The paper I have chosen is -> Internet addiction in students: Prevalence and risk factors by Daria J. Kuss, Mark D. Griffiths, Jens F. Binder (1) from the Journal of Computers in Human Behaviour with an impact factor of 2,273
The research paper examines how addictive students are of the Internet focused on their participation in various activities on the net such as online shopping and online gaming. Kuss Griffiths and Binder explained that the addictiveness does not probably come from the Internet medium in itself, it comes from online activities that affects their behaviour. The study examines how students get addicted to the Internet and what significant levels of addiction there is, and also if the interaction between personality traits (neuroticism, emotional stability, aggression etc) and the Internet use makes students more addictive. The study examines students in an English University in the East Midlands . The result determined that 3,2% of 2257 students were addicted to the Internet.
Which quantitative method or methods are used in the paper? Which are the benefits and limitations of using these methods?
To figure out if a student is addictive to the Internet they first have to define what addictive imply. There are a lot of factors that can depend on addictiveness and I am not convinced that a questionnaire consisting 120(!) questions will get a broader understanding if students are addictive or not. This also rely on an self awareness of the Internet use, and maybe it would be easier if the students could speak freely about their Internet habits instead of answering a questionnaire with premade answers. I think the results get very narrowed with a lack of details.
What did you learn about quantitative methods from reading the paper?
I already have some knowledge in the field of quantitative research from earlier courses. I have also in praxis, applied quantitative online surveys in my thesis based on our research question. Although, I have never heard about cross-sectional online gathering technique. I have learned that this kind of survey applies to a specific time and is limited to one subject. And I think that this type of survey can gather loads of data, and because it is distributed during a limited of time, the conditions will not have time to change, allowing an evident result.
Which are the main methodological problems of the study? How could the use of the quantitative method or methods have been improved?
I was surprised when the result only showed that 3,2% of 2257 students were addicted to the Internet. In this study, they used tools such as t-tests(3) and AICA-S(4) scores to conclude the result. Maybe it would have been better if they made a qualitative study with less students, and focusing on the main parts that from the theory, explains to be addictive factors. I would personally say I am addicted to the Internet, because everything is dependent on the Internet. So maybe complicated tests like t-tests and AICA-S are too advanced to find out if they are addicted or not.
I also think it would facilitate for us readers to obtain the questionnaire while reading, so we get further understanding of the questions they distributed.
Which are the benefits and limitations of using quantitative methods?
Quantitative methods gives an opportunity to collect a considerable amount of data using e.g. questionnaires. The statistic measure may allow one to evaluate and conclude the study from e.g patterns shown from the collected data. A further benefit is that one can control the method and exclude unnecessary facts due to the focused, narrowed and controlling variables. As a result of this a disadvantage is therefore the limited execution (provides limited details) from the respondents. Also that the researchers may address the answers due to their hypothesis.
Which are the benefits and limitations of using qualitative methods?
A qualitative method may give more realistic results than the quantitative method. A qualitative method is e.g interviews with the benefit that the interviewee can guide the questions in real time. Data based on experience provides a solid result(5).
A disadvantage is that due to the not totally controlling variables redundant data and other surprised factors may occur, which can also lead to a more time consuming effort.
(1) http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcc4.12059/full
(2) (https://explorable.com/types-of-survey) (260914)
(3) Definition: “A t-test’s statistical significance indicates whether or not the difference between two groups’ averages most likely reflects a “real” difference in the population from which the groups were sampled.” (http://docs.statwing.com/examples-and-definitions/t-test/statistical-significance/)(260914)
(4) Assessment for Computer and Internet Addiction-Screener
(5)(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2987281/)(260914)
Yo, Hannah, another comment coming in! I think your article sounds very interesting. I agree with you that perhaps it would be better to, if nothing else, combine the web-survey with a qualitative method? Perhaps like you wrote gather some participants and do some sort of interview. I haven't read the article but from your reflection it truly sounds like you have a clear point. And it too would be good to at least get to see some of the 120 (?!) questions.
SvaraRaderaAnyway, I chose to comment on this post since I thought it's a interesting topic. I too believe that we are more addicted to internet than the paper suggests. 3,2 %, I mean are you kidding? I thought it would be at least 60%. We check Facebook, the e-mail, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, Tumblr, Blogger, etcetc several times a day. And the study was on university students too. That target group, I would say, is especially addicted to internet, aren't they (we)? I guess that university in England isn't much like KTH or swedish universities when it comes to internet-addicted students...
I'm kind of nagging it that I agree with you all the time, but one more thing I agree on is the fact that we're rather addicted to the activities on the internet than the internet itself. I wonder what will happen in a few years. Will Facebook be as popular or will it even exist? There has been social networking sites as MSN Messenger, Lunarstorm and Playahead disapearing, what if Facebook and Instagram are going down that road too? Or have we found the perfect social networking sites and they will keep growing like Google. And speaking of Google, where will Google be in a couple of years? Will they take over the world? Haha, oh, well, very interesting blog post. Thank you for sharing!
Well-written and well-reasonable post!
Hi Hannah,
SvaraRaderaHaha, I think your article is quite interesting but I feel like it could be hard to investigate how addicted someone is. Where do you draw the line between using Internet a lot and being addicted? You write that they used two variables to come to a conclusion, is that really enough? It’s a very broad and complex subject and it might have been better to use a qualitative method instead (just like you suggested). I also am a bit concerned that they for are relying on self awareness and also that the respondent are honest in their answers. I feel like this a sensitive subject to many people and therefore it might compromise the result.
Anyhow, great job on the blog!
Sofia
Hi,
SvaraRaderaThe article you have chosen sounds really interesting, I agree as I also think that it is not a good way to send 120 questions with premade answers, also 120 questions are too much may be they chose that long questionnaire to see that how students responds to this kind of activity on internet. I would also say as you suggested that it would be better to use qualitative method for this research. I think that in this kind of research, face-to-face interviews would be better as sometimes body language is important to get right answers.
Well done!