Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Compare And Contrast Qualitative And Quantitative Data Collection
Compare And Contrast Qualitative And Quantitative Data Collection
Qualitative vs quantitative research
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The use of quantitative data to solve a problem may seem as everyday and common sense-ish as any other problem solving style; perhaps even more so as it seems to make so much sense. First though – what exactly is quantitative data? It is measurable (through a suitable measure such as dollars, degrees, inches, millimeters) and verifiable data. It is however, amenable to statistical manipulation. Quantitative data defines whereas qualitative data describes (BusinessDictionary.com, 2010). Why then, don’t we – as a society – use it more? It would seem that our biases toward everything from race and gender to reality and fantasy get in the way. One need look no further than the classic movie “12 Angry Men” (Rose & Lumet, 1957), about a dissenting juror in a murder trial who slowly manages to convince the others that the case is not as obviously clear as it seemed in court, to see that all is not as it seems to be. Even in the face of evidence (quantitative, circumstantial or peripheral), decisions and judgments – hence the solutions to the problem – are made with bias, prejudice and assumptive reasoning. Over the course of ninety-six minutes, we are enlightened to the role that bias plays in solving problems and making decisions, and the fact that the use of actual, quantifiable data and evidence can significantly influence – eventually – our ultimate decision. If only we would give data a chance, we would be truly amazed at the outcome of its use. In the example of this movie, the actual knife, the stab wounds, the voice creating the screaming and the description of the alleged perpetrator running away all point away from the accused, but no matter. The bias of the jurors takes over. The biases trigger statements ... ... middle of paper ... ...erman, M., Loewenstein, G. and Moore, D. (2002). Why good accountants do bad audits. Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation: Cambridge. BusinessDictionary.com. (2010). Broyles, W. (writer) and Howard, R. (director) (1995). Apollo 13. Imagine Entertainment. Universal Studios. Hollywood: California. Covey, S. (1989). The seven habits of highly effective people. Covey Leadership Center: Utah. Guterman, J. (2002). Don’t throw good money (or time) after bad. Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business School School Publishing Corporation: Cambridge. Horace. (23 B.C.). The Odes: Greece. Myers, I. and Briggs, K. (1962) Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Consulting Psychologists Press: Palo Alto. Rose, R. (writer) and Lumet, S. (director). (1957). 12 Angry Men. Orion-Nova Productions. New York: New York.
The reason being, the Supreme Court found that the expert evidence was not only useful, but was required to have a more in-depth understanding of the issues surrounding battered women. The rationale was, without expert testimony most people would be ignorant to spousal abuse. It was thought that without expert testimony, jurors would make assumptions about the stereotypes that may have been popularized by society as well ignore the importance of previous events that led up to the incident. Moreover, the trial judge charged the jurors properly, explaining that as long as there is some admissible evidence to establish the foundation for the expert 's opinion, he cannot subsequently instruct the jury to completely ignore the testimony. The judge also warned the jury that the more the expert relies on facts, not proven in evidence the less weight the jury may attribute to the opinion. Furthermore, expert evidence does not and cannot usurp the jury 's function of deciding whether, in fact, the accused 's perceptions and actions were reasonable. But fairness and the integrity of the trial process demand that the jury have the opportunity to hear that
This movie goes to show how such crucial facts and minuet evidence if not processed fully and clearly can change the outcome in such a big way. In this jury you have 12 men from all different walks of life, 12 different times, and 12 different personalities. Who have an obligation to come to one conclusion and that's whether or not the young man on trial is guilty of murdering his father or is innocent beyond a reasonable doubt. Under much frustration and lack of patience these 12 men began to get unruly and unfocused. Throughout this distraction key terms get misused, facts get turned around and more importantly emotions start to cross making it hard for these men to produce a verdict.
The definition of forensic science is any scientific research, method, or theory used to analyze evidence in an attempt to solve legal cases (Cho). In recent years, there has been growing public interest in forensic science, arguably because of the numerous television programs that glamorize its practices. This phenomenon is part of what is known as the CSI effect, or the process through which devoted fans of popular crime dramas develop unrealistic notions of forensic science methods, practices, and their applications in real life cases (Mancini 544; Stevens 37; Ley, Jankowski, and Brewer 52). The CSI effect has had more negative impacts on forensic science and society than positive impacts, especially in regards to what goes on in the minds of jurors who frequently watch television programs about crime. Studying the CSI effect also leads to tough questions about the ethics of portraying real stories to entertain the audience. The use of these true stories is justified in certain contexts, such as instances when societal issues arise, and as long as there is respect toward the privacy of family members and friends involved in such tragedies. The solution to the negative consequences of the CSI effect could be to produce television programs that are somehow informative and entertaining, but this would make it difficult to hold the interest of a viewing audience that craves drama and action.
In a well-known study conducted by Judge Donald Shelton, jurors were asked various questions to see if there was a significant difference in the rate of acquittals between those who watched shows such as CSI and those who do not. Attorneys, judges, and journalists have claimed that watching television programs like CSI have caused jurors to wrongfully acquit guilty defendants when no scientific evidence has been presented. To test this, 1,027 jurors were randomly selected and given a questionnaire to fill out. Questions about their demographics were listed and the jurors were asked what kind of TV shows they watched, how often, and how real they believed these shows were. The survey asked questons about seven ty...
In Richards Willing’s “CSI effect” the author tells the reader how, as a result of crime scene shows’ popularity, the misconceptions they create, and the combining of real life events with TV fantasy, crime scene shows have affected jurors and the oucomes of court cases. The shows’ popularity has increased peoples’ interest in forensic science and has caused workers and students to transfer into the field. The second effect crime scenes created is the misconception concerning when to use forensic tests, as well as misconceptions about the speed and accuracy of forensic workers and machines in tracking and identifying the culprit. Willing tells of a murder trial in Arizona in which the defendant’s bloody coat was listed as evidence, but was not tested. Although the defendant had already told investigators that he was at the scene of the crime, with the jacket, jurors asked for forensic DNA evidence linking the defendant to the bloody coat and to the crime scene. The juror’s exposure to crime scene shows had given them knowledge of forensic tests, but not knowledge of the proper use of the tests. Crime scene shows mix real life with TV fantasy. According to willing’s studies, highly attractive forensic workers and stunning suspects, along with very neat crime scenes on crime scene shows deemphasize the real life violence and brutality of crime. Similarly, tv reality shows have influenced people’s ideas about real life and real relationships through the effects of image, misleading information, and popularity.
In the essay, The CSI Effect by Richard Willing, he explains how television shows have and are affecting todays people and society. One show in particular he mentions is the CBS crime-scene/drama series CSI (Crime Scene Investigation). Willing says that shows like CSI raises jurors’ expectations in courthouses. Some lawyers have said that CSI and related shows have jurors relying too heavily on scientific findings and are not willing to accept those findings without taking into consideration that it was compromised by varying errors. Jurors have learned a lot about DNA tests from these programs, but not taught about the right time to use one in court. This “CSI Effect” is felt beyond the courtroom as well. Some of the science is state-of-the-art
Judges make rulings on what evidence may or may not be admitted over the course of a trial and technology impacts the way police collect and process evidence, this is true today as well as during the 1892 trial of Lizzie Borden. The rudimentary practice of evidence collection and processing by police was a critical factor in the acquittal of Lizzie Borden. Fingerprinting had not been introduced into the court system and the absence of an eyewitness left the prosecution with little to work with, this left the prosecution only circumstantial evidence but most if not all of it pointed at the defendant. The Borden home was absent of any signs of forced entry and the traditional signs of a struggle couldn’t be located during the police examination but several gruesome facts indicated Lizzie Borden may have been innocent. Medical evidence as to the method used in the killings pointed toward a “tall man” being the culprit, specifically the nineteen wounds inflicted on Abby Borden were said to have been from a dull edge of an axe.
The article, “Trial Lawyers Cater to Jurors’ Demands for Visual Evidence,” written by Sylvia Hsieh stresses the importance of visual evidence. Hsieh writes
The Zundel vs. Citron case explains bias as, “a state of mind that is in some way predisposed to a particular result or that is closed with regard to particular issues,” (Zundel vs. Citron). Due to the importance that bias can play in a decision, the courts have created a legal test to determine if it exists in any given situation. The test is, “what would an informed person, viewing the matter realistically and practically – and having thought the matter through –
in Houck). Jurors who are influenced by the CSI Effect tend to have biased opinions because CSI shows are the basis for their knowledge. Rather than simply acknowledging courtroom expectations by deliberating based on only the facts presented in the courtroom, jurors are asking for more evidence than that is provided or necessary because jurors are comparing forensic evidence used to convict on television to real life cases. Thus, jurors are not impartial to the case because they have a prenotion of what information they require to convict, such as fingerprints in burglaries and blood analysis in murder cases. Smith et all reports that viewers of CSI-type shows and other similar shows have “inflated perceptions of accuracy, reliability, and usefulness of forensic evidence (but not ‘nonscientific’ evidence)” (qtd. in Stinson et all). As CSI-type shows emphasize the collection, analysis, and presentation of forensic evidence during court proceedings more so than other types of
This essay is going to critically discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using surveys and questionnaires as a method of Socio-Legal research. When conducting socio-legal research, a number of methods can be used to collect useful information.
On the other hand, Quantitative research refers to “variance theory” where quantity describes the research in terms of statistical relationships between different variables (Maxwell, 2013). Quantitative research answers the questions “how much” or “how many?” Quantitative research is an objective, deductive process and is used to quantify attitudes, opinions, behaviors, and other defined variables with generalized results from a larger sample population. Much more structured than qualitative research, quantitative data collection methods include various forms of surveys, personal interviews and telephone interviews, polls, and systematic observations. Methods can be considered “cookie cutter” with a predetermined starting point and a fixed sequence of
Quantitative research uses a deductive reasoning also known as top to bottom or (top down approach) starting with a theory, then the hypothesis, followed by observation and finally confirmation , going from the general to the more specific. Quantitative methods use numbers and statistics to show the results of the research exercise and mainly are concerned with mathematics and statistics. In quantitative research there are levels of measurement being firstly nominal which are names of things followed by ordinal sequence of things, interval where the sequence has equal distance between each item, and ratio where there is a true zero (Alston & Bowles, 2003, p. 7-9).
Traditional research may use quantitative or qualitative research method. According to Hendricks (2009), quantitative research is a general conclusion based on hard data. Hen-dricks describe quantitativ...
On the other hand, quantitative research allows you to test hypothesis derived from theories, associated with the issues being investigated. It is less flexible, as there are standardized procedures and techniques for collecting, organizing and analyzing the data (Kuada, 2012).