Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals represent a significant portion of modern society, and these people often face numerous social challenges. As a result, various empirical articles address the issue, and the quantitative one by Hatzenbuehler et al. (2017) is among them. The research analyzes how social support for same-sex marriages affects the LGBT population’s smoking habits and overall health conditions. The present paper will comment on the sampling method that was utilized in the study.
Researchers typically draw significant attention to ensure that their sampling approach is adequate. As for Hatzenbuehler et al. (2017), the authors relied on the Gallup Daily tracking survey, and the following information will comment on the sampling procedure used in it. Thus, a probability sampling approach was used because randomly selected individuals were interviewed via their phones. The randomization was achieved using a Random Digit Dialing method that covered both landline and cell phone users. This strategy allowed extracting data from more than 373 000 individuals who represented all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
It is possible to admit that the strategy above has contributed to the study’s generalizability. On the one hand, Yegidis et al. (2018) report that randomization allows the creation of a sample that is as close to the entire population as possible. This fact denotes that the findings can be generalized to the population, which increases the article’s external validity (Yegidis et al., 2018). On the other hand, Hatzenbuehler et al. (2017) report that their study has a decent level of generalizability because their sample represents close to 90% of the United States adult population (p. 512). Consequently, there is sufficient evidence to claim that the study’s findings can be applied to the whole population.
Even though the sampling procedure above implies a high generalizability level, it still has some limitations. Firstly, it refers to a low average response rate of 11% (Hatzenbuehler et al., 2017, p. 512). This state of affairs can affect the study’s external validity and reliability. It is so because the low number implies that a significant portion of the LGBT population did not participate in the research. Secondly, another limitation refers to the fact that more than 9,000 respondents refused to disclose their sexual orientation (Hatzenbuehler et al., 2017). It can mean that interviewers failed to establish contact with the interviewees.
Thus, it is necessary to offer a solution to manage the effect of the limitations above. In the article, it was not mentioned how the interviewers started the survey. It relates to the fact that opening statements are of significance to establish contact with respondents. For example, it can be useful to make the interviewees feel special, which will make them want to participate. In particular, such statements as “The current research needs your assistance” or “Please take a few minutes to answer the questions” can make some people feel respected and participate in the survey.
In conclusion, the paper has demonstrated that the research by Hatzenbuehler et al. (2017) relied on a probability sampling technique. The scholars dealt with randomization to increase their study’s generalizability which is necessary to apply the findings to the population. However, a low response rate and the presence of respondents who failed to disclose their sexual orientation imply some issues with the article’s reliability and external validity. However, drawing more attention to establishing contact between an interviewer and interviewee can address the problems.
References
Hatzenbuehler, M. L., Flores, A. R., & Gates, G. J. (2017). Social attitudes regarding same-sex marriage and LGBT health disparities: Results from a national probability sample. Journal of Social Issues, 73(3), 508-528. Web.
Yegidis, B. L., Weinbach, R. W., & Myers, L. L. (2018). Research methods for social workers (8th ed.). Pearson.