The value of secondary data collection is questionable

Secondary research is useful as it helps researchers to quickly and within a limited period of time get the knowledge they want. However, the investigator can't monitor research carried out using secondary methods easily. Thus, there is a propensity to challenge and hence the details, which should be closely examined in secondary research. Subsequent data is provided primarily in a manner which does not meet the marketer's needs. For instance, a marketer that requires information about various sage groups will get disappointed if they find out that the way the ages are divided in the research does not match that of their company.

Secondary data collection is also questionable since, on several occasions, the marketer does not receive a satisfactory amount of information for the amount of money spent. Also, on many occasions, only a small part of research is revealed for free, whereas the full package that is necessary to gain the full value of the research is costly. This fact at times leads to the researcher being unable to get access to complete information. Some secondary data may have been collected several years ago and is therefore not timely. This outdated data offers petite value particularly for organizations that are conflicting in fast-changing marketplaces. Finally, there is no proprietary data in most cases when using secondary data because study is not carried out for a specific company. Also, it is scarce to gain an information advantage when secondary data collection is used.

Sampling is more relevant in observation than in focus groups

Observation is the act of monitoring some specific characteristics of a sample. It is similar to focus groups since both involve handling small samples of a given population. Despite the similarity, observation leads to the obtaining of more relevant information compared to focus groups since it enhances the finding out of the actual rather than reported behavior. In this way, the data collected through observing a sample can be the most accurate to predict the trends in a population. Observation is also more open-ended compared to focus groups since it does not involve moderation. When observing one is ready and will record everything as they observed and there are no specific expectations unlike in a focus group session.

In observation also, the researcher does not provide any impact on the sample group, unlike in focus groups where the researcher asks questions and therefore affect the resulting information. Focus groups involve a group discussion, and therefore the information obtained depends on the thinking of the whole group. This fact may lead to the collection of irrelevant data since it involves the considerations of opinions of several individuals. For the case of observation, for instance, an individual just observes and record the information they see without consulting anyone, hence resulting in more relevant data. Also, however much as the focus groups succeed in enabling the researcher to get the exact information they want, the weakness comes in since the researcher will not be informed about questions they fail to ask. For this reason, the researcher ends up gathering insufficient information about a population compared to if they had sat down and observed them for themselves.

Ethical research means you have the right samples

An ethical research is one that meets all the federal, professional and institutional standards for undertaking research. It also has human participants that help in supervising the students or researchers to sort out the issues they come across while writing their research projects or reports. Because of this, having the right samples does not alone make a research qualified to be termed ethical. It is also good to know that human subjects are essential in research, and must be treated with respect, ethically and fairly when conducting research. This fact is also one of the features of ethical research.

Since investigators are the ones that agree with the subjects to conduct an ethical research. For example, the subjects have to decide whether they trust the investigators as well as whether they believe that they will fulfill their obligations well. It is unethical to break any aspect of the agreement, and this will erode the trust between investigators and subjects. When the subjects do not trust the investigators, they will not be willing to participate in the research process. The investigators will then be forced to develop an overall knowledge to benefit the society rather than conduct a human subject research. The best way of dealing with the issue of lack of trust is to maintain the highest ethical standards. This idea means that all the characteristics of an ethical research need to be present as opposed to having the right samples alone.

Qualitative research relies far less on sampling

The most elaborate and recognized address about sampling is mainly thought to be associated with quantitative research alone. Qualitative research does not rely far much less on sampling. Qualitative researchers mainly make sampling choices to enable them to deepen their understanding of the phenomena they are researching on. But sampling has for a long time been a core concern in the humanistic and social inquiries, thus a need to discuss the qualitative sampling subject explicitly. The use of qualitative research has been increasing, and there is a need to understand it for some reasons. There is a necessity to complement the standardized data with the insider’s perspectives and insights about the context of the research question. For instance, to get this qualitative data, sampling has to be done since it is tedious and time-consuming to get it from the whole population.

Qualitative approaches are always valuable since they are suitable for accessing the analytic techniques as well as the validity of the standardized measures use with populations. This information can be easily obtained through sampling whereby the various ethnic and racial subpopulations are assessed. Since qualitative researchers aim at providing a valid and clear representation about a population, they take time to choose the best sample size that will enhance the discovery of nature and the scope of the universe being studied. Because of all these reasons, qualitative research relies a lot on sampling to be able to present a detailed, valid and clear report of the findings as saying that it relies far less on sampling is not true.

Quantitative research is never used before qualitative research

Quantitative research can be used before qualitative research since the choice is based on the preferences of the researcher. For example, some researchers, when they have a limited budget or when they are to choose one type only, they seem to default to qualitative. When they have all the time and resources to do both, they will prefer to start with quantitative that will help in clustering the analyses then followed by the qualitative to explain the reasons behind those clusters. Others will prefer to start with the qualitative approach to validate the findings later with a quantitative approach that will involve focused and large-scale surveys.

For some projects that have been done in the past, it has been realized that beginning with the quantitative research was of less value, but for others beginning with a qualitative research also led to some issues. Because of this, there are no sufficient reasons as to why quantitative research cannot be used before a qualitative one. It has also been argued out that when there is a need to make conclusions about the research questions faster; one is advised to start with quantitative research before doing the qualitative. Also when one’s thoughts or explorations diverge and one is undecided on where to start, digging for information through a quantitative research is advisable. It never wise to say that one of the two approaches is better than the other one since it will be like saying a fork is better than a spoon. Neither of them is basically better than the other one since they serve different purposes that do not have specified order.

Research objectives stay the same throughout a research project

A research objective is a concise, clear and declarative statement that directs the investigation of different variables. Research objectives focus on the ways of measuring these variables to identify as well as describe them. They are the results that a researcher seeks to find at the end of the research process, that is, what is achieved at the end of a research study. They are closely related to the problem statement, and since they are the result of the research, they need to be same throughout the project to avoid confusions.

Research objectives cover various aspects of the problem being researched on and all the factors that contribute to in a logical and coherent way. They, therefore, need to be phrased and specific regarding what is going to be done, where it will be done and the purpose of doing it. Once developed and stated, they then cannot be changed and have to be the same throughout the project to enable the researcher to be focused. The general objectives, for instance, specify the main goals of the research. These objectives state the expectations of the researcher at the end of the study. They, therefore, cannot be changed since changing them may lead to a loss in focus of the goals. Specific objectives, on the other hand, are aimed at directing and enhancing the achievement of the general objectives. These also have to remain the same to ensure consistency throughout the research.

Research must always be ethical

Ethics in research comprises of conduct, planning and reporting morals. It should involve the protections of both the human and animal subjects that are associated with the research operations. There is a need to always be ethical throughout the research process to promote the social and moral values like human rights, animal welfare, public safety and health, social responsibility and compliance with the law. When there is lack of ethics, also known as ethical lapses, in the research process, there will be a significant harm to human and animal subjects as well as the public at large. There are several reasons as to why ethics should be followed keenly during a research process. The general public will always accept the new results of research when they are sure of the authenticity at which the results have been published. It is also a good idea to have a clear difference between the conduct that is acceptable and unacceptable, especially when lives of human beings and animals are involved in the research.

For research to be successfully ethical there is a need for a sound ethics committee. The ethics committee has a significant role in describing the values and standards that have to be met to enhance research ethics and ensure that they are followed. Researchers also play a role in enhancing ethics in several ways. An example of these ways is by ensuring they have a clear design as well as conformance to the ethics throughout the research.