Research Designs: Experimental and Descriptive Research Designs
Experimental design permits the researcher to examine the designed hypothesis by developing conclusions in regard to the association amid reliant and independent variables. In other words, it is a theoretical framework within which trials are performed. On the other hand, descriptive design refers to a study that is developed to represent the respondents in a reliable manner (Dantzker, Hunter & Quinn, 2016). In this case, data is gathered through several means such as observation, consultations, case studies or questionnaire filling. Both designs are associated with several advantages as well as limitations in regard to research.
Experimental design is beneficial because it offers insights on the best strategy to approach a given population. In addition, the researcher possesses full control in regard to the existing variables which increase the capability of the study to be relevant, dependable and accurate. However, this design is a major subject to individual’s faults and the individual discernment can affect the conclusions (Kraemer, Fleck & Deschenes, 2012). More so, the design makes it easy to develop artificial findings and the utilized groups are not comparable in most cases. The descriptive design differs because it involves the direct gathering of data from the selected populace. In this context, the respondents or the subject is observed within a constant surrounding without affecting the common conducts (Kraemer, Fleck & Deschenes, 2012). In addition, the method of gathering information normally promotes in-depth examinations. When gathered in large scopes they lead to the development of wealthy data given that they can accommodate qualitative or even measurable methods. However, the design has its limitations because the respondents might not be honest thus resulting in inaccuracy (Bachman & Schutt, 2017). In addition, the researcher discernment plays a critical part while confidentiality can be a major issue. The potent research topic that both designs might be applicable is the original source of sentencing inconsistency in regard to crimes. This is because the topic is accurate when experiments or observational data is utilized.
References
Bachman, R., & Schutt, R. K. (2017). The practice of research in criminology and criminal justice (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dantzker, M. L., Hunter, R. D., & Quinn, S. T. (2016). Research methods for criminology and criminal justice.
Kraemer, W. J., Fleck, S. J., & Deschenes, M. R. (2012). Exercise physiology: Integrated from theory to practical applications. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Health.
