Discussion Board Replies/Ohio Lottery

The student must then post two (2) replies of at least 450 words per reply. Each response must be supported with at least 2 peer-reviewed sources and include 1 biblical application/integration (Part II). Note that the biblical application/integration cannot be more than 10% of the thread or replies.

Must use these links for scholarly sources:

https://sajip.co.za/index.php/sajip

https://www.annualreviews.org/journal/soc

(Respond to These two posts….Original Content Only…Case study is attached at the bottom)

(450 words per reply) (900 words total) (Reply to the Posts Below)

1. (Reply to this Post)

Detail the overall research design in the Ohio Lottery case. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the design?

Upon initial glance of Exhibit OL-1 displaying the overall research planning metric, there is quite a bit of information, and the entire process is clear and precise. One of the advantages of this design is that each step is clearly specified in detail within the timeline. In addition, the color-coded chart allows for easy navigation and identification. There are, however, several conflicts with the overall design that are a cause for concern. First and foremost, the process is entirely too long. Understanding that “qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them” (Aspers & Corte, 2019, p. 142), this type of research can be very lengthy. There are far too many gaps in between design events that need to be adjusted to close these gaps and provide a more efficient timeline.

• Evaluate the MET process. What are some of the strengths and weaknesses of the MET technique?

Utilizing the metaphor elicitation technique as an interview and research method provides a very detailed outcome and allows interviewees to connect in different ways. “This storytelling process assists interviewees with describing and talking freely about complex and difficult. According to Harper, photo elicitation technique allows researchers to see deeper into the conscious meaning of the topics than verbocentric interviews” (Jung, 2022, para. 12). One of the inconveniences with this type of interview process is that it is timely and requires the participation of many people to collaborate which takes additional time and resources.

• What measurement scales are used in the sample questions provided? Why might the lottery attitude and lottery importance questions have presented the most challenge to the professional researchers?

There are a couple different measurement scales in use for this interview. The stapel scale and numerical scale (Schindler, 2022, p. 136), are both rating scales that are used for the interviews. While both scales prove to be extremely affective, they require a larger question pool to get the most feedback. “The model gradually moves from concrete attributes to abstract attributes and eventually escalates to the most abstract personal values, establishing the correlation structure of the mental model” (Wang et al., 2022, para. 38). Therefore, the biggest constraint would be the time it takes to conduct enough interviews with the most questions to capture the most information for a more accurate product. Additionally, due to the multitude of different ideas and potential answers, the responses would need to be categorized which would be evaluating the response the best way possible without bias to narrow the scope. This would again, take some time but more importantly present the potential for mis categorizing one or many responses based on assumptions.

• Using text Exhibit 12-2, map out the likely quantitative instrument content.

Referring to Exhibit 12-2 in the text by Schindler, (2022, p. 148), creating content for measurement instrument utilization would begin with a non-question element for an introduction simply describing what the survey is about and expectations. A direct follow-up question should be added to assist in establishing rapport with the interviewees. Next would be a collaboration of questions in alternating order between administrative, target, classification, and non-question questions. “These include setting sample sizes, deciding what fraction of the participants should have a direct measurement, whether replicates are desirable and, when the study compares groups, what should be the allocation of resources to each group” (Bitan et al., 2021, para. 4). Finally, after the development of measurement questions, pretests are conducted with researchers and additional subject matter experts and revisions will be made prior to the implementation of the survey.

• The survey contained several questions that would alert the researchers that the participant was not taking the research process seriously. Is this a good or a bad idea? Why?

Having the ability to be able to differentiate a genuine response from an interested subject with that of an uninterested subject would prove to be extremely valuable to the researcher. This would then allow the researchers to filter out all the nonessential response information that would otherwise taint the overall survey by injecting convoluted data. “However, there are also several challenges that the researcher might face depending on the knowledge/experience in qualitative interviewing, the profile of participants, time, and resources available. It can be easy to be seduced by the seemingly simplicity of the procedure but putting theory into practice is another story” (Ramjaun, 2021, para. 16). Therefore, being able to determine what information is genuine can contribute to a better survey result.

• Evaluate the MET discussion guide for the Ohio Lottery Research.

The discussion guide is very detailed and creates a realistic timeline consisting of a certain amount of questions and/or activities to be conducted within the allotted time. Additionally, every section is has a clear set of instructions for the interviewer to work toward that particular objective. The recommendation I would give, would be to include more non-question references to add transitions and to build a better rapport. “By showing the participants images representing the researcher’s own personal feelings towards their studies, a level of trust and rapport was established between the participant and researcher. Building a relationship with participants in qualitative research, it is suggested, can encourage empathy and affiliation between the interviewer and interviewee and thus leading to a more successful, rich discussion” (Hancock & Foster, 2019, para. 24). That trust developed would deliver better more focused answers to use for the overall research.

Biblical Integration

What gets lost in research sometimes is the human element which, is what this research is all about. Sure, there may be good intentions with the lottery and the business side of it, however, is to create an alternate way of accumulating funds to improve the school system. Which is an investment within the community to ensure children are well educated and have the facilities and equipment needed to create a successful outcome for children. Becoming a lottery winner is another story altogether. “For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope” (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, Jeremiah 29:11).

2. Ohio Lottery (Reply to this Post)

Research Design in the Ohio Lottery Case

A multistage research design integrates qualitative and quantitative methods in the Ohio Lottery case study. This approach has pros and cons. A biblical perspective on Proverbs’ advice to seek knowledge from diverse sources enriches our understanding of this practice (Proverbs 2:2-6, New International Version). Like this research design that uses multiple techniques to understand, the Bible encourages seeking wisdom from various sources to make informed decisions.

Advantages of the Research Design

Utilizing a study design offers myriad advantages: employing qualitative MET interviews and quantitative online surveys furnishes an exhaustive comprehension of lottery participants and non-players. In this instance, the focus lies on feelings and motivations through applying qualitative techniques. Meanwhile, by contrast, our robust quantitative approach facilitates result extrapolation to broader demographic groups more easily (Robert and Paul, 2001). Secondly, qualitative research such as MET interviews unveils profound insights. It uncovers the complex motivations and attitudes underpinning lottery participation that transcend simple data, revealing psychological and emotional facets. Ultimately, a comprehensive study design strategy must consider demographics, which involves several aspects such as age distribution, gender representation, and potentially other factors such as socio-economic status or geographic location.

Disadvantages of the Research Design

The drawbacks of this study approach make coordinating multistage research operations complex and time-consuming. Logistics challenges arise when coordinating qualitative and quantitative components. Both strategies cost money for participant recruitment and data processing and require skilled researchers and moderators. Some research initiatives may be unachievable due to resource allocation since qualitative interviews demand expert moderators, and quantitative studies require large sample sizes. The study design is poor. Complex multistage research process management is time-consuming. Quantitative and qualitative factors coordination cause logistical challenges. Quantitative and qualitative methods involve participant recruitment, data collection, analytical costs, and skilled researcher or moderator needs. Due to the strict allocation defined in these studies’ protocols, many prospective research may be impracticable due to high resource needs.

Strengths of the MET Technique

The Metaphor Elicitation Technique (MET) in the Ohio Lottery case study provides multiple benefits: it plunges into participants’ motivations and feelings by utilizing metaphors, thereby offering a profound understanding that expands beyond essential dialogue to unveil their hidden thoughts. This method employs nonverbal cues that are more informative than spoken answers to enhance the quality of gathered information; this is its second advantage. Furthermore, it actively engages participants by letting them select photographs and create collages, intensifying their connection with the subject.

Weaknesses of the MET Technique

However, MET also presents certain drawbacks; one must duly consider these. The Ohio Lottery case exemplifies this: 25 interviews spread across three cities and conducted over several months illustrate the potential time consumption associated with it. Sometimes, these interviews extend beyond 90 minutes, which could inconvenience both participants and researchers. Moreover, the resource-intensive nature of MET necessitates a significant investment in both resources and knowledgeable moderators; this escalates the study’s expense and complexity (Kearney, 2005). The interpretation of metaphors introduces further challenges due to their inherent subjectivity: it may incite bias as diverse researchers could perceive identical metaphorical instances differently, a factor that potentially distorts findings. Finally, MET interviews tend towards small, unique samples.

Measurement Scales used on sample questions

The Ohio Lottery researchers used Likert and categorical scales. However, they need help to measure lottery attitudes and value to people. First, these questions are complicated. They need a profound investigation of inner feelings and beliefs, which may be challenging to convey. As we ask about attitudes and significance, we must urge them to uncover their inner ideas, which may be difficult.

Why did the lottery attitude present the most challenge to professional researchers?

Attitudes and importance are very individualized. What matters to one person may not to another. Value, which is fluid, is shaped by these subjective assessments. Researchers face challenges when different replies become the norm (Stetzka & Winter, 2021). Social desirability bias complicates researchers’ efforts to navigate each respondent’s unique viewpoint. When people try to provide socially acceptable replies, they may not be honest.

The likely Quantitative Instrument Content

A sample of potential quantitative instrument content for the Ohio Lottery research is showcased in Exhibit 12-2 through inquiries related to game and advertising awareness, play frequency, lottery attitudes, and demographic data (Schindler, 2022). The instrument includes multiple-choice queries; specifically, it incorporates Likert scale questions. Moreover, its versatility is enhanced by including agree/disagree statements. For example, direct participants to select the dollar amounts they have invested in Ohio Lottery Instant Games over the previous 12 months. They then rate their agreement with statements concerning how significantly playing this lottery has affected their self-esteem (Brehm et al., 2022). Furthermore, we delve deeper into our subjects’ motivations, which is achieved through soliciting feedback on questions tailored explicitly to understand why these individuals engage in such activities. The instrument actively incorporates queries about participants’ demographic data, such as age groupings, gender identification markers, and income brackets.

Survey Questions and Participant Seriousness Evaluation

Ohio Lottery researchers used Likert and categorical scales (Khazanov et al., 2023). However, polling lottery attitudes and perceived value to people was complex. First, these questions are complicated. They must thoroughly investigate personal feelings and values, which may be challenging to convey. The approach is like trying to explain why someone likes a meal. This approach requires prompting people to investigate their inner ideas while we discuss attitudes and significance, which may be difficult.

Second, opinions and significance differ greatly based on individuality. What’s important to one person may not matter to another. These subjective assessments affect our variable value judgments. Due to this, different answers become the norm, which challenges researchers. Researchers must navigate each respondent’s unique viewpoint, which is complicated by social desirability bias. People who provide socially acceptable replies may be dishonest about their experiences.

Evaluation of MET Discussion Guide for Ohio Lottery Research

Ohio Lottery study uses MET discussion guides to arrange qualitative interviews. It helps extract valuable ideas. This tool encourages users to reveal their views and feelings about playing the lottery in thorough comments. Visualization prompts in this guide encourage more profound observations of participants’ views and growth. They help them develop their initial thoughts in answer to discussion questions. Subjective collage interpretation and interviewer styles may weaken data collecting uniformity. The MET conversation guide helps understand motives and emotions by enriching the quantitative survey with qualitative data.