Introduction
Every credible study requires a thorough research methodology, as it is from this process that scholars can identify, select, process, and assess the information. In research articles, the methodology section allows the reader to critically examine the report’s validity and reliability. A recent study that aims to improve firms’ trust is “Trust Development in Globally Distributed Collaboration: A Case of U.S. and Chinese Mixed Teams” by Cheng et al. (2016). Therefore, this study aims to assess the methodology of the above research article.
Sample Size and Participant Selection
Certain design complications could compromise the study, including the limited number of participants. The study only used 172 students from the USA and China as participants (Cheng et al., 2016). Using a limited number of participants could lead to bias, thus compromising the research.
Bias Control and Use of the Control Group
Moreover, the study approach addresses bias, as the scholars compared participant traits among those who failed to finish the questionnaires within the latter two stages and those who completed them. The outcome revealed no significant differences based on demographic variables, and this non-response bias was excluded from the study (Cheng et al., 2016).
The study employed a control group to evaluate its study outcomes. During the experimental process, one team served as the treatment group, while the other served as the control group. The treatment group obtained instructions on utilizing the well-designed software according to engineering values, while the control group received no guidance (Cheng et al., 2016). The Control group, therefore, enhanced the study’s power and minimized its bias.
Research Design and Methodological Approach
Additionally, the statistical analysis was practical and applied efficiently. In particular, the study analyzed the longitudinal surveys, and the outcomes of this created a shifting trend within trust development with time.
In addition, the study employed qualitative analysis of the interview data, which led to the discovery of in-depth mechanisms from the perspective of the influencing factors. The study utilized a qualitative approach, precisely a design science approach. This approach effectively addressed the research questions. This qualitative study answers the question by adhering to specific steps, and these include identification of the problem, that is, the gap of the study, illustration of the objectives, evaluation of the participants or data, and then providing the implications after the research (Cheng et al., 2016). Thus, the study led to various implications, such as introducing trust antecedents and methods of improving trust.
Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research
The authors have pointed out the study’s limitations, specifically regarding the participants used. The participants were students, as this population might have differences from the working population. Thus, future research needs to incorporate participants from the real job market.
Methodological Clarity and Reporting Issues
The authors failed to reference the approaches used in the study, as they only mentioned their usage and not what they meant (Cheng et al., 2016). For instance, the multimodal approach has only been named the same as qualitative analysis, leaving readers to Google and find the meanings on their own. The reason for using the mixed method approach is that it enabled the scholars to examine the diverse outlooks and unearth connections among intricate layers of the multi-layered research questions.
Conclusion
Lastly, the study’s methodology is excellent as it carries most of the qualities required for research. The methodology, number of participants, and analysis method are well documented. In addition, the implementation and usage of the qualitative approach provide well-given answers to the various research questions, making it attain its mark as a credible source. Moreover, as with a regular study, limitations are inevitable, and these are what guide future studies. The study may incorporate a diverse population: employees and students.
Reference
Cheng, X., Fu, S., & Druckenmiller, D. (2016). Trust development in globally distributed collaboration: A case of U.S. and Chinese mixed teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 33(4), 978-1007.