Jämför metoder
Granska de valda metoderna sida vid sida; rader som skiljer sig är markerade.
| Jämförande deskriptiv forskning× | Kausal-komparativ forskning – Retrospektiv gruppjämförelsestudie× | |
|---|---|---|
| Ämnesområde | Forskningsdesign | Forskningsdesign |
| Familj | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Ursprungsår≠ | Mid-20th century, formalized in research methods texts from the 1960s onward | 1964 |
| Upphovsperson≠ | Codified in educational and behavioral research methods literature; no single originator | Fred N. Kerlinger |
| Typ | Non-experimental quantitative research design | Non-experimental quantitative research design |
| Ursprungskälla≠ | Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill. ISBN: 978-0078097874 | Kerlinger, F. N. (1964). Foundations of Behavioral Research. Holt, Rinehart and Winston. link ↗ |
| Alias | comparative survey design, descriptive comparative study, group-comparison descriptive research, CDR | ex post facto research, causal-comparative design, retrospective causal study, CCR |
| Närliggande | 3 | 3 |
| Sammanfattning≠ | Comparative descriptive research is a non-experimental quantitative design that systematically documents characteristics, attitudes, behaviors, or conditions across two or more naturally occurring groups, then places those descriptions side by side to identify similarities and differences. Unlike causal-comparative designs, it makes no claim about why groups differ — it rigorously answers the question 'How do these groups compare on this characteristic?' without manipulating any variable. | 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. |
| ScholarGateDatamängd ↗ |
|
|