Evaluating qualitative and quantitative research · 评估定性与定量研究
| English | 中文 | Pinyin · 拼音 |
|---|---|---|
| credibility/ˌkredɪˈbɪlɪti/ | 可信性 | kě xìn xìng |
| transferability/trænsˌfɜːrəˈbɪlɪti/ | 可迁移性 | kě qiān yí xìng |
A decision you can investigate
- An interview study gives detailed accounts from six volunteers.
- Small numbers do not alone make qualitative research worthless.
一个你可以调查的决策
- 一项访谈研究提供了六名志愿者的详细陈述。
- 样本量小并不单独意味着定性研究毫无价值。
Build the explanation
- Qualitative research examines meanings and experiences; quantitative research measures variables numerically.
- Evaluate each method against its question, sampling, analytic process and ethical obligations.
构建解释
- 质性研究考察意义与体验；量化研究则对变量进行数值测量。
- 针对每种方法，需根据其研究问题、抽样策略、分析过程及伦理义务进行评估。
Match the terms to their precise meanings. · 将术语与其精确含义匹配。
Use these definitions in the particular context of Evaluating qualitative and quantitative research. · 在评价定性与定量研究的特定语境中使用这些定义。
Work through the evidence
- An interview may reveal how people interpret an experience, but volunteer recruitment can shape whose perspectives appear.
- Compare themes with quoted evidence and reflect on the researcher's role, rather than judging credibility 可信性 only by sample size.
梳理证据
- 访谈可能揭示人们如何解读某种体验，但志愿者招募方式可能会影响哪些视角得以呈现。
- 将主题与引证证据进行比对，并反思研究者的角色，而非仅凭样本量来评判可信性。
What is a useful evaluation of the interview study? · 对这项访谈研究的有用评价是什么？
An interview may reveal how people interpret an experience, but volunteer recruitment can shape whose perspectives appear. Compare themes with quoted evidence and reflect on the researcher's role, rather than judging credibility only by sample size. · 访谈可能揭示人们如何解读某种体验，但志愿者招募方式可能会影响哪些视角得以呈现。将主题与引证证据进行比对，并反思研究者的角色，而非仅凭样本量来评判可信性。
Test the limits
- The current HL methods paper differs from the 2027 source-based data paper.
- Do not apply experimental cause-and-effect standards indiscriminately to an inquiry about lived meanings.
测试极限
- 当前HL论文题与2027源数据论文题不同。
- 不要将实验式的因果关系标准不加区分地应用于对生活意义的探究中。
Which caution belongs to this particular task? · 哪项注意事项适用于此特定任务？
The current HL methods paper differs from the 2027 source-based data paper. Do not apply experimental cause-and-effect standards indiscriminately to an inquiry about lived meanings. · 当前HL论文题与2027源数据论文题不同。不要将实验式的因果关系标准不加区分地应用于对生活意义的探究中。
The explanation in this lesson makes a conditional claim; relevant context and evidence still matter. · 本课的解释提出了条件性主张；相关背景和证据仍然重要。
Do not apply experimental cause-and-effect standards indiscriminately to an inquiry about lived meanings. · 不要将实验因果标准不加区分地应用于探究生活意义的问题。
Apply and explain your answer
- What is a useful evaluation of the interview study?
- Whether recruitment and analysis support its claims about the participants' experiences.
应用并解释你的答案
- 对这项访谈研究的有效评估是什么？
- 招募与分析是否支持其关于参与者体验的论断。
Choose the two statements supported by this lesson. · 选择本课支持的两项陈述。
The concept and worked evidence support these claims; the stated limits rule out the universal shortcut. · 概念和推演证据支持这些主张；明确的限制排除了普遍捷径。
Use the terms precisely
- credibility: The trustworthiness of a research interpretation.
- transferability 可迁移性: The extent to which insights may apply in another context.
精确使用术语
- 可信性：研究解释的可信程度。
- 可迁移性: 研究发现在另一情境下适用的程度。
An interview may reveal how people interpret an experience, but volunteer recruitment can shape whose perspectives appear. Compare themes with quoted evidence and reflect on the researcher's role, rather than judging credibility only by sample size.
The current HL methods paper differs from the 2027 source-based data paper. Do not apply experimental cause-and-effect standards indiscriminately to an inquiry about lived meanings.
Qualitative research examines meanings and experiences; quantitative research measures variables numerically.
访谈可能揭示人们如何解读某种体验，但志愿者招募方式可能会影响哪些视角得以呈现。将主题与引证证据进行比对，并反思研究者的角色，而非仅凭样本量来评判可信性。
当前HL论文题与2027源数据论文题不同。不要将实验式的因果关系标准不加区分地应用于对生活意义的探究中。
质性研究考察意义与体验；量化研究则对变量进行数值测量。