intervention involved in assigning study groups; simply
observe the relationship between exposure and disease.
 Subject to many potential biases, but by careful design and analysis,
many of these biases can be minimized.
 Examples of observational studies: comparative cross-sectional, cohort
and case control studies.

Case-control studies: Group of subjects with the disease (cases) and group of
subjects without the disease (controls) are identified. Information, about
previous exposures are obtained for cases and controls, and frequency of
exposure compared for the two groups.

Intervention studies
In intervention studies, the researcher manipulates a situation and measures the
effects of this manipulation. Usually (but not always) two groups are compared,
one group in which the intervention takes place (e.g. treatment with a certain
drug) and another group that remains ‘untouched’. The two categories of
intervention studies are:
 Experimental studies
 Quasi-experimental studies

Experimental studies
The experimental design gives the most reliable proof for causation. In an
experimental study, individuals are randomly allocated to at least two groups.
One group is subject to an intervention, or experiment, while the other group(s)
is not.
The outcome of the intervention (effect of the intervention on the dependent
variable/problem) is obtained by comparing the two groups.

A number of experimental study designs have been developed. These are widely
used in laboratory settings and in clinical settings. For ethical reasons, the
opportunities for experiments involving human subjects are restricted. However,
randomized control trials of new drugs are common.

At community level, where health research is frequently undertaken, we

experience not only ethical but also practical problems in carrying out

8
experimental studies. In real life settings, it is often impossible to assign persons
at random to two groups, or to maintain a control group.

You start with two groups of people (assumed to be the same) and measure
them on the dependent variable. It is assumed that there will be the same level
of variation within each group. You then do something to one of the groups
(e.g., introduce a stimulus to the experimental group) but not to the other
(control group). Then you measure the dependent variable again.

This procedure provides a test of the hypothesis that there's more change in the
experimental group than in the control group.
Control is a strength of this design. (This is sometimes referred to as internal
validity). In sociology it's difficult to implement a true classical experimental
design. Hence longitudinal research is often undertaken to compensate.

Therefore, experimental research designs may have to be replaced by quasi-

experimental designs.

Quasi-experimental studies
In a quasi-experimental study, one characteristic of a true experiment is
missing, either randomization or the use of a separate control group.
A quasi-experimental study, however, always includes the manipulation of an
independent variable which is the intervention.
One of the most common quasi-experimental designs uses two (or more)
groups, one of which serves as a control group in which no intervention takes
place.
Both groups are observed before as well as after the intervention, to test if the
intervention has made any difference. (This quasi-experimental design is called
the ‘non-equivalent control group design’ because the subjects in the two groups
(study and control groups) have not been randomly assigned.)

Another type of design that is often chosen because it is quite easy to set up uses
only one group in which an intervention is carried out. The situation is
analyzed before and after the intervention to test if there is any difference in the
observed problem. This is called a ‘BEFORE-AFTER’ study. This design is
considered a ‘pre-experimental’ design rather than a ‘quasi-experimental’
design because it involves neither randomization nor the use of a control group.

9
Intervention (experimental) studies can also be considered either therapeutic or
preventive. Therapeutic trials are conducted among patients with a particular
disease to determine the ability of an agent or procedure to reduce symptoms,
prevent recurrence, or decrease risk of death from that disease.

A preventive trial (community trial) involves the evaluation of whether an

agent or procedure reduces the risk of developing disease among those free
from that condition at enrolment. Thus, preventive trials can be conducted
among individuals at usual risk (e.g. vaccine trials)

Longitudinal Designs
These are studies in which multiple observations are made over time e.g.,
survey research. There are three basic types of longitudinal designs:
Trend Studies
Cohort Studies
Panel Studies

Trend Studies
Trend studies examine changes within some general population over time.

Cohort Studies
Cohort studies examine more specific sub-populations (cohorts) as they change
over time.

Strengths and limitations of the cohort study design

Strengths:
 Is of particular value when the exposure is rare
 Can examine multiple effects of a single exposure
 Allows direct measurement of incidence of disease in the exposed and
non-exposed groups.

Limitations:
 Is inefficient for the evaluation of rare diseases
 Expensive and time consuming
 Validity of the results can be seriously affected by losses to follow-up.

Panel Studies
Panel studies are similar to trend and cohort studies except that the same set of
people is studied each time. Panel studies give a more complete picture of how
individuals change overtime.
Cohort and trend studies find out only net changes. Example public opinion
studies.

10
Panel studies are the best type of longitudinal design to study cause and effect.
(Explanatory studies.)

Longitudinal studies have an obvious advantage over cross-sectional ones in

providing information describing processes over time.
But often this advantage comes at heavy cost in both time and money
...especially in large scale surveys.

Figure A: Three types of causal relationships

11
Figure B: Causal and non-causal explanations of the relationship between
school type and academic achievement

12
Figure C: Relationship between research design and particular data collection
methods

13
14