Running head: CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

Conducting Quantitative Research

Name
Date

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

Abstract
This paper looks into the process of conducting a quantitative research. To
narrow down the scope of the paper, the paper will look into three items.
The challenges of conducting the research are addressed notably those
regarding validity, sampling, bias and reliability. With the challenges in
mind, the paper will focus on formulation of a strategy to study the factors
affecting performance of virtual teams. The same paper will analyse the
strategy chosen and provide a verdict.

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

Challenges of conducting quantitative research

Conducting quantitative research encounters several challenges. Apart
from the fact that quantitative methods tend to be complex and technical,
other challenges related to the research design and interpretation of the
research results exists. Notably, challenges exist broadly during sampling,
conducting research itself, when analysing results and ensuring objective
publishing of the interpretive results. The challenges faced present
concerns about validity and reliability of the test results and the
authenticity of the entire research.
Challenges related to sampling
Firstly, sampling refers to informant election. When conducting
quantitative research, concerns about the size, appropriateness of the
informants chosen, and other ethical, geopolitical and socioeconomic
factors of the informants present various challenges. According to Williams
(2011), informant selection in quantitative research must ensure that the
size of the ample is large enough to guarantee generalizability of the tested
hypothesis. This means, non-response of the chosen population becomes
an imperative consideration. Non-response in sampling means that one
will end with an inadequate sample.
Komlan (2014) argues that an occurrence of a non-response can lead
to overestimation of the sample or the under estimation, which guarantee

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

challenges during testing. Krishna, Maithreyi & Surapaneni (2010)

consequently present a sampling bias on the sample. During research,
occurrence of the non-response or a failure to enhance randomization of
samples. In the research, Krishna et al., (2010) further presented key
sample biases that can occur during a quantitative research including
referral or volunteer samples, selection biases and measurement biases. In
the process of identifying a measurable sample, quantitative researchers
can end up involuntarily becoming biased on the mentioned or other ways.
Further, any sampling bias can alter specificity of the hypothesis.
According to Muijs (2011), specificity affect any numerical data to be
collected and therefore becomes a major concern when choosing a
quantitative design. Evidently, Muijs further voices the issue of quantitative
research based on forcing the sample chosen to be wholly calculable. If this
is the case, sometimes respondents may be forced into responding within
the presented options. Chances of contrary opinions may not be included
which can lead to bias and invalidity of results.
Challenges related to validity
Any research must show that the constructs that come out of it are
valid and reflect the population or phenomena characteristics. To achieve
this, the researcher must endeavour to bypass several validity hurdles.
Muijs (2011) observes several challenges. The challenges are those related

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

to the construct developed, criterion used, the content queried or those

regarding internal or external factor validities (p. 56).
With regard to validity, construct validity challenges emanate from
the issues of theory, notably those of the concepts measured and the
structure of the instruments (p. 59). According to Komlan (2014),
construct validity challenges come from the interconnectedness of the
research work. A research sample must correspond to the instruments used
and the instruments must be able to capture the items chosen for study.
Concisely, articulation of the items with regard to the instruments ensures
that the constructs expected are the exact constructs sought for in the
research, which is no mean feat.
Construct validity goes hand in hand with content validity, which is
about face, sampling and item validation (Wrench, Thomas-Maddox,
Richmond, & McCroskey, 2008). Achieving content validity is a challenge
given the nature of objectivity and dependence on facts at the expense of
narratives. Wrench and others further project that the quantitative
researcher is confronted by the need to ensure that extreme areas existing
in the population can be handled. In addition, the possibility of controlling
population and sample is at best impossible given the nature of human
being in the study of an aspect of humanity. Lastly, items used may not fit
like-for-like with the face required or even the sample appropriateness.

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

Criterion validity challenges are related to how the criteria chosen

compares with other tests within the same class. For example, if the
question asked answers all issues that can lead to the same conclusion, is
the research in the field closing down to a similar path or inferences.
According to Muijs (2011), criterion validity can be either predictive or
concurrent. This means the instrument used in the quantitative research
ought to guarantee prediction or relation. Topics that have wide theoretical
and scholarly ubiquity present a good chance of capturing the needed
criteria validity, unfortunately, research is not merely a move to replicate
what other scholars have done, but rather, it is a chance to contribute to
the existing body of knowledge on the topic.
Ihantola & Kihn (2011) issues of generalization and variations
bring internal and external validity concerns. Achieving a generalizable
conclusion is a challenge in quantitative research especially given that
narratives cannot be used to strengthen or items under review with
relation to other existing studies.
Challenges affecting reliability of research
Reliability in any research is a prerequisite. Unfortunately, ensuring
it is not a straightforward exercise. There are concerns about how
achievement of reliability is possible in a quantitative research. Usually,
reliability is about ensuring that replication of a similar study leads to

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

similar results (Ihantola & Kihn, 2011). Tests taken and the measured
items require measurement tools, which have margins of error. Muijs
(2011) says that issues of reliability can come from measurement repetition
or from internal inconsistencies.
With repetition of measurements, Komlan (2014) was of the opinion
that some of the most used reliability coefficient measuring instruments
like the Cronbachs alpha do not guarantee reliability. He argued that,
though they guarantee higher levels of probability that the measured items
are reliable, the whole issues of reliability stem from other sections of the
research process notably in the formulation and design of questionnaires
and the scales and items observed.
Further, reliability also stems from the way results are analyzed,
reported and interpreted. According to Scott (2008) on challenges of
conducting research, she argues that the use of accredited or suitable
research best practices is not always a guarantee that research will be
watertight. She reckons that even with good tests of reliability, researchers
can thoroughly examine, or poorly interrogate results to an extent that the
two gives out differing levels of conviction. Carter and Hurtado (2007)
agree that eventually, the issue of reliability boils down to professional and
scholarly behavior whose subjectivity scars over in terms of conflicts of
interests and autobiography.

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

Bias
Carter and Hurtado (2007) gave a glimpse of what bias does to
research. Certain research topics or subjects have certain tendencies to use
designs, methods, methodology, analysis tools or otherwise coalescing and
unique to the. For example, educational research has unwritten research
tendencies unique to them. People conducting education research tend to
follow the codes and systems without considering whether variability is a
significant concern.
Bias also affects research questions design and formulation (Krishna,
Maithreyi, & Surapaneni, 2010). Such biases can alter the way the whole
research process matures given that any research is interdependent of
constituent parts that must marry each other at the right time. Web reliant
researches face low response rates for questionnaires. This means that the
non-response issue weighs heavily on the researcher during sampling. It is
in this backdrop that researchers end up seeking to enhance sample size
that biases occur. For example, a researcher may know that conducting
teenagers over the internet achieves a higher response rate, that way; the
researcher opts to choose a sample that is reliant on a responsive sample
even when the motive is to generate a societal scope (Frippiat, Marquis,
Wiles-portier, 2010).

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

Describing an Appropriate Quantitative Research Strategy to Study Factors

Affecting Performance of Virtual Teams
Based on the numerous challenges of conducting a quantitative
research, it is important for the researcher to design a strategy that
overcomes the challenges and enables her to test her hypotheses. Given the
nature of the study seeking to establish the factors affecting performance of
virtual teams, it is plausible to argue that the researcher requires carrying
out either a causal comparative research or an experimental research. The
causal comparative research will help the researcher establish the
relationship between various independent variables and a dependent
variable (Williams 2011). On the other hand, the experimental research
will allow the researcher to introduce various controls in order to establish
the effect of different independent variables on the dependent variable.
For the researcher to decide which research method to use, she needs
to consider its vulnerability to the pitfalls discussed above and most
importantly, to consider its suitability in testing the hypotheses of the
study. Assuming that the researcher wishes to establish which variables are
statistically significant in determining the performance levels of virtual
teams, the method used must be able to test how social capital or group
cohesiveness and knowledge sharing affects performance (Ling, Kehong, &
Haixia, 2010).

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

10

In order to develop a strategy that reduces the chances of the study

failing to attain credible results, I will assume that the researcher will
utilise either a causal comparative research or the experimental research. In
either case, the researchers strategy must enable her study to attain
credibility. Towards this end, it is important to develop a strategy that
overcomes major challenges of conducting the research.
Overcoming the issues of sampling
Sampling is a critical process in undertaking a quantitative research
with the potential of causing various credibility issues. According to
Ihantola and Kihn (2011), errors committed during sampling could result
in loss of reliability of the study by influencing its external validity (p. 7).
When a researcher selects a sample size, she must be careful to select a
sample size sufficient to represent not only the accessed population but
also similar populations in other settings (Ibid). As observed by Carr
(1994), the researcher must refrain from the temptation of using purposive
or convenient samples if her study is to be valid enough to warrant
generalization of the findings.
The strategy here is to ensure that the researcher maintains the
validity of the study by ensuring that sampling problems due to such
issues as non- responsiveness are minimal and well compensated.
According to Muijs (2011), the sample size is subject to time and financial

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

11

constraints implying that the researcher may be unable to use a sample

size that is big enough. In this regard, the sample selected should be as
representative of the population under study as possible. Muijs (2011)
proposes ensuring that the researcher investigates those variables she
expects to have more effect on the dependent variable.
The researcher, therefore, is able to minimize the problems of
sampling by ensuring that the research design is set in a manner that
narrows down the variables under study. For instance, the researcher
might narrow down the research to focus on factors affecting performance
of virtual teams through variables that affect group cohesiveness and
knowledge sharing. Additionally, the researcher will aim at selecting a
sample size that is big enough to cover issues of non-responsiveness thus
enabling her to draw a more representative sample. Ensuring the
randomness of the sample is also important.
Designing a questionnaire
Critical to the research process is the data collection stage. Equally
critical is acknowledging the high vulnerability to errors of the stage and to
plan on how to minimize the possible errors. According to Frippiat,
Marquis, Wiles-Portier (2010), sending questionnaires to online
respondents have enabled improvement of question designs. Consequently,
a researcher is able to design questionnaire questions in a manner that

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

12

proves simple and interesting to respondents while adhering to a validity

criterion. To avoid situations where researchers ignore the soft data
collected (Carr 1994), it is important to use analytical methods that allow
the testing of every piece of data collected that is relevant to the study.
In order to collect data relevant to testing the factors affecting
performance, it is critical to include questions that tests the expected
relationships. In this regard, the researcher may, in addition to testing trust
issues; other factors include cooperation and competition (Baruch & Lin
2012). The researcher should utilize a strategy such that the questions
asked in the questionnaire are quantifiable (Frippiat et al. 2010). Questions
should therefore allow coding or be framed in a way that gives numerical
data.
Another aspect of the questionnaires that the researcher must
consider is the susceptibility of the respondent to give answers that are
only convenient to him. Frippiat et al. (2010) observes that including
difficult questions or complex and long procedures in the filling of the
questionnaires, especially in online surveys, may increase satisficing (p.
305). To enable the respondents to complete the surveys, the researcher
should find ways to motivate them especially by making sure the questions
are simple and the process captivating.

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

13

By receiving credible responses from the questionnaire, the

researcher will be able to draw data that is usable in testing the hypotheses.
Where the researcher adhered to a superior criterion validity check, it is
plausible to expect that the data thus acquired will be sufficient to test the
hypotheses. Shuttleworth (2009) warns of the repercussions of failing to
close all the gaps between the research objectives, research questions, the
hypotheses, and the data collected. Indeed, Howe and Eisenhart (1990)
posit that the researcher has a responsibility to ensure that the data
collected provides answers to the research questions. To achieve the fit, the
researcher must design the questionnaires to facilitate receiving answers
that contain relevant information towards her research questions.
Overcoming the problems of reliability
With regard to reliability, a working strategy in conducting this kind
of research must ensure that it goes beyond the challenges. Reliability is
about the size of the sample. Firstly, as Black (1999) suggests, the first step
is to ensure that there are enough questions or enough identifying
components of the constructs sought (p. 198). For example, in this study,
one must ensure that the literature about the factors is well represented in
the survey questions. Since the concern is the factors affecting performance
of virtual teams, existence and knowledge of such factors must be present.
The factors under scrutiny ought to all be represented in the questionnaire.

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

14

The core of this strategy is to ensure that errors are minimised to enhance
reliability of the outcome.
Homogeneity of the studied population and sample has a strong
impact on the reliability of results. Because of this, Shuttleworth (2009)
recommends that during sampling, the use of stratified random samples to
ensure that the diversity of the population is captured. In this research, the
use of such a randomized sample enhances the accuracy of the trait
measured within the population. Virtue teams can be scattered globally.
Consequently, an approach that captures this aspect of the population
must be enhanced, through randomization and sample size, especially
given that the study is about aspects of the population (Hopkins, 2008b).
Williams (2011) suggests that time consumed during the research
process is vital and can affect the reliability of the results reported. During
data collection, time and speed required to do this must be optimum.
Changing phenomena requires a short time interval between the first and
the last observed. Overall, research in virtual teams will also require an
optimum time allowance. Although time for collection can be a week to
allow respondents enough time to consider the interview, time required to
complete a survey must be minimum yet enough. Long questionnaires can
enhance the quality of the responses as seen above, but the respondents
are unlikely to give it thought or carefulness in answering the prompts.

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

15

Because of this, the time allowed should not exceed 30 minutes to reduce
respondents chances of opting out of the interview.
Analytical instruments are dependent on the effectiveness of the
wording of the research questions, items under review and intended
constructs (Black, 1999). Komlan (2011) recommends that the researcher
must be well informed on the exact expectation of the research normally
conveyed in the research questions, hypothesis and executed through
specific questions in the questionnaire. Each question shall reflect an
actionable and a specific outcome. For example, a typical questionnaire
may ask, How does trust affect your performance? indicators of how
can be put in terms of ratings from 1-5 scale with one meaning definitely
not while five being definitely yes. Similarly, qualitative analysis can help
to eradicate any concern about logical flows of elemental truths.
Overcoming bias
Data captured usually develops noise mostly in the shape of biases
and inaccuracies; data cleaning is a process that is essential when one has
such data. Dealing with such noise can affect the outcome of the research
and therefore, the recommended methods must suppress the element of
noise without affecting the informants intentions (Lash, Fox, & Fink,
2011). The writer can use Cronbachs alpha coefficients to enhance the
knowledge of errors and inconsistencies. Calculation and presentation of

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

16

the coefficient value and inclusion in the analysis will enhance the
reliability of the measured constructs. The reason for this is because, rather
than have a long questionnaire that can enhance clarity of information, but
discourage survey responses, the survey questionnaire is kept precise,
concise and therefore noise minimised.
Equally true is that all the challenges emanate from a design that
fails to arrest potential concerns at every stage. The most efficient way to
reduce potential biases is through objective reasoning and consulted
decisions. Through well organized literature search and synthesis, the gaps
identified provide questions to be asked and constructs sought.
Overcoming bias is a dependent challenge whose elimination strategy is
one that requires adherence to scholarly commitments.
Overcoming the challenges of validity
Validity is the ability of a test to produce results that explains the
phenomenon under investigation (Phelan & Wren 2006). Williams (2007)
emphasizes the importance of ensuring that the research is valid and
credible since the sole objective of any study is to provide generalizable
findings about a population. The researcher must be able to collect data
that enables generalizability of her findings or that makes the relationships
established between variables valid (Williams 2007, p. 66). In the case for
causal comparison research, the researcher must design her data collection

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

17

methods to gather information that connects to the research questions. For

instance, in ensuring that the sampling is valid, the researcher must be
aware of the need to use a sample that is representative of the population.
Ensuring that the sample used is random increases the chance of the
selected units bearing all the tested attributes of the population.
Questionnaire questions must be able to collect information usable
in testing the hypotheses. Given that the respondents must respond to the
questions asked, it is critical of the researcher to ensure that the questions
asked have quantifiable answers. In this respect, the strategy would to
minimize the questions whose answers will be subjective or ambiguous.
Shuttleworth (2009) observes that the failure to develop questionnaires
based on a validity criterion may lead to loss of credibility in the study or
financial losses where the study was part of a market research. A superior
strategy would ensure that the question asked in the questionnaires leads
to collection of data usable in testing the hypothesis under investigation.
Indeed, the questionnaire ought to contain questions that directly links to
the tests the researcher wishes to undertake on the hypotheses. The
hypotheses being tested must also be able to meet the objective of the
study by being sufficient to give inferences on the relationships being
tested (Shuttleworth, 2009).

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

18

For example, if trust is hypothesized to be a factor influencing

performance, respondents must respond to questions that examines issues
of trust in virtual teams performance if not trust itself (Aubert & Kelsey
2003). The hypotheses must be able to test for relationship between trust
and performance of virtual teams. The researcher needs to ensure she
controls the responses in a manner that allows them to present a
relationship between independent variables and the dependent variable
(Ihantola & Kihn 2011). In this regard, it is important for the researcher to
ensure that the responses expected from the questionnaires can develop a
connection between trust or trust issues and virtual teams performance.
The issues of validity emerge in a research early on and requires
proper planning to ensure that each stage remains in tandem with the
bigger commitment to providing valid findings. Hopkins (2008) indicates
that where the research carried out is significant; there is often the need to
carry out a pilot study in order to identify all the aspects of the study and
to prepare for challenges that become apparent. In carrying out a study on
performance of virtual teams, it is critical to carry out a pilot study in
order to familiarize with the population and to determine the appropriate
sample size. As Ihantola and Kihn (2011) adduces, the validity of a study
determines whether other scholars can use its findings to draw inferences
about the whole population under investigation. A valid study will have to

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

19

be able to present findings that can be useful in describing characteristics

of the population.
Conclusion
Conducting a quantitative research requires deliberate commitment
to various standards in order to provide new knowledge to a specific field.
While undertaking the research, a researcher must overcome numerous
challenges in order to provide not only reliable findings but also to ensure
their validity. Pitfalls to conducting a valid research may arise from various
stages in the research process such as sampling and data collection.
Sampling process is critical to the research process and the researcher must
be careful to minimize errors in the stage. Possible solutions to sampling
problems include avoiding convenience sampling and allowing for
unresponsive respondents during data collection. The sample size must be
big enough and drawn from every domain of the population. In data
collection stage, it is important to ensure that the method used allows
respondents to give clear answers and eliminates or reduces cases of
satisficing. A quantitative researcher must aim towards drawing valid
findings by observing a pre-planned validity criterion. To ensure the
findings are valid, the sampling, data collection, and the data analysis
processes must all adhere to validity criterion and be free of bias.

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

20

References
Aubert, B. A., & Kelsey, B. L. (2003). Further understanding of trust and
performance in virtual teams. Small group research, 34(5), 575-618.
Baruch, Y., & Lin, C. P. (2012). All for one, one for all: Coopetition and
virtual team
performance. Technological Forecasting and Social
Change, 79(6), 1155-1168.
Black, T. R. (1999). Doing quantitative research in the social sciences: An
integrated approach to research design, measurement and statistics.
Thousand Oak, CA: Sage Publications.
Carr, L. T. (1994). The strengths and weaknesses of quantitative and
qualitative research: what method for nursing? Journal of advanced
nursing, 20(4), 716-721.
Carter, D. F., & Hurtado, S. (2007). Bridging key research dilemmas:
Quantitative research using a critical eye. New directions for institutional
research, 2007(133), 25-35.
Creswell, J., W., (2009). Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative and
Mixed Methods Approaches (3ndEd.). CA: Sage publications.
Frippiat, D, Marquis, N., Wiles-Portier, E., (2010). Web Surveys in the
Social Sciences: An Overview. Population, 65(2), 285-311.
Hopkins, W. G. (2008a). Quantitative research design. Sport science 4(1),
sportsci.org/jour/0001/wghdesign.html.

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

21

Hopkins, W. G., (2008b). Research Designs: Choosing and Fine-tuning a

Design for Your Study.
Sport science, 12, 12-21
(sportsci.org/2008/wghdesign.htm).
Howe, K., & Eisenhart, M. (1990). Standards for qualitative (and
quantitative) research: A prolegomenon. Educational researcher, 19(4),
2-9.
Ihantola, E. M., & Kihn, L. A. (2011). Threats to validity and reliability in
mixed methods accounting research. Qualitative Research in Accounting
& Management, 8(1), 39-58.
Jawadi, N., & Bonet-Fernandez, D. (2013). An examination of the factors
influencing
relationship building and performance in virtual R&D
project teams (No. 2013-040).
Komlan, J. (2014). The challenge of conducting a quantitative business
research: Analysis of issues with survey design, sampling, validity, and
reliability.
Krishna, R., Maithreyi, R., & Surapaneni, K. M. (2010). Research bias: a
review for medical students. J Clin Diagn Res, 4, 2320-2324.
Lash, T. L., Fox, M. P., & Fink, A. K. (2011). Applying quantitative bias
analysis to epidemiologic data. Springer Science & Business Media.
Ling, S., Kehong, H., & Haixia, P. (2010). Essential factors of affecting
knowledge sharing in virtual teams. In Proceedings of the Seventh

CONDUCTING QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

22

International Conference on Innovation & Management (pp. 10801083).

Muijs, D. (2011). Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.
Phelan C. and Wren, J. (2006). Exploring Reliability in Academic
Assessment. Uni Office of Academic Assessment (2005-06). Retrieved on
6 February 2015 from,
https://www.uni.edu/chfasoa/reliabilityandvalidity.htm.
Scott, J., (2008). Children as respondents: the challenge for quantitative
methods. In Christensen, P., & James, A. (Eds.) (pp. 87-109). Research
with children: Perspectives and practices. Routledge.
Shuttleworth, M. (2009). Criterion Validity: Criterion validity assesses
whether a test reflects a
certain set of abilities. Experimentresources.com.
Williams, C. (2011). Research methods. Journal of Business & Economics
Research (JBER),
5(3).
Wrench, J. S., Thomas-Maddox, C., Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C.
(2008). Quantitative research methods for communication: A hands-on
approach. Oxford University Press, Inc.