Introduction
Surveys are valuable and helpful instruments for collecting data that can be used to analyze a particular phenomenon or answer a specific research question. However, this tool is only positive if correctly implemented. When surveys are of poor quality, they can generate false or biased data, making it impossible to obtain reliable results. That is why researchers are encouraged to follow the best practice standards when they use this instrument. It is reasonable to consider a hypothetical scenario of designing a survey at my university to see how it should be performed.
Question of Interest: On average, how many hours per week do students spend studying?
Poor Ways to Collect Samples
It is exciting to analyze this issue to know whether the selected individuals have sufficient time to engage in other essential activities. The first poor way of collecting the sample involves relying on a voluntary response sample. According to Moore et al. (2018), this term denotes that surveys are only answered by individuals who “choose themselves by responding to a broad appeal” (p. 398). I can conduct such a survey in my class alone, which will result in a convenience bias because this sample will consist of respondents who are easiest to reach and want to disclose their strong opinions (Moore et al., 2018). This approach can result in the overrepresentation or underrepresentation of some answers.
The second inefficient way is to survey during the final exam week. During this period, students typically spend more time studying, which suggests that the results cannot be generalized to the entire year. This scenario contributes to a temporal bias that undermines the validity of findings because they can be exaggerated during the selected period (Yuan et al., 2021). This sampling approach is not suitable because the task is to analyze students’ studying habits under normal conditions.
Ways to Modify a Survey
It is reasonable to take specific steps to produce a better sample. On the one hand, a suitable approach is to cooperate with the faculty staff to collect the email addresses of all the students. According to the American Association for Public Opinion Research [AAPOR] (n.d.), creating a sampling frame is a significant activity to see the exhaustive list of potential respondents. According to this list, it will be possible to select a specific sample by sending invitation letters to all the students.
Depending on their level of interest, I could choose the exact number of individuals who will be included in my survey. It is additionally worth stating that an online questionnaire is a convenient, easy, and free instrument (American Association for Public Opinion Research [AAPOR], n.d.). The described methodology can help avoid the impact of a convenience bias.
On the other hand, I would deliver my survey in the middle of the term. This decision would ensure that no unusual phenomena or events lead to the overrepresentation or underrepresentation of the behavior under analysis. Choosing the most appropriate time is the only effective decision to eliminate a temporal bias from the given questionnaire. This solution ensures that the obtained results are trustworthy.
Ethical Considerations
While collecting data with the sample of participants, I should abide by a few ethical and legal considerations. Firstly, it is necessary to remember that an institutional review board should review all planned studies in advance. This body ensures that the proposed survey is safe, important, and can produce significant results (Spellecy & Busse, 2021). Thus, researchers require the board’s approval to implement their scientific activities.
Secondly, informed consent is essential from all individuals who will participate in a study. According to Bazzano et al.(2021), the US Code of Federal Regulations and the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects offer legal obligations for researchers to obtain informed consent. That is why I would ask all the selected individuals to fill in a written informed consent form to protect myself from legal issues.
Thirdly, I would draw attention to the requirement of keeping individual data confidential. Moore et al. (2018) stipulate that researchers are obliged to protect the subject’s privacy, which denotes that no personal information should be made public. I will achieve this objective by revealing statistical summaries for groups. Furthermore, I will do my best to protect the subject’s information from any data leakage and unauthorized access and use.
Conclusion
The survey is an essential and valuable data collection instrument. However, if researchers fail to conduct it properly, they can receive wrong and weak information, which can lead to various biases. For example, reliance on the easiest data collection method can result in a convenience bias, while delivering a questionnaire at an unsuitable time contributes to a temporal bias. Researchers should know these drawbacks and the appropriate steps to minimize their adverse impact.
Finally, every survey is associated with some ethical and legal issues. They refer to institutional review board approval, informed consent, and confidentiality. Scientists must satisfy all these requirements to guarantee that they have the right to conduct a study and that it does not violate any ethical or legal standards.
References
American Association for Public Opinion Research. (n.d.). Best practices for survey research. Web.
Bazzano, L. A., Durant, J., & Brantley, P. R. (2021). A modern history of informed consent and the role of key information. Ochsner Journal, 21(1), 81-85. Web.
Moore, D. S., Notz, W. I., & Flinger, M. A. (2018). The basic practice of statistics (8th ed.). W. H. Freeman.
Spellecy, R., & Busse, K. (2021). The history of human subjects research and rationale for institutional review board oversight. Nutrition in Clinical Practice, 36(3), 560-567. Web.
Yuan, W., Beaulieu-Jones, B. K., Yu, K. H., Lipnick, S. L., Palmer, N., Loscalzo, J., Cai, T. & Kohane, I. S. (2021). Temporal bias in case-control design: Preventing reliable predictions of the future. Nature Communications, 12(1), 1107. Web.