Quantitative and qualitative research approaches to assess student well-being

Although there is dissimiliarity in theoretical research approaches to subjective well-being and to assessments of well-being, there is agreement regarding the value of well-being, especially among student populations. In the highly structured, achievement-oriented, non-optimal context of a classroom, individual well-being is a necessary pre-condition for learning. Among student populations well-being should not be construed as an achievement enhancer; but, rather, recognized and measured as an educational value of its own. However, it is necessary for the positive bias towards learning at least in highly structured, achievement-orientated, non-optional learning contexts like school [cf. Hascher, T. (2004). Wohlbefinden in der Schule. Münster: Waxmann]. How can it be measured? Since different research approaches lead to a variety of instruments, the following paper will focus on two ways of assessing well-being in school: a questionnaire on student well-being (N = 2014) 1 and a semi-structured daily diary about relevant emotional situations in school (N = 58, period 3 × 2 weeks). Both methods are introduced and their methodological quality is discussed in terms of reliability, validity and in terms of their usefulness for improving school practice. Furthermore, the research potential of combining quantitative and qualitative data on students’ well-being is addressed.

Quantitative naturalistic research; an introduction to naturalistic observation and investigation

Mode of access: Internet.

Appraising qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews:A quantitative and qualitative comparison of three methods

Objective: Qualitative research is increasingly valued as part of the evidence for policy and practice, but how it should be appraised is contested. Various appraisal methods, including checklists and other structured approaches, have been proposed but rarely evaluated. We aimed to compare three methods for appraising qualitative research papers that were candidates for inclusion in a systematic review of evidence on support for breast-feeding. Method: A sample of 12 research papers on support for breast-feeding was appraised by six qualitative reviewers using three appraisal methods: unprompted judgement, based on expert opinion; a UK Cabinet Office quality framework; and CASP, a Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool. Papers were assigned, following appraisals, to 1 of 5 categories, which were dichotomized to indicate whether or not papers should be included in a systematic review. Patterns of agreement in categorization of papers were assessed quantitatively using κ statistics, and qualitatively using cross-case analysis. Results: Agreement in categorizing papers across the three methods was slight (κ =0.13; 95% CI 0.06-0.24). Structured approaches did not appear to yield higher agreement than that by unprompted judgement. Qualitative analysis revealed reviewers' dilemmas in deciding between the potential impact of findings and the quality of the research execution or reporting practice. Structured instruments appeared to make reviewers more explicit about the reasons for their judgements. Conclusions: Structured approaches may not produce greater consistency of judgements about whether to include qualitative papers in a systematic review. Future research should address how appraisals of qualitative research should be incorporated in systematic reviews. © The Royal Society of Medicine Press Ltd 2007.

Quantitative electroencephalographic comodulation : an investigation of patterns in chronic fatigue syndrome

Introduction. This is a pilot study of quantitative electro-encephalographic (QEEG) comodulation analysis, which is used to assist in identifying regional brain differences in those people suffering from chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) compared to a normative database. The QEEG comodulation analysis examines spatial-temporal cross-correlation of spectral estimates in the resting dominant frequency band. A pattern shown by Sterman and Kaiser (2001) and referred to as the anterior posterior dissociation (APD) discloses a significant reduction in shared functional modulation between frontal and centro-parietal areas of the cortex. This research attempts to examine whether this pattern is evident in CFS. Method. Eleven adult participants, diagnosed by a physician as having CFS, were involved in QEEG data collection. Nineteen-channel cap recordings were made in five conditions: eyes-closed baseline, eyes-open, reading task one, math computations task two, and a second eyes-closed baseline. Results. Four of the 11 participants showed an anterior posterior dissociation pattern for the eyes-closed resting dominant frequency. However, seven of the 11 participants did not show this pattern. Examination of the mean 8-12 Hz amplitudes across three cortical regions (frontal, central and parietal) indicated a trend of higher overall alpha levels in the parietal region in CFS patients who showed the APD pattern compared to those who did not have this pattern. All patients showing the pattern were free of medication, while 71% of those absent of the pattern were using antidepressant medications. Conclusions. Although the sample is small, it is suggested that this method of evaluating the disorder holds promise. The fact that this pattern was not consistently represented in the CFS sample could be explained by the possibility of subtypes of CFS, or perhaps co-morbid conditions. Further, the use of antidepressant medications may mask the pattern by altering the temporal characteristics of the EEG. The results of this pilot study indicate that further research is warranted to verify that the pattern holds across the wider population of CFS sufferers.