Bandingkan kaedah
Semak kaedah pilihan anda secara bersebelahan; baris yang berbeza akan diserlahkan.
| Tinjauan Relasional Komparatif× | Reka Bentuk Kausal-Perbandingan× | |
|---|---|---|
| Bidang | Reka Bentuk Penyelidikan | Reka Bentuk Penyelidikan |
| Keluarga | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Tahun asal≠ | Mid-20th century onward; systematized in educational research c. 1960s–1990s | 1964 |
| Pengasas≠ | Rooted in survey methodology tradition; formalized by scholars such as Fraenkel, Wallen, and Creswell | Fred N. Kerlinger |
| Jenis≠ | Quantitative non-experimental survey design | Non-experimental quantitative research design |
| Sumber perintis≠ | Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2009). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill. ISBN: 978-0073525 670 | Kerlinger, F. N. (1964). Foundations of Behavioral Research. Holt, Rinehart and Winston. link ↗ |
| Alias≠ | comparative correlational survey, multi-group relational survey, cross-group relational survey design | ex post facto research, causal-comparative design, retrospective causal study, CCR |
| Berkaitan≠ | 4 | 3 |
| Ringkasan≠ | A comparative relational survey is a quantitative, non-experimental design that examines the relationships among variables within a single study while simultaneously comparing those relationship patterns across two or more distinct groups. It extends a standard relational (correlational) survey by adding a comparative dimension, revealing whether associations observed in one group hold, differ, or even reverse in another. It is widely used in education, psychology, organizational behavior, and health sciences. | Causal-comparative research is a non-experimental quantitative design in which the researcher compares two or more groups that already differ on an independent variable — one that was not manipulated — to investigate possible causes or consequences of that difference. Because group membership is pre-existing rather than randomly assigned, the design can suggest causal relationships but cannot establish them with the certainty of a true experiment. It is widely used in education, psychology, and social sciences when experimental manipulation is impractical or unethical. |
| ScholarGateSet data ↗ |
|
|