Research Methods in Physical Activity
by Jerry R. Thomas , Jack K. Nelson and Stephen J. Silverman
Published by: Human Kinetics, Inc.
Research Methods in Physical Activity, Seventh Edition, systematically guides students through the research process, introducing methods and tools specifically for kinesiology and exercise science disciplines, including the subdisciplines of physical therapy, rehabilitation, and occupational therapy. The seventh edition leads students and novice researchers to research competency with the distinctive humor that has become a trademark of this internationally recognized text.
This text provides step-by-step information for every aspect of the research process, from identifying and devising research questions to analyzing data and compiling results for presentation. Methods for qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods research approaches are addressed, and real-world research questions—including historical, experimental, epidemiological, and philosophical—are presented by scholarly contributors who give suggestions for approaches to follow. Photos, anecdotes, and humorous stories are used throughout the text to put students at ease and emphasize key points through practical applications. Enhancements to the seventh edition include the following:
• Updated information and techniques for electronic searches to ensure students use best research practices
• New information on meta-analysis and the benefits of journal-style writing that teach readers to evaluate and prepare data for scholarly journals and publication
• Special attention to ethical issues to help readers understand the regulations involved in using human and animal subjects
• New information on logistic regression that aids in the understanding of complex ideas
• Further explanation of qualitative and mixed-methods research approaches, in addition to quantitative approaches, to ensure readers use the most appropriate methodology for their research
The content of the seventh edition maintains and expands upon the logical content progression that has made Research Methods in Physical Activity the leading text in the field.
Part I presents an overview of the research process, including problem development, preparation of the research plan, and understanding ethical issues in research and writing. Part II introduces statistical and measurement issues in research, and part III presents various types of or approaches to research and methodology from expert researchers in the field. Part IV includes a writing guide for result findings and details how to develop and organize research papers and presentations. Statistical tables and guides are available in the appendix.
To aid instructors, Research Methods in Physical Activity, Seventh Edition, includes a suite of ancillary materials featuring an instructor guide, test package, an extra data set for instructors who wish to create specialized learning activities, and presentation package plus image bank.
Research Methods in Physical Activity, Seventh Edition, instills in students the confidence to devise, collect, analyze, and present their research in a competent manner by systematically guiding them through the research process. It is an essential text for all emerging researchers in physical activity.
Part I: Overview of the Research Process
Chapter 1. Introduction to Research in Physical Activity
The Nature of Research
Unscientific Versus Scientific Methods of Problem Solving
Alternative Models of Research
Types of Research
Overview of the Research Process
Parts of a Thesis: A Reflection on the Steps in the Research Process
Summary
Chapter 2. Developing the Problem and Using the Literature
Identifying the Research Problem
Purpose of the Literature Review
Basic Literature Search Strategies
Steps in the Literature Search
Summary
Chapter 3. Presenting the Problem
Choosing the Title
Writing the Introduction
Stating the Research Problem
Presenting the Research Hypothesis
Operationally Defining Terms
Basic Assumptions, Delimitations, and Limitations
Justifying the Significance of the Study
Differences Between the Thesis and the Research Article
Summary
Chapter 4. Formulating the Method
How to Present Methodological Details
Why Planning the Method Is Important
Two Principles for Planning Experiments
Describing Participants
Describing Instruments
Describing Procedures
Describing Design and Analysis
Establishing Cause and Effect
Interaction of Participants, Measurements, and Treatments
Summary
Chapter 5. Ethical Issues in Research and Scholarship
Seven Areas of Scientific Dishonesty
Ethical Issues Regarding Copyright
Model for Considering Scientific Misconduct
Working With Faculty
Protecting Human Participants
Protecting Animal Subjects
Summary
Part II: Statistical and Measurement Concepts in Research
Chapter 6. Becoming Acquainted With Statistical Concepts
Why We Need Statistics
Use of Computers in Statistical Analysis
Description and Inference Are Not Statistical Techniques
Ways to Select a Sample
Justifying Post Hoc Explanations
Difficulty of Random Sampling and Assignment: How Good Does It Have to Be?
Unit of Analysis
Measures of Central Tendency and Variability
Basic Concepts of Statistical Techniques
Data for Use in the Remaining Statistical Chapters
Summary
Chapter 7. Statistical Issues in Research Planning and Evaluation
Probability
Meaningfulness (Effect Size)
Power
Using Information in the Context of the Study
Summary
Chapter 8. Relationships Among Variables
What Correlational Research Investigates
Understanding the Nature of Correlation
What the Coefficient of Correlation Means
Using Correlation for Prediction
Partial Correlation
Uses of Semipartial Correlation
Procedures for Multiple Regression
Logistic Regression
Discriminant Function AnalysisMultivariate Forms of Correlation
Summary
Chapter 9. Differences Among Groups
How Statistics Test Differences
Types of t Tests
Interpreting t
Relationship of t and r
Analysis of Variance
Analysis of Covariance
Experimentwise Error Rate
Understanding Multivariate Techniques
Summary
Chapter 10. Nonparametric Techniques
Chi Square: Testing the Observed Versus the Expected
Procedures for Rank-Order Data
Correlation
Differences Among Groups
Summary
Chapter 11. Measuring Research Variables
Validity
Reliability
Methods of Establishing Reliability
Intertester Reliability (Objectivity)
Standard Error of Measurement
Using Standard Scores to Compare Performance
Measuring Movement
Measuring Written Responses
Measuring Affective Behavior
Scales for Measuring Affective Behavior
Measuring Knowledge
Item Response Theory
Summary
Part III: Types of Research
Chapter 12. Sociohistorical Process in Sport Studies
David K. Wiggins and Daniel S. Mason
Development of the Discipline Theory and Sport History
Relationship Between Theory and Method
Research Goals and Questions
Research Topics
Research Design
Data Analysis and Interpretation
Research Findings
Exemplary Studies in Sport History
Summary
Chapter 13. Philosophical Research in Physical Activity
R. Scott Kretchmar and Tim Elcombe
Identifying the Purposes of Philosophical Research
Identifying the Range of Philosophical Research
Locating a Research Problem
Analyzing a Research Problem
Summary
Chapter 14. Research Synthesis (Meta-Analysis)
Using Meta-Analysis to Synthesize Research
Presenting Effect Size Data
Summary
Chapter 15. Surveys
Questionnaires
Electronic Surveys
Delphi Method
Personal Interviews
Normative Surveys
Summary
Chapter 16. Other Descriptive Research Methods
Developmental Research
Case Studies
Job Analysis
Observational Research
Unobtrusive Research Techniques
Correlational Research
Summary
Chapter 17. Physical Activity Epidemiology Research
Barbara E. Ainsworth and Charles E. Matthews
Observational Versus Experimental Research
What Is Epidemiology?
Physical Activity Measurement Definitions
Assessment of Physical Activity
Epidemiological Study Designs
Reading and Interpreting a Physical Activity Epidemiological Study
Summary
Chapter 18. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Research
Sources of Invalidity
Threats to Internal Validity
Threats to External Validity
Controlling Threats to Internal Validity
Controlling Threats to External Validity
Types of Designs
Summary
Chapter 19. Qualitative Research
Procedures in Qualitative Research
Analysis of the Data
Concluding Remarks
Summary
Chapter 20. Mixed-Methods Research
Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Methods
Designing Mixed-Methods Research
Issues in Mixed-Methods Research
Examples of Mixed-Methods Research
Summary
Part IV: Writing the Research Report
Chapter 21. Completing the Research Process
Research Proposal
Thesis and Dissertation Proposal
Advisor and Dissertation Committee
The Good Scholar Must Research and Write
Scientific Writing
First Things Are Sometimes Best Done Last
Developing a Good Introduction
Describing the Method
The Proposal Process
Preparing and Presenting Qualitative Research Proposals
Writing Proposals for Granting Agencies
Submitting Internal Proposals
Completing Your Thesis or Dissertation
Results and Discussion
Handling Multiple Experiments in a Single Report
Using Tables and Figures
Summary
Chapter 22. Ways of Reporting Research
Basic Writing Guidelines
A Brief Word About Acknowledgments
Thesis and Dissertation Format: Traditional Versus Journal
Helpful Hints for Successful Journal Writing
Revising Research Papers
Writing Abstracts
Making Oral and Poster Presentations
Summary
Jerry R. Thomas, EdD, is professor and dean of the College of Education at the University of North Texas. Besides writing the previous editions of this book, Thomas has authored more than 200 publications, 120 of which are refereed publications with numerous contributions in research methods. In 1999 he was named the C.H. McCloy Lecturer for his production of research throughout his career. Thomas has been editor in chief of Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport and a reviewer for most major research journals in kinesiology and numerous journals in psychology. He has also served as president of the National Academy of Kinesiology, American Kinesiology Association, AAHPERD Research Consortium, and North American Society for Psychology of Sport and Physical Activity. In 1990 he was named an AAHPERD Alliance Scholar and in 2003 was named a NASPSPA Distinguished Scholar based on lifetime achievement in research. Thomas received an honorary doctorate of science from his undergraduate institution, Furman University, in the spring of 2015.
Jack K. Nelson, EdD, is professor emeritus in the department of kinesiology at Louisiana State University. Nelson conducted and published research and taught research methods for 35 years. He has been an adviser on more than 50 doctoral dissertations and more than 50 master’s theses. He has more than 80 publications and has served as editor of research publications. A fellow in the Research Consortium, he has been a member of AAHPERD, the American Educational Research Association, and the American College of Sports Medicine. He has also served as president of the Association for Research, Administration, Professional Councils and Societies (now AAALF) and as vice president of AAHPERD.
Stephen Silverman, EdD, has taught and written about research methods for more than 30 years. He is a professor of education at Teachers College at Columbia University and has conducted research on teaching in physical education focusing on how children learn motor skill and develop attitudes. He has published more than 75 research articles in addition to many books and book chapters. Silverman is a fellow and past president of the National Academy of Kinesiology and the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance (AAHPERD) Research Consortium and a fellow of the American Educational Research Association (AERA). A former coeditor of the Journal of Teaching in Physical Education and editor in chief of the Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, Silverman was an AERA Physical Education scholar lecturer, a Research Consortium scholar lecturer, and Weiss lecturer and Alliance Scholar for AAHPERD.
Choosing the right participants for your study
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study.
Describing Participants
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study. These are questions to consider when selecting participants:
- Are participants with special characteristics necessary for your research?
- Age (children, elderly)
- Sex (females, males, or both)
- Level of training (trained or untrained)
- Level of performance (experts or novices)
- Size (weight, fatness)
- Special types (athletes, cyclists, runners)
- Can you obtain the necessary permission and cooperation from the participants?
- Can you find enough participants?
Of course, you want to select participants who will respond to the treatments and measures used in the study. For example, if you want to see the results of training a group of children in overhand throwing, selecting expert 12-year-old baseball pitchers as participants will not likely produce a change in measures of throwing outcome. An intense, long-term training program would be required to have any influence on these participants. Selecting children who are soccer players and have never played organized baseball would offer better odds for a training program to produce changes.
In experimental research, the interactions among participants, measures, and the nature of the treatment program are essential in allowing the treatment program to have a chance to work (Thomas, Lochbaum, Landers, & He, 1997). If you select participants who have high levels of physical fitness, subjecting them to a moderate training program will not produce changes in fitness. Also, participants high in physical fitness will have a small range of scores on a measure of cardiorespiratory endurance (e.g., 
O2max). For example, you will not find a significant correlation between O2max and marathon performance in world-class marathon runners. Their range of scores in O2max is small, as is their range of scores in marathon performance times. Because the range of scores is small in both measures, no significant correlation will be found. This result does not mean that running performance and cardiorespiratory endurance are not related. It means that you have restricted the range of participants' performance so much that the correlation cannot be exhibited. If you had selected moderately trained runners (e.g., women who jog three times per week for 40 min each time), a significant correlation would be found between running performance on a 5K run and O2max. (We discuss procedures for selecting sample participants in chapter 6.)
Participants, measures, and treatment programs are interrelated. Be sure to choose participants who will respond to the treatment program and have a broad enough range of results when measured with the chosen techniques.
You may have to offer something to the participants to make being in the study worthwhile.
What to Tell About the Participants
The exact number of participants should be given, as should any loss of participants during the time of study. In the proposal, some of this information may not be exact. For example, the following might describe the potential participants:
Participants: For this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, will be randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained distance runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who have been competitive runners for at least 2 years. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
After the study is completed, details are available on the participants, so now this section might read as follows:
Participants: In this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, were randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who had been competitive runners for at least 2 years. The participants had the following characteristics (standard deviations in parentheses): age, M = 26 years (3.3); height, M = 172.5 cm (7.5); weight, M = 66.9 kg (8.7); and O2max, M = 65 ml · kg · min - 1 (4.2). Participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
The participant characteristics listed are extremely pertinent in an exercise physiology study but not at all pertinent, for example, in a study of equipment used by children on the playground. The nature of the research dictates the participant characteristics of interest to the researcher. Carefully think through the characteristics that you will report in your research. Look at related studies for ideas about important characteristics to report.
The characteristics of participants that you identify and report must be clearly specified. Note in the example that well-trained runners were exactly defined; that is, their O2max must be equal to 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher. When participants of different ages are to be used is another good example. Saying only that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be the participants is not sufficient. How wide is the age range for 7-year-olds? Is it ±1 month, ±6 months, or what? In the proposal, you may say that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be included in the study. At the time of testing, each age will be limited to a range of ±6 months. Then, when the thesis or dissertation is written, it may read as follows:
At each age level, 15 children were selected for this study. The mean ages are as follows (standard deviations in parentheses): the youngest group, 7.1 years (4.4 months); 9-year-olds, 9.2 years (3.9 months); and the oldest group, 11.2 years (4.1 months).
A graduate student we know was in his committee meeting when a faculty member on his committee asked him to describe one of his participants. The student said, "Hewas 6 feet tall, had brown hair and a beard, and trained regularly by distance running." The really sharp faculty member then asked, "Was this a male or female?" to which the student was unable to respond because of laughter.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
How to wade through research jargon
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation.
Reading Research
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation. We writers are often guilty of trying to use language to dazzle the reader and perhaps to give the impression that our subject matter is more esoteric than it really is. We tend to write for the benefit of a rather small number of readers - that is, other researchers in our field.
We have the problem of jargon, of course. In any field, whether it is physics, football, or cake baking, jargon confounds the outsider. The use of jargon serves as a kind of shorthand. It provides meaning to the people within the field because everyone uses those words in the same context. Research literature is famous for using a three-dollar word when a nickel word would do. As Day and Gastel (2006, p. 200)asked, what self-respecting writer would use a three-letter word such as now when he or she could use the elegant expression at this point in time? Researchers never do anything, they perform it; they never start, they initiate; and they terminate instead of end. Day and Gastel further remarked that an occasional author slips and uses the word drug, but most salivate like Pavlov's dogs in anticipation of using chemotherapeutic agent.
The need to bridge the gap between the researcher and the practitioner has been recognized for years. For example, the Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance has a feature called "Research Works," which disseminates applied research information to teachers, coaches, and fitness and recreation leaders. The website for the American Kinesiology Association (www.americankinesiology.org) regularly has a section on applied research. Yet despite these and other attempts to bridge the gap between researchers and practitioners, the gap is still imposing.
It goes without saying that if you are not knowledgeable about the subject matter, you cannot read the research literature. Conversely, if you know the subject matter, you can probably wade through the researcher's jargon more effectively. For example, if you know baseball and the researcher is recommending that by shortening the radius, the hitter can increase the angular velocity, you can figure out that the researcher means to choke up on the bat.
One of the big stumbling blocks is the statistical analysis part of research reports. Even the most ardent seeker of knowledge can be turned off by such descriptions as this: "The tetrachoric correlations among the test variables were subjected to a centroid factor analysis, and orthogonal rotations of the primary axes were accomplished by Zimmerman's graphical method until simple structure and positive manifold were closely approximated." Please note that we are not criticizing the authors for such descriptions, because reviewers and editors usually require them. We are just acknowledging that statistical analysis is frightening to someone who is trying to read a research article and does not know a factor analysis from a volleyball. The widespread use of computers and "computerese" probably compounds the mystery associated with statistics. Many people believe anything that comes out of a computer. Others are more old-fashioned and check the computer's accuracy with their calculators. A classic, yet fictional, case of a computer mistake occurred in a high school in which the computer printed the students' locker numbers in the column where their IQs were supposed to go. It is classic because no one noticed the error at the time, but at the end of the year the students with the highest locker numbers got the best grades.
How to Read Research
Despite all the hurdles that loom in the practitioner's path when reading research, we contend that you can read and profit from (usually not materially, but then consider the data on the new Speedo swimsuit and its influence on the 2008 swimming results in Beijing)the research literature even if you are not well grounded in research techniques and statistical analysis. We would like to contend that after you read this book, you will be able to read any journal in any field, but the publisher would not let us say that. We offer the following suggestions on reading the research literature:
- Become familiar with a few publications that contain pertinent research in your field. You might get some help on choosing the publications from a professor or librarian.
- Read only studies that are of interest to you. This point may sound too trite to mention, but some people feel obligated to wade through every article.
- Read as a practitioner would. Do not look for eternal truths. Look for ideas and indications. No study is proof of anything. Only when it has been verified repeatedly does it constitute knowledge.
- Read the abstract first. This saves time by helping you determine whether you wish to read the whole thing. If you are still interested, then you can read the study to gain a better understanding of the methodology and the interpretations, but do not get bogged down with details.
- Do not be too concerned about statistical significance. Understanding the concept of significance certainly helps, but a little common sense serves you about as well as knowing the difference between the .02 and the .01 levels, or a one-tailed test versus a two-tailed test. Think in terms of meaningfulness. For example, if two methods of teaching bowling result in an average difference of 0.5 pins, what does it matter whether the difference is significant? On the other hand, if a big difference is present but not significant, further investigation is warranted, especially if the study involved a small number of participants. Knowing the concepts of the types of statistical analysis is certainly helpful, but it is not crucial to being able to read a study. Just skip that part.
- Be critical but objective. You can usually assume that a national research journal selects studies for publication by the jury method. Two or three qualified people read and judge the relevance of the problem, the validity and reliability of the procedures, the efficacy of the experimental design, and the appropriateness of the statistical analysis. Certainly, some studies are published that should not be. Yet if you are not an expert in research, you do not need to be suspicious about the scientific worth of a study that appears in a recognized journal. If it is too far removed from any practical application to your situation, do not read it.
You will find that the more you read, the more you understand, simply because you become more familiar with the language and the methodology, like the man who was thrilled to learn he had been speaking prose all his life.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Formatting for journal publications
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report.
Structure of the Journal Format
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report. The format that we suggest has three major parts. Preliminary materials include such items as the title page, table of contents, acknowledgments, and abstract. The body of the thesis and dissertation is a complete manuscript prepared in journal form. Included are the standard parts of a research report, such as the introduction, methods, results, discussion, references, figures, and tables. The appendixes often include a more thorough literature review, additional detail about methods, and additional results not placed in the body of the thesis or dissertation.
Journal style (IMRD) in theses and dissertations is appropriate when the goal is publication as an article in a journal, which should be the goal for all scientific studies. There are exceptions, however; the traditional chapter format may be appropriate for studies of the history or philosophy of sport because the likely publication would be in book form. Also, some modification of the IMRD format may be best for areas such as the sociology of sport.
Following are the parts of the thesis and dissertation for quantitative studies using the journal format:
1.0 Preliminary materials
- 1.1 Title Page
- 1.2 Acknowledgments
- 1.3 Abstract
- 1.4 Table of contents
- 1.5 List of tables
- 1.6 List of figures
2.0 Body of the thesis or dissertation (IMRD)
- 2.1 Introduction
- 2.2 Methods
- 2.3 Results
- 2.4 Discussion
- 2.5 References
- 2.6 Tables
- 2.7 Figures
3.0 Appendixes
- 3.1 Extended literature review
- 3.2 Additional methodology
- 3.3 Additional results
- 3.4 Other additional materials
4.0 One-page curriculum vitae
How can this format overcome the limitations of the chapter style? For both master's and doctoral students, a manuscript (body of the thesis or dissertation, IMRD) is developed that is ready for journal submission. All that remains is to add the title page and abstract, and the paper can be sent to a suitable journal.
The advantage of the journal format for doctoral students should be apparent. Because PhD recipients who fail to publish their dissertations within two years are unlikely to publish afterward, a more functional format encourages publication. Especially when we consider that dissertations appear to make important contributions to knowledge, the evaluation and subsequent publication of that knowledge through refereed journals is an important step. Although master's theses are not as likely as dissertations to be published, any format that encourages the publication of quality thesis work is desirable.
We want to make one final point before proceeding to the structure of the journal format: Your graduate school probably requires that the thesis or dissertation follow a standard style manual (or at least the style of a journal). The three most common are the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (American Psychological Association, 2010),American Physiological Society style(Curran-Everett & Benos, 2004), and The Chicago Manual of Style (University of Chicago Press, 2010).The journal format adapts nicely to any of these styles. University regulations usually do not specify a particular style, but frequently, an academic department may adopt one or two styles. If the journal format is to be used, a department might want to allow more than one style. For example, many journals reporting exercise physiology and biomechanical studies use the American Physiological Society style. Journals publishing articles in motor behavior, sport psychology and sociology, and professional preparation frequently use the APA manual. Journals that publish articles on the history and philosophy of sport frequently use The Chicago Manual of Style. Graduate students benefit considerably by having the flexibility to choose the style recommended by the journal to which the paper will be submitted.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Choosing the right participants for your study
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study.
Describing Participants
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study. These are questions to consider when selecting participants:
- Are participants with special characteristics necessary for your research?
- Age (children, elderly)
- Sex (females, males, or both)
- Level of training (trained or untrained)
- Level of performance (experts or novices)
- Size (weight, fatness)
- Special types (athletes, cyclists, runners)
- Can you obtain the necessary permission and cooperation from the participants?
- Can you find enough participants?
Of course, you want to select participants who will respond to the treatments and measures used in the study. For example, if you want to see the results of training a group of children in overhand throwing, selecting expert 12-year-old baseball pitchers as participants will not likely produce a change in measures of throwing outcome. An intense, long-term training program would be required to have any influence on these participants. Selecting children who are soccer players and have never played organized baseball would offer better odds for a training program to produce changes.
In experimental research, the interactions among participants, measures, and the nature of the treatment program are essential in allowing the treatment program to have a chance to work (Thomas, Lochbaum, Landers, & He, 1997). If you select participants who have high levels of physical fitness, subjecting them to a moderate training program will not produce changes in fitness. Also, participants high in physical fitness will have a small range of scores on a measure of cardiorespiratory endurance (e.g., O2max). For example, you will not find a significant correlation between O2max and marathon performance in world-class marathon runners. Their range of scores in O2max is small, as is their range of scores in marathon performance times. Because the range of scores is small in both measures, no significant correlation will be found. This result does not mean that running performance and cardiorespiratory endurance are not related. It means that you have restricted the range of participants' performance so much that the correlation cannot be exhibited. If you had selected moderately trained runners (e.g., women who jog three times per week for 40 min each time), a significant correlation would be found between running performance on a 5K run and O2max. (We discuss procedures for selecting sample participants in chapter 6.)
Participants, measures, and treatment programs are interrelated. Be sure to choose participants who will respond to the treatment program and have a broad enough range of results when measured with the chosen techniques.
You may have to offer something to the participants to make being in the study worthwhile.
What to Tell About the Participants
The exact number of participants should be given, as should any loss of participants during the time of study. In the proposal, some of this information may not be exact. For example, the following might describe the potential participants:
Participants: For this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, will be randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained distance runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who have been competitive runners for at least 2 years. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
After the study is completed, details are available on the participants, so now this section might read as follows:
Participants: In this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, were randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who had been competitive runners for at least 2 years. The participants had the following characteristics (standard deviations in parentheses): age, M = 26 years (3.3); height, M = 172.5 cm (7.5); weight, M = 66.9 kg (8.7); and O2max, M = 65 ml · kg · min - 1 (4.2). Participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
The participant characteristics listed are extremely pertinent in an exercise physiology study but not at all pertinent, for example, in a study of equipment used by children on the playground. The nature of the research dictates the participant characteristics of interest to the researcher. Carefully think through the characteristics that you will report in your research. Look at related studies for ideas about important characteristics to report.
The characteristics of participants that you identify and report must be clearly specified. Note in the example that well-trained runners were exactly defined; that is, their O2max must be equal to 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher. When participants of different ages are to be used is another good example. Saying only that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be the participants is not sufficient. How wide is the age range for 7-year-olds? Is it ±1 month, ±6 months, or what? In the proposal, you may say that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be included in the study. At the time of testing, each age will be limited to a range of ±6 months. Then, when the thesis or dissertation is written, it may read as follows:
At each age level, 15 children were selected for this study. The mean ages are as follows (standard deviations in parentheses): the youngest group, 7.1 years (4.4 months); 9-year-olds, 9.2 years (3.9 months); and the oldest group, 11.2 years (4.1 months).
A graduate student we know was in his committee meeting when a faculty member on his committee asked him to describe one of his participants. The student said, "Hewas 6 feet tall, had brown hair and a beard, and trained regularly by distance running." The really sharp faculty member then asked, "Was this a male or female?" to which the student was unable to respond because of laughter.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
How to wade through research jargon
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation.
Reading Research
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation. We writers are often guilty of trying to use language to dazzle the reader and perhaps to give the impression that our subject matter is more esoteric than it really is. We tend to write for the benefit of a rather small number of readers - that is, other researchers in our field.
We have the problem of jargon, of course. In any field, whether it is physics, football, or cake baking, jargon confounds the outsider. The use of jargon serves as a kind of shorthand. It provides meaning to the people within the field because everyone uses those words in the same context. Research literature is famous for using a three-dollar word when a nickel word would do. As Day and Gastel (2006, p. 200)asked, what self-respecting writer would use a three-letter word such as now when he or she could use the elegant expression at this point in time? Researchers never do anything, they perform it; they never start, they initiate; and they terminate instead of end. Day and Gastel further remarked that an occasional author slips and uses the word drug, but most salivate like Pavlov's dogs in anticipation of using chemotherapeutic agent.
The need to bridge the gap between the researcher and the practitioner has been recognized for years. For example, the Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance has a feature called "Research Works," which disseminates applied research information to teachers, coaches, and fitness and recreation leaders. The website for the American Kinesiology Association (www.americankinesiology.org) regularly has a section on applied research. Yet despite these and other attempts to bridge the gap between researchers and practitioners, the gap is still imposing.
It goes without saying that if you are not knowledgeable about the subject matter, you cannot read the research literature. Conversely, if you know the subject matter, you can probably wade through the researcher's jargon more effectively. For example, if you know baseball and the researcher is recommending that by shortening the radius, the hitter can increase the angular velocity, you can figure out that the researcher means to choke up on the bat.
One of the big stumbling blocks is the statistical analysis part of research reports. Even the most ardent seeker of knowledge can be turned off by such descriptions as this: "The tetrachoric correlations among the test variables were subjected to a centroid factor analysis, and orthogonal rotations of the primary axes were accomplished by Zimmerman's graphical method until simple structure and positive manifold were closely approximated." Please note that we are not criticizing the authors for such descriptions, because reviewers and editors usually require them. We are just acknowledging that statistical analysis is frightening to someone who is trying to read a research article and does not know a factor analysis from a volleyball. The widespread use of computers and "computerese" probably compounds the mystery associated with statistics. Many people believe anything that comes out of a computer. Others are more old-fashioned and check the computer's accuracy with their calculators. A classic, yet fictional, case of a computer mistake occurred in a high school in which the computer printed the students' locker numbers in the column where their IQs were supposed to go. It is classic because no one noticed the error at the time, but at the end of the year the students with the highest locker numbers got the best grades.
How to Read Research
Despite all the hurdles that loom in the practitioner's path when reading research, we contend that you can read and profit from (usually not materially, but then consider the data on the new Speedo swimsuit and its influence on the 2008 swimming results in Beijing)the research literature even if you are not well grounded in research techniques and statistical analysis. We would like to contend that after you read this book, you will be able to read any journal in any field, but the publisher would not let us say that. We offer the following suggestions on reading the research literature:
- Become familiar with a few publications that contain pertinent research in your field. You might get some help on choosing the publications from a professor or librarian.
- Read only studies that are of interest to you. This point may sound too trite to mention, but some people feel obligated to wade through every article.
- Read as a practitioner would. Do not look for eternal truths. Look for ideas and indications. No study is proof of anything. Only when it has been verified repeatedly does it constitute knowledge.
- Read the abstract first. This saves time by helping you determine whether you wish to read the whole thing. If you are still interested, then you can read the study to gain a better understanding of the methodology and the interpretations, but do not get bogged down with details.
- Do not be too concerned about statistical significance. Understanding the concept of significance certainly helps, but a little common sense serves you about as well as knowing the difference between the .02 and the .01 levels, or a one-tailed test versus a two-tailed test. Think in terms of meaningfulness. For example, if two methods of teaching bowling result in an average difference of 0.5 pins, what does it matter whether the difference is significant? On the other hand, if a big difference is present but not significant, further investigation is warranted, especially if the study involved a small number of participants. Knowing the concepts of the types of statistical analysis is certainly helpful, but it is not crucial to being able to read a study. Just skip that part.
- Be critical but objective. You can usually assume that a national research journal selects studies for publication by the jury method. Two or three qualified people read and judge the relevance of the problem, the validity and reliability of the procedures, the efficacy of the experimental design, and the appropriateness of the statistical analysis. Certainly, some studies are published that should not be. Yet if you are not an expert in research, you do not need to be suspicious about the scientific worth of a study that appears in a recognized journal. If it is too far removed from any practical application to your situation, do not read it.
You will find that the more you read, the more you understand, simply because you become more familiar with the language and the methodology, like the man who was thrilled to learn he had been speaking prose all his life.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Formatting for journal publications
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report.
Structure of the Journal Format
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report. The format that we suggest has three major parts. Preliminary materials include such items as the title page, table of contents, acknowledgments, and abstract. The body of the thesis and dissertation is a complete manuscript prepared in journal form. Included are the standard parts of a research report, such as the introduction, methods, results, discussion, references, figures, and tables. The appendixes often include a more thorough literature review, additional detail about methods, and additional results not placed in the body of the thesis or dissertation.
Journal style (IMRD) in theses and dissertations is appropriate when the goal is publication as an article in a journal, which should be the goal for all scientific studies. There are exceptions, however; the traditional chapter format may be appropriate for studies of the history or philosophy of sport because the likely publication would be in book form. Also, some modification of the IMRD format may be best for areas such as the sociology of sport.
Following are the parts of the thesis and dissertation for quantitative studies using the journal format:
1.0 Preliminary materials
- 1.1 Title Page
- 1.2 Acknowledgments
- 1.3 Abstract
- 1.4 Table of contents
- 1.5 List of tables
- 1.6 List of figures
2.0 Body of the thesis or dissertation (IMRD)
- 2.1 Introduction
- 2.2 Methods
- 2.3 Results
- 2.4 Discussion
- 2.5 References
- 2.6 Tables
- 2.7 Figures
3.0 Appendixes
- 3.1 Extended literature review
- 3.2 Additional methodology
- 3.3 Additional results
- 3.4 Other additional materials
4.0 One-page curriculum vitae
How can this format overcome the limitations of the chapter style? For both master's and doctoral students, a manuscript (body of the thesis or dissertation, IMRD) is developed that is ready for journal submission. All that remains is to add the title page and abstract, and the paper can be sent to a suitable journal.
The advantage of the journal format for doctoral students should be apparent. Because PhD recipients who fail to publish their dissertations within two years are unlikely to publish afterward, a more functional format encourages publication. Especially when we consider that dissertations appear to make important contributions to knowledge, the evaluation and subsequent publication of that knowledge through refereed journals is an important step. Although master's theses are not as likely as dissertations to be published, any format that encourages the publication of quality thesis work is desirable.
We want to make one final point before proceeding to the structure of the journal format: Your graduate school probably requires that the thesis or dissertation follow a standard style manual (or at least the style of a journal). The three most common are the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (American Psychological Association, 2010),American Physiological Society style(Curran-Everett & Benos, 2004), and The Chicago Manual of Style (University of Chicago Press, 2010).The journal format adapts nicely to any of these styles. University regulations usually do not specify a particular style, but frequently, an academic department may adopt one or two styles. If the journal format is to be used, a department might want to allow more than one style. For example, many journals reporting exercise physiology and biomechanical studies use the American Physiological Society style. Journals publishing articles in motor behavior, sport psychology and sociology, and professional preparation frequently use the APA manual. Journals that publish articles on the history and philosophy of sport frequently use The Chicago Manual of Style. Graduate students benefit considerably by having the flexibility to choose the style recommended by the journal to which the paper will be submitted.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Choosing the right participants for your study
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study.
Describing Participants
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study. These are questions to consider when selecting participants:
- Are participants with special characteristics necessary for your research?
- Age (children, elderly)
- Sex (females, males, or both)
- Level of training (trained or untrained)
- Level of performance (experts or novices)
- Size (weight, fatness)
- Special types (athletes, cyclists, runners)
- Can you obtain the necessary permission and cooperation from the participants?
- Can you find enough participants?
Of course, you want to select participants who will respond to the treatments and measures used in the study. For example, if you want to see the results of training a group of children in overhand throwing, selecting expert 12-year-old baseball pitchers as participants will not likely produce a change in measures of throwing outcome. An intense, long-term training program would be required to have any influence on these participants. Selecting children who are soccer players and have never played organized baseball would offer better odds for a training program to produce changes.
In experimental research, the interactions among participants, measures, and the nature of the treatment program are essential in allowing the treatment program to have a chance to work (Thomas, Lochbaum, Landers, & He, 1997). If you select participants who have high levels of physical fitness, subjecting them to a moderate training program will not produce changes in fitness. Also, participants high in physical fitness will have a small range of scores on a measure of cardiorespiratory endurance (e.g., O2max). For example, you will not find a significant correlation between O2max and marathon performance in world-class marathon runners. Their range of scores in O2max is small, as is their range of scores in marathon performance times. Because the range of scores is small in both measures, no significant correlation will be found. This result does not mean that running performance and cardiorespiratory endurance are not related. It means that you have restricted the range of participants' performance so much that the correlation cannot be exhibited. If you had selected moderately trained runners (e.g., women who jog three times per week for 40 min each time), a significant correlation would be found between running performance on a 5K run and O2max. (We discuss procedures for selecting sample participants in chapter 6.)
Participants, measures, and treatment programs are interrelated. Be sure to choose participants who will respond to the treatment program and have a broad enough range of results when measured with the chosen techniques.
You may have to offer something to the participants to make being in the study worthwhile.
What to Tell About the Participants
The exact number of participants should be given, as should any loss of participants during the time of study. In the proposal, some of this information may not be exact. For example, the following might describe the potential participants:
Participants: For this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, will be randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained distance runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who have been competitive runners for at least 2 years. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
After the study is completed, details are available on the participants, so now this section might read as follows:
Participants: In this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, were randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who had been competitive runners for at least 2 years. The participants had the following characteristics (standard deviations in parentheses): age, M = 26 years (3.3); height, M = 172.5 cm (7.5); weight, M = 66.9 kg (8.7); and O2max, M = 65 ml · kg · min - 1 (4.2). Participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
The participant characteristics listed are extremely pertinent in an exercise physiology study but not at all pertinent, for example, in a study of equipment used by children on the playground. The nature of the research dictates the participant characteristics of interest to the researcher. Carefully think through the characteristics that you will report in your research. Look at related studies for ideas about important characteristics to report.
The characteristics of participants that you identify and report must be clearly specified. Note in the example that well-trained runners were exactly defined; that is, their O2max must be equal to 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher. When participants of different ages are to be used is another good example. Saying only that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be the participants is not sufficient. How wide is the age range for 7-year-olds? Is it ±1 month, ±6 months, or what? In the proposal, you may say that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be included in the study. At the time of testing, each age will be limited to a range of ±6 months. Then, when the thesis or dissertation is written, it may read as follows:
At each age level, 15 children were selected for this study. The mean ages are as follows (standard deviations in parentheses): the youngest group, 7.1 years (4.4 months); 9-year-olds, 9.2 years (3.9 months); and the oldest group, 11.2 years (4.1 months).
A graduate student we know was in his committee meeting when a faculty member on his committee asked him to describe one of his participants. The student said, "Hewas 6 feet tall, had brown hair and a beard, and trained regularly by distance running." The really sharp faculty member then asked, "Was this a male or female?" to which the student was unable to respond because of laughter.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
How to wade through research jargon
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation.
Reading Research
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation. We writers are often guilty of trying to use language to dazzle the reader and perhaps to give the impression that our subject matter is more esoteric than it really is. We tend to write for the benefit of a rather small number of readers - that is, other researchers in our field.
We have the problem of jargon, of course. In any field, whether it is physics, football, or cake baking, jargon confounds the outsider. The use of jargon serves as a kind of shorthand. It provides meaning to the people within the field because everyone uses those words in the same context. Research literature is famous for using a three-dollar word when a nickel word would do. As Day and Gastel (2006, p. 200)asked, what self-respecting writer would use a three-letter word such as now when he or she could use the elegant expression at this point in time? Researchers never do anything, they perform it; they never start, they initiate; and they terminate instead of end. Day and Gastel further remarked that an occasional author slips and uses the word drug, but most salivate like Pavlov's dogs in anticipation of using chemotherapeutic agent.
The need to bridge the gap between the researcher and the practitioner has been recognized for years. For example, the Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance has a feature called "Research Works," which disseminates applied research information to teachers, coaches, and fitness and recreation leaders. The website for the American Kinesiology Association (www.americankinesiology.org) regularly has a section on applied research. Yet despite these and other attempts to bridge the gap between researchers and practitioners, the gap is still imposing.
It goes without saying that if you are not knowledgeable about the subject matter, you cannot read the research literature. Conversely, if you know the subject matter, you can probably wade through the researcher's jargon more effectively. For example, if you know baseball and the researcher is recommending that by shortening the radius, the hitter can increase the angular velocity, you can figure out that the researcher means to choke up on the bat.
One of the big stumbling blocks is the statistical analysis part of research reports. Even the most ardent seeker of knowledge can be turned off by such descriptions as this: "The tetrachoric correlations among the test variables were subjected to a centroid factor analysis, and orthogonal rotations of the primary axes were accomplished by Zimmerman's graphical method until simple structure and positive manifold were closely approximated." Please note that we are not criticizing the authors for such descriptions, because reviewers and editors usually require them. We are just acknowledging that statistical analysis is frightening to someone who is trying to read a research article and does not know a factor analysis from a volleyball. The widespread use of computers and "computerese" probably compounds the mystery associated with statistics. Many people believe anything that comes out of a computer. Others are more old-fashioned and check the computer's accuracy with their calculators. A classic, yet fictional, case of a computer mistake occurred in a high school in which the computer printed the students' locker numbers in the column where their IQs were supposed to go. It is classic because no one noticed the error at the time, but at the end of the year the students with the highest locker numbers got the best grades.
How to Read Research
Despite all the hurdles that loom in the practitioner's path when reading research, we contend that you can read and profit from (usually not materially, but then consider the data on the new Speedo swimsuit and its influence on the 2008 swimming results in Beijing)the research literature even if you are not well grounded in research techniques and statistical analysis. We would like to contend that after you read this book, you will be able to read any journal in any field, but the publisher would not let us say that. We offer the following suggestions on reading the research literature:
- Become familiar with a few publications that contain pertinent research in your field. You might get some help on choosing the publications from a professor or librarian.
- Read only studies that are of interest to you. This point may sound too trite to mention, but some people feel obligated to wade through every article.
- Read as a practitioner would. Do not look for eternal truths. Look for ideas and indications. No study is proof of anything. Only when it has been verified repeatedly does it constitute knowledge.
- Read the abstract first. This saves time by helping you determine whether you wish to read the whole thing. If you are still interested, then you can read the study to gain a better understanding of the methodology and the interpretations, but do not get bogged down with details.
- Do not be too concerned about statistical significance. Understanding the concept of significance certainly helps, but a little common sense serves you about as well as knowing the difference between the .02 and the .01 levels, or a one-tailed test versus a two-tailed test. Think in terms of meaningfulness. For example, if two methods of teaching bowling result in an average difference of 0.5 pins, what does it matter whether the difference is significant? On the other hand, if a big difference is present but not significant, further investigation is warranted, especially if the study involved a small number of participants. Knowing the concepts of the types of statistical analysis is certainly helpful, but it is not crucial to being able to read a study. Just skip that part.
- Be critical but objective. You can usually assume that a national research journal selects studies for publication by the jury method. Two or three qualified people read and judge the relevance of the problem, the validity and reliability of the procedures, the efficacy of the experimental design, and the appropriateness of the statistical analysis. Certainly, some studies are published that should not be. Yet if you are not an expert in research, you do not need to be suspicious about the scientific worth of a study that appears in a recognized journal. If it is too far removed from any practical application to your situation, do not read it.
You will find that the more you read, the more you understand, simply because you become more familiar with the language and the methodology, like the man who was thrilled to learn he had been speaking prose all his life.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Formatting for journal publications
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report.
Structure of the Journal Format
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report. The format that we suggest has three major parts. Preliminary materials include such items as the title page, table of contents, acknowledgments, and abstract. The body of the thesis and dissertation is a complete manuscript prepared in journal form. Included are the standard parts of a research report, such as the introduction, methods, results, discussion, references, figures, and tables. The appendixes often include a more thorough literature review, additional detail about methods, and additional results not placed in the body of the thesis or dissertation.
Journal style (IMRD) in theses and dissertations is appropriate when the goal is publication as an article in a journal, which should be the goal for all scientific studies. There are exceptions, however; the traditional chapter format may be appropriate for studies of the history or philosophy of sport because the likely publication would be in book form. Also, some modification of the IMRD format may be best for areas such as the sociology of sport.
Following are the parts of the thesis and dissertation for quantitative studies using the journal format:
1.0 Preliminary materials
- 1.1 Title Page
- 1.2 Acknowledgments
- 1.3 Abstract
- 1.4 Table of contents
- 1.5 List of tables
- 1.6 List of figures
2.0 Body of the thesis or dissertation (IMRD)
- 2.1 Introduction
- 2.2 Methods
- 2.3 Results
- 2.4 Discussion
- 2.5 References
- 2.6 Tables
- 2.7 Figures
3.0 Appendixes
- 3.1 Extended literature review
- 3.2 Additional methodology
- 3.3 Additional results
- 3.4 Other additional materials
4.0 One-page curriculum vitae
How can this format overcome the limitations of the chapter style? For both master's and doctoral students, a manuscript (body of the thesis or dissertation, IMRD) is developed that is ready for journal submission. All that remains is to add the title page and abstract, and the paper can be sent to a suitable journal.
The advantage of the journal format for doctoral students should be apparent. Because PhD recipients who fail to publish their dissertations within two years are unlikely to publish afterward, a more functional format encourages publication. Especially when we consider that dissertations appear to make important contributions to knowledge, the evaluation and subsequent publication of that knowledge through refereed journals is an important step. Although master's theses are not as likely as dissertations to be published, any format that encourages the publication of quality thesis work is desirable.
We want to make one final point before proceeding to the structure of the journal format: Your graduate school probably requires that the thesis or dissertation follow a standard style manual (or at least the style of a journal). The three most common are the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (American Psychological Association, 2010),American Physiological Society style(Curran-Everett & Benos, 2004), and The Chicago Manual of Style (University of Chicago Press, 2010).The journal format adapts nicely to any of these styles. University regulations usually do not specify a particular style, but frequently, an academic department may adopt one or two styles. If the journal format is to be used, a department might want to allow more than one style. For example, many journals reporting exercise physiology and biomechanical studies use the American Physiological Society style. Journals publishing articles in motor behavior, sport psychology and sociology, and professional preparation frequently use the APA manual. Journals that publish articles on the history and philosophy of sport frequently use The Chicago Manual of Style. Graduate students benefit considerably by having the flexibility to choose the style recommended by the journal to which the paper will be submitted.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Choosing the right participants for your study
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study.
Describing Participants
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study. These are questions to consider when selecting participants:
- Are participants with special characteristics necessary for your research?
- Age (children, elderly)
- Sex (females, males, or both)
- Level of training (trained or untrained)
- Level of performance (experts or novices)
- Size (weight, fatness)
- Special types (athletes, cyclists, runners)
- Can you obtain the necessary permission and cooperation from the participants?
- Can you find enough participants?
Of course, you want to select participants who will respond to the treatments and measures used in the study. For example, if you want to see the results of training a group of children in overhand throwing, selecting expert 12-year-old baseball pitchers as participants will not likely produce a change in measures of throwing outcome. An intense, long-term training program would be required to have any influence on these participants. Selecting children who are soccer players and have never played organized baseball would offer better odds for a training program to produce changes.
In experimental research, the interactions among participants, measures, and the nature of the treatment program are essential in allowing the treatment program to have a chance to work (Thomas, Lochbaum, Landers, & He, 1997). If you select participants who have high levels of physical fitness, subjecting them to a moderate training program will not produce changes in fitness. Also, participants high in physical fitness will have a small range of scores on a measure of cardiorespiratory endurance (e.g., O2max). For example, you will not find a significant correlation between O2max and marathon performance in world-class marathon runners. Their range of scores in O2max is small, as is their range of scores in marathon performance times. Because the range of scores is small in both measures, no significant correlation will be found. This result does not mean that running performance and cardiorespiratory endurance are not related. It means that you have restricted the range of participants' performance so much that the correlation cannot be exhibited. If you had selected moderately trained runners (e.g., women who jog three times per week for 40 min each time), a significant correlation would be found between running performance on a 5K run and O2max. (We discuss procedures for selecting sample participants in chapter 6.)
Participants, measures, and treatment programs are interrelated. Be sure to choose participants who will respond to the treatment program and have a broad enough range of results when measured with the chosen techniques.
You may have to offer something to the participants to make being in the study worthwhile.
What to Tell About the Participants
The exact number of participants should be given, as should any loss of participants during the time of study. In the proposal, some of this information may not be exact. For example, the following might describe the potential participants:
Participants: For this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, will be randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained distance runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who have been competitive runners for at least 2 years. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
After the study is completed, details are available on the participants, so now this section might read as follows:
Participants: In this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, were randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who had been competitive runners for at least 2 years. The participants had the following characteristics (standard deviations in parentheses): age, M = 26 years (3.3); height, M = 172.5 cm (7.5); weight, M = 66.9 kg (8.7); and O2max, M = 65 ml · kg · min - 1 (4.2). Participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
The participant characteristics listed are extremely pertinent in an exercise physiology study but not at all pertinent, for example, in a study of equipment used by children on the playground. The nature of the research dictates the participant characteristics of interest to the researcher. Carefully think through the characteristics that you will report in your research. Look at related studies for ideas about important characteristics to report.
The characteristics of participants that you identify and report must be clearly specified. Note in the example that well-trained runners were exactly defined; that is, their O2max must be equal to 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher. When participants of different ages are to be used is another good example. Saying only that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be the participants is not sufficient. How wide is the age range for 7-year-olds? Is it ±1 month, ±6 months, or what? In the proposal, you may say that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be included in the study. At the time of testing, each age will be limited to a range of ±6 months. Then, when the thesis or dissertation is written, it may read as follows:
At each age level, 15 children were selected for this study. The mean ages are as follows (standard deviations in parentheses): the youngest group, 7.1 years (4.4 months); 9-year-olds, 9.2 years (3.9 months); and the oldest group, 11.2 years (4.1 months).
A graduate student we know was in his committee meeting when a faculty member on his committee asked him to describe one of his participants. The student said, "Hewas 6 feet tall, had brown hair and a beard, and trained regularly by distance running." The really sharp faculty member then asked, "Was this a male or female?" to which the student was unable to respond because of laughter.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
How to wade through research jargon
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation.
Reading Research
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation. We writers are often guilty of trying to use language to dazzle the reader and perhaps to give the impression that our subject matter is more esoteric than it really is. We tend to write for the benefit of a rather small number of readers - that is, other researchers in our field.
We have the problem of jargon, of course. In any field, whether it is physics, football, or cake baking, jargon confounds the outsider. The use of jargon serves as a kind of shorthand. It provides meaning to the people within the field because everyone uses those words in the same context. Research literature is famous for using a three-dollar word when a nickel word would do. As Day and Gastel (2006, p. 200)asked, what self-respecting writer would use a three-letter word such as now when he or she could use the elegant expression at this point in time? Researchers never do anything, they perform it; they never start, they initiate; and they terminate instead of end. Day and Gastel further remarked that an occasional author slips and uses the word drug, but most salivate like Pavlov's dogs in anticipation of using chemotherapeutic agent.
The need to bridge the gap between the researcher and the practitioner has been recognized for years. For example, the Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance has a feature called "Research Works," which disseminates applied research information to teachers, coaches, and fitness and recreation leaders. The website for the American Kinesiology Association (www.americankinesiology.org) regularly has a section on applied research. Yet despite these and other attempts to bridge the gap between researchers and practitioners, the gap is still imposing.
It goes without saying that if you are not knowledgeable about the subject matter, you cannot read the research literature. Conversely, if you know the subject matter, you can probably wade through the researcher's jargon more effectively. For example, if you know baseball and the researcher is recommending that by shortening the radius, the hitter can increase the angular velocity, you can figure out that the researcher means to choke up on the bat.
One of the big stumbling blocks is the statistical analysis part of research reports. Even the most ardent seeker of knowledge can be turned off by such descriptions as this: "The tetrachoric correlations among the test variables were subjected to a centroid factor analysis, and orthogonal rotations of the primary axes were accomplished by Zimmerman's graphical method until simple structure and positive manifold were closely approximated." Please note that we are not criticizing the authors for such descriptions, because reviewers and editors usually require them. We are just acknowledging that statistical analysis is frightening to someone who is trying to read a research article and does not know a factor analysis from a volleyball. The widespread use of computers and "computerese" probably compounds the mystery associated with statistics. Many people believe anything that comes out of a computer. Others are more old-fashioned and check the computer's accuracy with their calculators. A classic, yet fictional, case of a computer mistake occurred in a high school in which the computer printed the students' locker numbers in the column where their IQs were supposed to go. It is classic because no one noticed the error at the time, but at the end of the year the students with the highest locker numbers got the best grades.
How to Read Research
Despite all the hurdles that loom in the practitioner's path when reading research, we contend that you can read and profit from (usually not materially, but then consider the data on the new Speedo swimsuit and its influence on the 2008 swimming results in Beijing)the research literature even if you are not well grounded in research techniques and statistical analysis. We would like to contend that after you read this book, you will be able to read any journal in any field, but the publisher would not let us say that. We offer the following suggestions on reading the research literature:
- Become familiar with a few publications that contain pertinent research in your field. You might get some help on choosing the publications from a professor or librarian.
- Read only studies that are of interest to you. This point may sound too trite to mention, but some people feel obligated to wade through every article.
- Read as a practitioner would. Do not look for eternal truths. Look for ideas and indications. No study is proof of anything. Only when it has been verified repeatedly does it constitute knowledge.
- Read the abstract first. This saves time by helping you determine whether you wish to read the whole thing. If you are still interested, then you can read the study to gain a better understanding of the methodology and the interpretations, but do not get bogged down with details.
- Do not be too concerned about statistical significance. Understanding the concept of significance certainly helps, but a little common sense serves you about as well as knowing the difference between the .02 and the .01 levels, or a one-tailed test versus a two-tailed test. Think in terms of meaningfulness. For example, if two methods of teaching bowling result in an average difference of 0.5 pins, what does it matter whether the difference is significant? On the other hand, if a big difference is present but not significant, further investigation is warranted, especially if the study involved a small number of participants. Knowing the concepts of the types of statistical analysis is certainly helpful, but it is not crucial to being able to read a study. Just skip that part.
- Be critical but objective. You can usually assume that a national research journal selects studies for publication by the jury method. Two or three qualified people read and judge the relevance of the problem, the validity and reliability of the procedures, the efficacy of the experimental design, and the appropriateness of the statistical analysis. Certainly, some studies are published that should not be. Yet if you are not an expert in research, you do not need to be suspicious about the scientific worth of a study that appears in a recognized journal. If it is too far removed from any practical application to your situation, do not read it.
You will find that the more you read, the more you understand, simply because you become more familiar with the language and the methodology, like the man who was thrilled to learn he had been speaking prose all his life.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Formatting for journal publications
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report.
Structure of the Journal Format
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report. The format that we suggest has three major parts. Preliminary materials include such items as the title page, table of contents, acknowledgments, and abstract. The body of the thesis and dissertation is a complete manuscript prepared in journal form. Included are the standard parts of a research report, such as the introduction, methods, results, discussion, references, figures, and tables. The appendixes often include a more thorough literature review, additional detail about methods, and additional results not placed in the body of the thesis or dissertation.
Journal style (IMRD) in theses and dissertations is appropriate when the goal is publication as an article in a journal, which should be the goal for all scientific studies. There are exceptions, however; the traditional chapter format may be appropriate for studies of the history or philosophy of sport because the likely publication would be in book form. Also, some modification of the IMRD format may be best for areas such as the sociology of sport.
Following are the parts of the thesis and dissertation for quantitative studies using the journal format:
1.0 Preliminary materials
- 1.1 Title Page
- 1.2 Acknowledgments
- 1.3 Abstract
- 1.4 Table of contents
- 1.5 List of tables
- 1.6 List of figures
2.0 Body of the thesis or dissertation (IMRD)
- 2.1 Introduction
- 2.2 Methods
- 2.3 Results
- 2.4 Discussion
- 2.5 References
- 2.6 Tables
- 2.7 Figures
3.0 Appendixes
- 3.1 Extended literature review
- 3.2 Additional methodology
- 3.3 Additional results
- 3.4 Other additional materials
4.0 One-page curriculum vitae
How can this format overcome the limitations of the chapter style? For both master's and doctoral students, a manuscript (body of the thesis or dissertation, IMRD) is developed that is ready for journal submission. All that remains is to add the title page and abstract, and the paper can be sent to a suitable journal.
The advantage of the journal format for doctoral students should be apparent. Because PhD recipients who fail to publish their dissertations within two years are unlikely to publish afterward, a more functional format encourages publication. Especially when we consider that dissertations appear to make important contributions to knowledge, the evaluation and subsequent publication of that knowledge through refereed journals is an important step. Although master's theses are not as likely as dissertations to be published, any format that encourages the publication of quality thesis work is desirable.
We want to make one final point before proceeding to the structure of the journal format: Your graduate school probably requires that the thesis or dissertation follow a standard style manual (or at least the style of a journal). The three most common are the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (American Psychological Association, 2010),American Physiological Society style(Curran-Everett & Benos, 2004), and The Chicago Manual of Style (University of Chicago Press, 2010).The journal format adapts nicely to any of these styles. University regulations usually do not specify a particular style, but frequently, an academic department may adopt one or two styles. If the journal format is to be used, a department might want to allow more than one style. For example, many journals reporting exercise physiology and biomechanical studies use the American Physiological Society style. Journals publishing articles in motor behavior, sport psychology and sociology, and professional preparation frequently use the APA manual. Journals that publish articles on the history and philosophy of sport frequently use The Chicago Manual of Style. Graduate students benefit considerably by having the flexibility to choose the style recommended by the journal to which the paper will be submitted.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Choosing the right participants for your study
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study.
Describing Participants
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study. These are questions to consider when selecting participants:
- Are participants with special characteristics necessary for your research?
- Age (children, elderly)
- Sex (females, males, or both)
- Level of training (trained or untrained)
- Level of performance (experts or novices)
- Size (weight, fatness)
- Special types (athletes, cyclists, runners)
- Can you obtain the necessary permission and cooperation from the participants?
- Can you find enough participants?
Of course, you want to select participants who will respond to the treatments and measures used in the study. For example, if you want to see the results of training a group of children in overhand throwing, selecting expert 12-year-old baseball pitchers as participants will not likely produce a change in measures of throwing outcome. An intense, long-term training program would be required to have any influence on these participants. Selecting children who are soccer players and have never played organized baseball would offer better odds for a training program to produce changes.
In experimental research, the interactions among participants, measures, and the nature of the treatment program are essential in allowing the treatment program to have a chance to work (Thomas, Lochbaum, Landers, & He, 1997). If you select participants who have high levels of physical fitness, subjecting them to a moderate training program will not produce changes in fitness. Also, participants high in physical fitness will have a small range of scores on a measure of cardiorespiratory endurance (e.g., O2max). For example, you will not find a significant correlation between O2max and marathon performance in world-class marathon runners. Their range of scores in O2max is small, as is their range of scores in marathon performance times. Because the range of scores is small in both measures, no significant correlation will be found. This result does not mean that running performance and cardiorespiratory endurance are not related. It means that you have restricted the range of participants' performance so much that the correlation cannot be exhibited. If you had selected moderately trained runners (e.g., women who jog three times per week for 40 min each time), a significant correlation would be found between running performance on a 5K run and O2max. (We discuss procedures for selecting sample participants in chapter 6.)
Participants, measures, and treatment programs are interrelated. Be sure to choose participants who will respond to the treatment program and have a broad enough range of results when measured with the chosen techniques.
You may have to offer something to the participants to make being in the study worthwhile.
What to Tell About the Participants
The exact number of participants should be given, as should any loss of participants during the time of study. In the proposal, some of this information may not be exact. For example, the following might describe the potential participants:
Participants: For this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, will be randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained distance runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who have been competitive runners for at least 2 years. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
After the study is completed, details are available on the participants, so now this section might read as follows:
Participants: In this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, were randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who had been competitive runners for at least 2 years. The participants had the following characteristics (standard deviations in parentheses): age, M = 26 years (3.3); height, M = 172.5 cm (7.5); weight, M = 66.9 kg (8.7); and O2max, M = 65 ml · kg · min - 1 (4.2). Participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
The participant characteristics listed are extremely pertinent in an exercise physiology study but not at all pertinent, for example, in a study of equipment used by children on the playground. The nature of the research dictates the participant characteristics of interest to the researcher. Carefully think through the characteristics that you will report in your research. Look at related studies for ideas about important characteristics to report.
The characteristics of participants that you identify and report must be clearly specified. Note in the example that well-trained runners were exactly defined; that is, their O2max must be equal to 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher. When participants of different ages are to be used is another good example. Saying only that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be the participants is not sufficient. How wide is the age range for 7-year-olds? Is it ±1 month, ±6 months, or what? In the proposal, you may say that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be included in the study. At the time of testing, each age will be limited to a range of ±6 months. Then, when the thesis or dissertation is written, it may read as follows:
At each age level, 15 children were selected for this study. The mean ages are as follows (standard deviations in parentheses): the youngest group, 7.1 years (4.4 months); 9-year-olds, 9.2 years (3.9 months); and the oldest group, 11.2 years (4.1 months).
A graduate student we know was in his committee meeting when a faculty member on his committee asked him to describe one of his participants. The student said, "Hewas 6 feet tall, had brown hair and a beard, and trained regularly by distance running." The really sharp faculty member then asked, "Was this a male or female?" to which the student was unable to respond because of laughter.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
How to wade through research jargon
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation.
Reading Research
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation. We writers are often guilty of trying to use language to dazzle the reader and perhaps to give the impression that our subject matter is more esoteric than it really is. We tend to write for the benefit of a rather small number of readers - that is, other researchers in our field.
We have the problem of jargon, of course. In any field, whether it is physics, football, or cake baking, jargon confounds the outsider. The use of jargon serves as a kind of shorthand. It provides meaning to the people within the field because everyone uses those words in the same context. Research literature is famous for using a three-dollar word when a nickel word would do. As Day and Gastel (2006, p. 200)asked, what self-respecting writer would use a three-letter word such as now when he or she could use the elegant expression at this point in time? Researchers never do anything, they perform it; they never start, they initiate; and they terminate instead of end. Day and Gastel further remarked that an occasional author slips and uses the word drug, but most salivate like Pavlov's dogs in anticipation of using chemotherapeutic agent.
The need to bridge the gap between the researcher and the practitioner has been recognized for years. For example, the Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance has a feature called "Research Works," which disseminates applied research information to teachers, coaches, and fitness and recreation leaders. The website for the American Kinesiology Association (www.americankinesiology.org) regularly has a section on applied research. Yet despite these and other attempts to bridge the gap between researchers and practitioners, the gap is still imposing.
It goes without saying that if you are not knowledgeable about the subject matter, you cannot read the research literature. Conversely, if you know the subject matter, you can probably wade through the researcher's jargon more effectively. For example, if you know baseball and the researcher is recommending that by shortening the radius, the hitter can increase the angular velocity, you can figure out that the researcher means to choke up on the bat.
One of the big stumbling blocks is the statistical analysis part of research reports. Even the most ardent seeker of knowledge can be turned off by such descriptions as this: "The tetrachoric correlations among the test variables were subjected to a centroid factor analysis, and orthogonal rotations of the primary axes were accomplished by Zimmerman's graphical method until simple structure and positive manifold were closely approximated." Please note that we are not criticizing the authors for such descriptions, because reviewers and editors usually require them. We are just acknowledging that statistical analysis is frightening to someone who is trying to read a research article and does not know a factor analysis from a volleyball. The widespread use of computers and "computerese" probably compounds the mystery associated with statistics. Many people believe anything that comes out of a computer. Others are more old-fashioned and check the computer's accuracy with their calculators. A classic, yet fictional, case of a computer mistake occurred in a high school in which the computer printed the students' locker numbers in the column where their IQs were supposed to go. It is classic because no one noticed the error at the time, but at the end of the year the students with the highest locker numbers got the best grades.
How to Read Research
Despite all the hurdles that loom in the practitioner's path when reading research, we contend that you can read and profit from (usually not materially, but then consider the data on the new Speedo swimsuit and its influence on the 2008 swimming results in Beijing)the research literature even if you are not well grounded in research techniques and statistical analysis. We would like to contend that after you read this book, you will be able to read any journal in any field, but the publisher would not let us say that. We offer the following suggestions on reading the research literature:
- Become familiar with a few publications that contain pertinent research in your field. You might get some help on choosing the publications from a professor or librarian.
- Read only studies that are of interest to you. This point may sound too trite to mention, but some people feel obligated to wade through every article.
- Read as a practitioner would. Do not look for eternal truths. Look for ideas and indications. No study is proof of anything. Only when it has been verified repeatedly does it constitute knowledge.
- Read the abstract first. This saves time by helping you determine whether you wish to read the whole thing. If you are still interested, then you can read the study to gain a better understanding of the methodology and the interpretations, but do not get bogged down with details.
- Do not be too concerned about statistical significance. Understanding the concept of significance certainly helps, but a little common sense serves you about as well as knowing the difference between the .02 and the .01 levels, or a one-tailed test versus a two-tailed test. Think in terms of meaningfulness. For example, if two methods of teaching bowling result in an average difference of 0.5 pins, what does it matter whether the difference is significant? On the other hand, if a big difference is present but not significant, further investigation is warranted, especially if the study involved a small number of participants. Knowing the concepts of the types of statistical analysis is certainly helpful, but it is not crucial to being able to read a study. Just skip that part.
- Be critical but objective. You can usually assume that a national research journal selects studies for publication by the jury method. Two or three qualified people read and judge the relevance of the problem, the validity and reliability of the procedures, the efficacy of the experimental design, and the appropriateness of the statistical analysis. Certainly, some studies are published that should not be. Yet if you are not an expert in research, you do not need to be suspicious about the scientific worth of a study that appears in a recognized journal. If it is too far removed from any practical application to your situation, do not read it.
You will find that the more you read, the more you understand, simply because you become more familiar with the language and the methodology, like the man who was thrilled to learn he had been speaking prose all his life.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Formatting for journal publications
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report.
Structure of the Journal Format
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report. The format that we suggest has three major parts. Preliminary materials include such items as the title page, table of contents, acknowledgments, and abstract. The body of the thesis and dissertation is a complete manuscript prepared in journal form. Included are the standard parts of a research report, such as the introduction, methods, results, discussion, references, figures, and tables. The appendixes often include a more thorough literature review, additional detail about methods, and additional results not placed in the body of the thesis or dissertation.
Journal style (IMRD) in theses and dissertations is appropriate when the goal is publication as an article in a journal, which should be the goal for all scientific studies. There are exceptions, however; the traditional chapter format may be appropriate for studies of the history or philosophy of sport because the likely publication would be in book form. Also, some modification of the IMRD format may be best for areas such as the sociology of sport.
Following are the parts of the thesis and dissertation for quantitative studies using the journal format:
1.0 Preliminary materials
- 1.1 Title Page
- 1.2 Acknowledgments
- 1.3 Abstract
- 1.4 Table of contents
- 1.5 List of tables
- 1.6 List of figures
2.0 Body of the thesis or dissertation (IMRD)
- 2.1 Introduction
- 2.2 Methods
- 2.3 Results
- 2.4 Discussion
- 2.5 References
- 2.6 Tables
- 2.7 Figures
3.0 Appendixes
- 3.1 Extended literature review
- 3.2 Additional methodology
- 3.3 Additional results
- 3.4 Other additional materials
4.0 One-page curriculum vitae
How can this format overcome the limitations of the chapter style? For both master's and doctoral students, a manuscript (body of the thesis or dissertation, IMRD) is developed that is ready for journal submission. All that remains is to add the title page and abstract, and the paper can be sent to a suitable journal.
The advantage of the journal format for doctoral students should be apparent. Because PhD recipients who fail to publish their dissertations within two years are unlikely to publish afterward, a more functional format encourages publication. Especially when we consider that dissertations appear to make important contributions to knowledge, the evaluation and subsequent publication of that knowledge through refereed journals is an important step. Although master's theses are not as likely as dissertations to be published, any format that encourages the publication of quality thesis work is desirable.
We want to make one final point before proceeding to the structure of the journal format: Your graduate school probably requires that the thesis or dissertation follow a standard style manual (or at least the style of a journal). The three most common are the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (American Psychological Association, 2010),American Physiological Society style(Curran-Everett & Benos, 2004), and The Chicago Manual of Style (University of Chicago Press, 2010).The journal format adapts nicely to any of these styles. University regulations usually do not specify a particular style, but frequently, an academic department may adopt one or two styles. If the journal format is to be used, a department might want to allow more than one style. For example, many journals reporting exercise physiology and biomechanical studies use the American Physiological Society style. Journals publishing articles in motor behavior, sport psychology and sociology, and professional preparation frequently use the APA manual. Journals that publish articles on the history and philosophy of sport frequently use The Chicago Manual of Style. Graduate students benefit considerably by having the flexibility to choose the style recommended by the journal to which the paper will be submitted.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Choosing the right participants for your study
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study.
Describing Participants
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study. These are questions to consider when selecting participants:
- Are participants with special characteristics necessary for your research?
- Age (children, elderly)
- Sex (females, males, or both)
- Level of training (trained or untrained)
- Level of performance (experts or novices)
- Size (weight, fatness)
- Special types (athletes, cyclists, runners)
- Can you obtain the necessary permission and cooperation from the participants?
- Can you find enough participants?
Of course, you want to select participants who will respond to the treatments and measures used in the study. For example, if you want to see the results of training a group of children in overhand throwing, selecting expert 12-year-old baseball pitchers as participants will not likely produce a change in measures of throwing outcome. An intense, long-term training program would be required to have any influence on these participants. Selecting children who are soccer players and have never played organized baseball would offer better odds for a training program to produce changes.
In experimental research, the interactions among participants, measures, and the nature of the treatment program are essential in allowing the treatment program to have a chance to work (Thomas, Lochbaum, Landers, & He, 1997). If you select participants who have high levels of physical fitness, subjecting them to a moderate training program will not produce changes in fitness. Also, participants high in physical fitness will have a small range of scores on a measure of cardiorespiratory endurance (e.g., O2max). For example, you will not find a significant correlation between O2max and marathon performance in world-class marathon runners. Their range of scores in O2max is small, as is their range of scores in marathon performance times. Because the range of scores is small in both measures, no significant correlation will be found. This result does not mean that running performance and cardiorespiratory endurance are not related. It means that you have restricted the range of participants' performance so much that the correlation cannot be exhibited. If you had selected moderately trained runners (e.g., women who jog three times per week for 40 min each time), a significant correlation would be found between running performance on a 5K run and O2max. (We discuss procedures for selecting sample participants in chapter 6.)
Participants, measures, and treatment programs are interrelated. Be sure to choose participants who will respond to the treatment program and have a broad enough range of results when measured with the chosen techniques.
You may have to offer something to the participants to make being in the study worthwhile.
What to Tell About the Participants
The exact number of participants should be given, as should any loss of participants during the time of study. In the proposal, some of this information may not be exact. For example, the following might describe the potential participants:
Participants: For this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, will be randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained distance runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who have been competitive runners for at least 2 years. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
After the study is completed, details are available on the participants, so now this section might read as follows:
Participants: In this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, were randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who had been competitive runners for at least 2 years. The participants had the following characteristics (standard deviations in parentheses): age, M = 26 years (3.3); height, M = 172.5 cm (7.5); weight, M = 66.9 kg (8.7); and O2max, M = 65 ml · kg · min - 1 (4.2). Participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
The participant characteristics listed are extremely pertinent in an exercise physiology study but not at all pertinent, for example, in a study of equipment used by children on the playground. The nature of the research dictates the participant characteristics of interest to the researcher. Carefully think through the characteristics that you will report in your research. Look at related studies for ideas about important characteristics to report.
The characteristics of participants that you identify and report must be clearly specified. Note in the example that well-trained runners were exactly defined; that is, their O2max must be equal to 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher. When participants of different ages are to be used is another good example. Saying only that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be the participants is not sufficient. How wide is the age range for 7-year-olds? Is it ±1 month, ±6 months, or what? In the proposal, you may say that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be included in the study. At the time of testing, each age will be limited to a range of ±6 months. Then, when the thesis or dissertation is written, it may read as follows:
At each age level, 15 children were selected for this study. The mean ages are as follows (standard deviations in parentheses): the youngest group, 7.1 years (4.4 months); 9-year-olds, 9.2 years (3.9 months); and the oldest group, 11.2 years (4.1 months).
A graduate student we know was in his committee meeting when a faculty member on his committee asked him to describe one of his participants. The student said, "Hewas 6 feet tall, had brown hair and a beard, and trained regularly by distance running." The really sharp faculty member then asked, "Was this a male or female?" to which the student was unable to respond because of laughter.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
How to wade through research jargon
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation.
Reading Research
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation. We writers are often guilty of trying to use language to dazzle the reader and perhaps to give the impression that our subject matter is more esoteric than it really is. We tend to write for the benefit of a rather small number of readers - that is, other researchers in our field.
We have the problem of jargon, of course. In any field, whether it is physics, football, or cake baking, jargon confounds the outsider. The use of jargon serves as a kind of shorthand. It provides meaning to the people within the field because everyone uses those words in the same context. Research literature is famous for using a three-dollar word when a nickel word would do. As Day and Gastel (2006, p. 200)asked, what self-respecting writer would use a three-letter word such as now when he or she could use the elegant expression at this point in time? Researchers never do anything, they perform it; they never start, they initiate; and they terminate instead of end. Day and Gastel further remarked that an occasional author slips and uses the word drug, but most salivate like Pavlov's dogs in anticipation of using chemotherapeutic agent.
The need to bridge the gap between the researcher and the practitioner has been recognized for years. For example, the Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance has a feature called "Research Works," which disseminates applied research information to teachers, coaches, and fitness and recreation leaders. The website for the American Kinesiology Association (www.americankinesiology.org) regularly has a section on applied research. Yet despite these and other attempts to bridge the gap between researchers and practitioners, the gap is still imposing.
It goes without saying that if you are not knowledgeable about the subject matter, you cannot read the research literature. Conversely, if you know the subject matter, you can probably wade through the researcher's jargon more effectively. For example, if you know baseball and the researcher is recommending that by shortening the radius, the hitter can increase the angular velocity, you can figure out that the researcher means to choke up on the bat.
One of the big stumbling blocks is the statistical analysis part of research reports. Even the most ardent seeker of knowledge can be turned off by such descriptions as this: "The tetrachoric correlations among the test variables were subjected to a centroid factor analysis, and orthogonal rotations of the primary axes were accomplished by Zimmerman's graphical method until simple structure and positive manifold were closely approximated." Please note that we are not criticizing the authors for such descriptions, because reviewers and editors usually require them. We are just acknowledging that statistical analysis is frightening to someone who is trying to read a research article and does not know a factor analysis from a volleyball. The widespread use of computers and "computerese" probably compounds the mystery associated with statistics. Many people believe anything that comes out of a computer. Others are more old-fashioned and check the computer's accuracy with their calculators. A classic, yet fictional, case of a computer mistake occurred in a high school in which the computer printed the students' locker numbers in the column where their IQs were supposed to go. It is classic because no one noticed the error at the time, but at the end of the year the students with the highest locker numbers got the best grades.
How to Read Research
Despite all the hurdles that loom in the practitioner's path when reading research, we contend that you can read and profit from (usually not materially, but then consider the data on the new Speedo swimsuit and its influence on the 2008 swimming results in Beijing)the research literature even if you are not well grounded in research techniques and statistical analysis. We would like to contend that after you read this book, you will be able to read any journal in any field, but the publisher would not let us say that. We offer the following suggestions on reading the research literature:
- Become familiar with a few publications that contain pertinent research in your field. You might get some help on choosing the publications from a professor or librarian.
- Read only studies that are of interest to you. This point may sound too trite to mention, but some people feel obligated to wade through every article.
- Read as a practitioner would. Do not look for eternal truths. Look for ideas and indications. No study is proof of anything. Only when it has been verified repeatedly does it constitute knowledge.
- Read the abstract first. This saves time by helping you determine whether you wish to read the whole thing. If you are still interested, then you can read the study to gain a better understanding of the methodology and the interpretations, but do not get bogged down with details.
- Do not be too concerned about statistical significance. Understanding the concept of significance certainly helps, but a little common sense serves you about as well as knowing the difference between the .02 and the .01 levels, or a one-tailed test versus a two-tailed test. Think in terms of meaningfulness. For example, if two methods of teaching bowling result in an average difference of 0.5 pins, what does it matter whether the difference is significant? On the other hand, if a big difference is present but not significant, further investigation is warranted, especially if the study involved a small number of participants. Knowing the concepts of the types of statistical analysis is certainly helpful, but it is not crucial to being able to read a study. Just skip that part.
- Be critical but objective. You can usually assume that a national research journal selects studies for publication by the jury method. Two or three qualified people read and judge the relevance of the problem, the validity and reliability of the procedures, the efficacy of the experimental design, and the appropriateness of the statistical analysis. Certainly, some studies are published that should not be. Yet if you are not an expert in research, you do not need to be suspicious about the scientific worth of a study that appears in a recognized journal. If it is too far removed from any practical application to your situation, do not read it.
You will find that the more you read, the more you understand, simply because you become more familiar with the language and the methodology, like the man who was thrilled to learn he had been speaking prose all his life.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Formatting for journal publications
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report.
Structure of the Journal Format
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report. The format that we suggest has three major parts. Preliminary materials include such items as the title page, table of contents, acknowledgments, and abstract. The body of the thesis and dissertation is a complete manuscript prepared in journal form. Included are the standard parts of a research report, such as the introduction, methods, results, discussion, references, figures, and tables. The appendixes often include a more thorough literature review, additional detail about methods, and additional results not placed in the body of the thesis or dissertation.
Journal style (IMRD) in theses and dissertations is appropriate when the goal is publication as an article in a journal, which should be the goal for all scientific studies. There are exceptions, however; the traditional chapter format may be appropriate for studies of the history or philosophy of sport because the likely publication would be in book form. Also, some modification of the IMRD format may be best for areas such as the sociology of sport.
Following are the parts of the thesis and dissertation for quantitative studies using the journal format:
1.0 Preliminary materials
- 1.1 Title Page
- 1.2 Acknowledgments
- 1.3 Abstract
- 1.4 Table of contents
- 1.5 List of tables
- 1.6 List of figures
2.0 Body of the thesis or dissertation (IMRD)
- 2.1 Introduction
- 2.2 Methods
- 2.3 Results
- 2.4 Discussion
- 2.5 References
- 2.6 Tables
- 2.7 Figures
3.0 Appendixes
- 3.1 Extended literature review
- 3.2 Additional methodology
- 3.3 Additional results
- 3.4 Other additional materials
4.0 One-page curriculum vitae
How can this format overcome the limitations of the chapter style? For both master's and doctoral students, a manuscript (body of the thesis or dissertation, IMRD) is developed that is ready for journal submission. All that remains is to add the title page and abstract, and the paper can be sent to a suitable journal.
The advantage of the journal format for doctoral students should be apparent. Because PhD recipients who fail to publish their dissertations within two years are unlikely to publish afterward, a more functional format encourages publication. Especially when we consider that dissertations appear to make important contributions to knowledge, the evaluation and subsequent publication of that knowledge through refereed journals is an important step. Although master's theses are not as likely as dissertations to be published, any format that encourages the publication of quality thesis work is desirable.
We want to make one final point before proceeding to the structure of the journal format: Your graduate school probably requires that the thesis or dissertation follow a standard style manual (or at least the style of a journal). The three most common are the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (American Psychological Association, 2010),American Physiological Society style(Curran-Everett & Benos, 2004), and The Chicago Manual of Style (University of Chicago Press, 2010).The journal format adapts nicely to any of these styles. University regulations usually do not specify a particular style, but frequently, an academic department may adopt one or two styles. If the journal format is to be used, a department might want to allow more than one style. For example, many journals reporting exercise physiology and biomechanical studies use the American Physiological Society style. Journals publishing articles in motor behavior, sport psychology and sociology, and professional preparation frequently use the APA manual. Journals that publish articles on the history and philosophy of sport frequently use The Chicago Manual of Style. Graduate students benefit considerably by having the flexibility to choose the style recommended by the journal to which the paper will be submitted.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Choosing the right participants for your study
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study.
Describing Participants
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study. These are questions to consider when selecting participants:
- Are participants with special characteristics necessary for your research?
- Age (children, elderly)
- Sex (females, males, or both)
- Level of training (trained or untrained)
- Level of performance (experts or novices)
- Size (weight, fatness)
- Special types (athletes, cyclists, runners)
- Can you obtain the necessary permission and cooperation from the participants?
- Can you find enough participants?
Of course, you want to select participants who will respond to the treatments and measures used in the study. For example, if you want to see the results of training a group of children in overhand throwing, selecting expert 12-year-old baseball pitchers as participants will not likely produce a change in measures of throwing outcome. An intense, long-term training program would be required to have any influence on these participants. Selecting children who are soccer players and have never played organized baseball would offer better odds for a training program to produce changes.
In experimental research, the interactions among participants, measures, and the nature of the treatment program are essential in allowing the treatment program to have a chance to work (Thomas, Lochbaum, Landers, & He, 1997). If you select participants who have high levels of physical fitness, subjecting them to a moderate training program will not produce changes in fitness. Also, participants high in physical fitness will have a small range of scores on a measure of cardiorespiratory endurance (e.g., O2max). For example, you will not find a significant correlation between O2max and marathon performance in world-class marathon runners. Their range of scores in O2max is small, as is their range of scores in marathon performance times. Because the range of scores is small in both measures, no significant correlation will be found. This result does not mean that running performance and cardiorespiratory endurance are not related. It means that you have restricted the range of participants' performance so much that the correlation cannot be exhibited. If you had selected moderately trained runners (e.g., women who jog three times per week for 40 min each time), a significant correlation would be found between running performance on a 5K run and O2max. (We discuss procedures for selecting sample participants in chapter 6.)
Participants, measures, and treatment programs are interrelated. Be sure to choose participants who will respond to the treatment program and have a broad enough range of results when measured with the chosen techniques.
You may have to offer something to the participants to make being in the study worthwhile.
What to Tell About the Participants
The exact number of participants should be given, as should any loss of participants during the time of study. In the proposal, some of this information may not be exact. For example, the following might describe the potential participants:
Participants: For this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, will be randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained distance runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who have been competitive runners for at least 2 years. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
After the study is completed, details are available on the participants, so now this section might read as follows:
Participants: In this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, were randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who had been competitive runners for at least 2 years. The participants had the following characteristics (standard deviations in parentheses): age, M = 26 years (3.3); height, M = 172.5 cm (7.5); weight, M = 66.9 kg (8.7); and O2max, M = 65 ml · kg · min - 1 (4.2). Participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
The participant characteristics listed are extremely pertinent in an exercise physiology study but not at all pertinent, for example, in a study of equipment used by children on the playground. The nature of the research dictates the participant characteristics of interest to the researcher. Carefully think through the characteristics that you will report in your research. Look at related studies for ideas about important characteristics to report.
The characteristics of participants that you identify and report must be clearly specified. Note in the example that well-trained runners were exactly defined; that is, their O2max must be equal to 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher. When participants of different ages are to be used is another good example. Saying only that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be the participants is not sufficient. How wide is the age range for 7-year-olds? Is it ±1 month, ±6 months, or what? In the proposal, you may say that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be included in the study. At the time of testing, each age will be limited to a range of ±6 months. Then, when the thesis or dissertation is written, it may read as follows:
At each age level, 15 children were selected for this study. The mean ages are as follows (standard deviations in parentheses): the youngest group, 7.1 years (4.4 months); 9-year-olds, 9.2 years (3.9 months); and the oldest group, 11.2 years (4.1 months).
A graduate student we know was in his committee meeting when a faculty member on his committee asked him to describe one of his participants. The student said, "Hewas 6 feet tall, had brown hair and a beard, and trained regularly by distance running." The really sharp faculty member then asked, "Was this a male or female?" to which the student was unable to respond because of laughter.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
How to wade through research jargon
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation.
Reading Research
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation. We writers are often guilty of trying to use language to dazzle the reader and perhaps to give the impression that our subject matter is more esoteric than it really is. We tend to write for the benefit of a rather small number of readers - that is, other researchers in our field.
We have the problem of jargon, of course. In any field, whether it is physics, football, or cake baking, jargon confounds the outsider. The use of jargon serves as a kind of shorthand. It provides meaning to the people within the field because everyone uses those words in the same context. Research literature is famous for using a three-dollar word when a nickel word would do. As Day and Gastel (2006, p. 200)asked, what self-respecting writer would use a three-letter word such as now when he or she could use the elegant expression at this point in time? Researchers never do anything, they perform it; they never start, they initiate; and they terminate instead of end. Day and Gastel further remarked that an occasional author slips and uses the word drug, but most salivate like Pavlov's dogs in anticipation of using chemotherapeutic agent.
The need to bridge the gap between the researcher and the practitioner has been recognized for years. For example, the Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance has a feature called "Research Works," which disseminates applied research information to teachers, coaches, and fitness and recreation leaders. The website for the American Kinesiology Association (www.americankinesiology.org) regularly has a section on applied research. Yet despite these and other attempts to bridge the gap between researchers and practitioners, the gap is still imposing.
It goes without saying that if you are not knowledgeable about the subject matter, you cannot read the research literature. Conversely, if you know the subject matter, you can probably wade through the researcher's jargon more effectively. For example, if you know baseball and the researcher is recommending that by shortening the radius, the hitter can increase the angular velocity, you can figure out that the researcher means to choke up on the bat.
One of the big stumbling blocks is the statistical analysis part of research reports. Even the most ardent seeker of knowledge can be turned off by such descriptions as this: "The tetrachoric correlations among the test variables were subjected to a centroid factor analysis, and orthogonal rotations of the primary axes were accomplished by Zimmerman's graphical method until simple structure and positive manifold were closely approximated." Please note that we are not criticizing the authors for such descriptions, because reviewers and editors usually require them. We are just acknowledging that statistical analysis is frightening to someone who is trying to read a research article and does not know a factor analysis from a volleyball. The widespread use of computers and "computerese" probably compounds the mystery associated with statistics. Many people believe anything that comes out of a computer. Others are more old-fashioned and check the computer's accuracy with their calculators. A classic, yet fictional, case of a computer mistake occurred in a high school in which the computer printed the students' locker numbers in the column where their IQs were supposed to go. It is classic because no one noticed the error at the time, but at the end of the year the students with the highest locker numbers got the best grades.
How to Read Research
Despite all the hurdles that loom in the practitioner's path when reading research, we contend that you can read and profit from (usually not materially, but then consider the data on the new Speedo swimsuit and its influence on the 2008 swimming results in Beijing)the research literature even if you are not well grounded in research techniques and statistical analysis. We would like to contend that after you read this book, you will be able to read any journal in any field, but the publisher would not let us say that. We offer the following suggestions on reading the research literature:
- Become familiar with a few publications that contain pertinent research in your field. You might get some help on choosing the publications from a professor or librarian.
- Read only studies that are of interest to you. This point may sound too trite to mention, but some people feel obligated to wade through every article.
- Read as a practitioner would. Do not look for eternal truths. Look for ideas and indications. No study is proof of anything. Only when it has been verified repeatedly does it constitute knowledge.
- Read the abstract first. This saves time by helping you determine whether you wish to read the whole thing. If you are still interested, then you can read the study to gain a better understanding of the methodology and the interpretations, but do not get bogged down with details.
- Do not be too concerned about statistical significance. Understanding the concept of significance certainly helps, but a little common sense serves you about as well as knowing the difference between the .02 and the .01 levels, or a one-tailed test versus a two-tailed test. Think in terms of meaningfulness. For example, if two methods of teaching bowling result in an average difference of 0.5 pins, what does it matter whether the difference is significant? On the other hand, if a big difference is present but not significant, further investigation is warranted, especially if the study involved a small number of participants. Knowing the concepts of the types of statistical analysis is certainly helpful, but it is not crucial to being able to read a study. Just skip that part.
- Be critical but objective. You can usually assume that a national research journal selects studies for publication by the jury method. Two or three qualified people read and judge the relevance of the problem, the validity and reliability of the procedures, the efficacy of the experimental design, and the appropriateness of the statistical analysis. Certainly, some studies are published that should not be. Yet if you are not an expert in research, you do not need to be suspicious about the scientific worth of a study that appears in a recognized journal. If it is too far removed from any practical application to your situation, do not read it.
You will find that the more you read, the more you understand, simply because you become more familiar with the language and the methodology, like the man who was thrilled to learn he had been speaking prose all his life.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Formatting for journal publications
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report.
Structure of the Journal Format
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report. The format that we suggest has three major parts. Preliminary materials include such items as the title page, table of contents, acknowledgments, and abstract. The body of the thesis and dissertation is a complete manuscript prepared in journal form. Included are the standard parts of a research report, such as the introduction, methods, results, discussion, references, figures, and tables. The appendixes often include a more thorough literature review, additional detail about methods, and additional results not placed in the body of the thesis or dissertation.
Journal style (IMRD) in theses and dissertations is appropriate when the goal is publication as an article in a journal, which should be the goal for all scientific studies. There are exceptions, however; the traditional chapter format may be appropriate for studies of the history or philosophy of sport because the likely publication would be in book form. Also, some modification of the IMRD format may be best for areas such as the sociology of sport.
Following are the parts of the thesis and dissertation for quantitative studies using the journal format:
1.0 Preliminary materials
- 1.1 Title Page
- 1.2 Acknowledgments
- 1.3 Abstract
- 1.4 Table of contents
- 1.5 List of tables
- 1.6 List of figures
2.0 Body of the thesis or dissertation (IMRD)
- 2.1 Introduction
- 2.2 Methods
- 2.3 Results
- 2.4 Discussion
- 2.5 References
- 2.6 Tables
- 2.7 Figures
3.0 Appendixes
- 3.1 Extended literature review
- 3.2 Additional methodology
- 3.3 Additional results
- 3.4 Other additional materials
4.0 One-page curriculum vitae
How can this format overcome the limitations of the chapter style? For both master's and doctoral students, a manuscript (body of the thesis or dissertation, IMRD) is developed that is ready for journal submission. All that remains is to add the title page and abstract, and the paper can be sent to a suitable journal.
The advantage of the journal format for doctoral students should be apparent. Because PhD recipients who fail to publish their dissertations within two years are unlikely to publish afterward, a more functional format encourages publication. Especially when we consider that dissertations appear to make important contributions to knowledge, the evaluation and subsequent publication of that knowledge through refereed journals is an important step. Although master's theses are not as likely as dissertations to be published, any format that encourages the publication of quality thesis work is desirable.
We want to make one final point before proceeding to the structure of the journal format: Your graduate school probably requires that the thesis or dissertation follow a standard style manual (or at least the style of a journal). The three most common are the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (American Psychological Association, 2010),American Physiological Society style(Curran-Everett & Benos, 2004), and The Chicago Manual of Style (University of Chicago Press, 2010).The journal format adapts nicely to any of these styles. University regulations usually do not specify a particular style, but frequently, an academic department may adopt one or two styles. If the journal format is to be used, a department might want to allow more than one style. For example, many journals reporting exercise physiology and biomechanical studies use the American Physiological Society style. Journals publishing articles in motor behavior, sport psychology and sociology, and professional preparation frequently use the APA manual. Journals that publish articles on the history and philosophy of sport frequently use The Chicago Manual of Style. Graduate students benefit considerably by having the flexibility to choose the style recommended by the journal to which the paper will be submitted.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Choosing the right participants for your study
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study.
Describing Participants
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study. These are questions to consider when selecting participants:
- Are participants with special characteristics necessary for your research?
- Age (children, elderly)
- Sex (females, males, or both)
- Level of training (trained or untrained)
- Level of performance (experts or novices)
- Size (weight, fatness)
- Special types (athletes, cyclists, runners)
- Can you obtain the necessary permission and cooperation from the participants?
- Can you find enough participants?
Of course, you want to select participants who will respond to the treatments and measures used in the study. For example, if you want to see the results of training a group of children in overhand throwing, selecting expert 12-year-old baseball pitchers as participants will not likely produce a change in measures of throwing outcome. An intense, long-term training program would be required to have any influence on these participants. Selecting children who are soccer players and have never played organized baseball would offer better odds for a training program to produce changes.
In experimental research, the interactions among participants, measures, and the nature of the treatment program are essential in allowing the treatment program to have a chance to work (Thomas, Lochbaum, Landers, & He, 1997). If you select participants who have high levels of physical fitness, subjecting them to a moderate training program will not produce changes in fitness. Also, participants high in physical fitness will have a small range of scores on a measure of cardiorespiratory endurance (e.g., O2max). For example, you will not find a significant correlation between O2max and marathon performance in world-class marathon runners. Their range of scores in O2max is small, as is their range of scores in marathon performance times. Because the range of scores is small in both measures, no significant correlation will be found. This result does not mean that running performance and cardiorespiratory endurance are not related. It means that you have restricted the range of participants' performance so much that the correlation cannot be exhibited. If you had selected moderately trained runners (e.g., women who jog three times per week for 40 min each time), a significant correlation would be found between running performance on a 5K run and O2max. (We discuss procedures for selecting sample participants in chapter 6.)
Participants, measures, and treatment programs are interrelated. Be sure to choose participants who will respond to the treatment program and have a broad enough range of results when measured with the chosen techniques.
You may have to offer something to the participants to make being in the study worthwhile.
What to Tell About the Participants
The exact number of participants should be given, as should any loss of participants during the time of study. In the proposal, some of this information may not be exact. For example, the following might describe the potential participants:
Participants: For this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, will be randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained distance runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who have been competitive runners for at least 2 years. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
After the study is completed, details are available on the participants, so now this section might read as follows:
Participants: In this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, were randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who had been competitive runners for at least 2 years. The participants had the following characteristics (standard deviations in parentheses): age, M = 26 years (3.3); height, M = 172.5 cm (7.5); weight, M = 66.9 kg (8.7); and O2max, M = 65 ml · kg · min - 1 (4.2). Participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
The participant characteristics listed are extremely pertinent in an exercise physiology study but not at all pertinent, for example, in a study of equipment used by children on the playground. The nature of the research dictates the participant characteristics of interest to the researcher. Carefully think through the characteristics that you will report in your research. Look at related studies for ideas about important characteristics to report.
The characteristics of participants that you identify and report must be clearly specified. Note in the example that well-trained runners were exactly defined; that is, their O2max must be equal to 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher. When participants of different ages are to be used is another good example. Saying only that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be the participants is not sufficient. How wide is the age range for 7-year-olds? Is it ±1 month, ±6 months, or what? In the proposal, you may say that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be included in the study. At the time of testing, each age will be limited to a range of ±6 months. Then, when the thesis or dissertation is written, it may read as follows:
At each age level, 15 children were selected for this study. The mean ages are as follows (standard deviations in parentheses): the youngest group, 7.1 years (4.4 months); 9-year-olds, 9.2 years (3.9 months); and the oldest group, 11.2 years (4.1 months).
A graduate student we know was in his committee meeting when a faculty member on his committee asked him to describe one of his participants. The student said, "Hewas 6 feet tall, had brown hair and a beard, and trained regularly by distance running." The really sharp faculty member then asked, "Was this a male or female?" to which the student was unable to respond because of laughter.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
How to wade through research jargon
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation.
Reading Research
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation. We writers are often guilty of trying to use language to dazzle the reader and perhaps to give the impression that our subject matter is more esoteric than it really is. We tend to write for the benefit of a rather small number of readers - that is, other researchers in our field.
We have the problem of jargon, of course. In any field, whether it is physics, football, or cake baking, jargon confounds the outsider. The use of jargon serves as a kind of shorthand. It provides meaning to the people within the field because everyone uses those words in the same context. Research literature is famous for using a three-dollar word when a nickel word would do. As Day and Gastel (2006, p. 200)asked, what self-respecting writer would use a three-letter word such as now when he or she could use the elegant expression at this point in time? Researchers never do anything, they perform it; they never start, they initiate; and they terminate instead of end. Day and Gastel further remarked that an occasional author slips and uses the word drug, but most salivate like Pavlov's dogs in anticipation of using chemotherapeutic agent.
The need to bridge the gap between the researcher and the practitioner has been recognized for years. For example, the Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance has a feature called "Research Works," which disseminates applied research information to teachers, coaches, and fitness and recreation leaders. The website for the American Kinesiology Association (www.americankinesiology.org) regularly has a section on applied research. Yet despite these and other attempts to bridge the gap between researchers and practitioners, the gap is still imposing.
It goes without saying that if you are not knowledgeable about the subject matter, you cannot read the research literature. Conversely, if you know the subject matter, you can probably wade through the researcher's jargon more effectively. For example, if you know baseball and the researcher is recommending that by shortening the radius, the hitter can increase the angular velocity, you can figure out that the researcher means to choke up on the bat.
One of the big stumbling blocks is the statistical analysis part of research reports. Even the most ardent seeker of knowledge can be turned off by such descriptions as this: "The tetrachoric correlations among the test variables were subjected to a centroid factor analysis, and orthogonal rotations of the primary axes were accomplished by Zimmerman's graphical method until simple structure and positive manifold were closely approximated." Please note that we are not criticizing the authors for such descriptions, because reviewers and editors usually require them. We are just acknowledging that statistical analysis is frightening to someone who is trying to read a research article and does not know a factor analysis from a volleyball. The widespread use of computers and "computerese" probably compounds the mystery associated with statistics. Many people believe anything that comes out of a computer. Others are more old-fashioned and check the computer's accuracy with their calculators. A classic, yet fictional, case of a computer mistake occurred in a high school in which the computer printed the students' locker numbers in the column where their IQs were supposed to go. It is classic because no one noticed the error at the time, but at the end of the year the students with the highest locker numbers got the best grades.
How to Read Research
Despite all the hurdles that loom in the practitioner's path when reading research, we contend that you can read and profit from (usually not materially, but then consider the data on the new Speedo swimsuit and its influence on the 2008 swimming results in Beijing)the research literature even if you are not well grounded in research techniques and statistical analysis. We would like to contend that after you read this book, you will be able to read any journal in any field, but the publisher would not let us say that. We offer the following suggestions on reading the research literature:
- Become familiar with a few publications that contain pertinent research in your field. You might get some help on choosing the publications from a professor or librarian.
- Read only studies that are of interest to you. This point may sound too trite to mention, but some people feel obligated to wade through every article.
- Read as a practitioner would. Do not look for eternal truths. Look for ideas and indications. No study is proof of anything. Only when it has been verified repeatedly does it constitute knowledge.
- Read the abstract first. This saves time by helping you determine whether you wish to read the whole thing. If you are still interested, then you can read the study to gain a better understanding of the methodology and the interpretations, but do not get bogged down with details.
- Do not be too concerned about statistical significance. Understanding the concept of significance certainly helps, but a little common sense serves you about as well as knowing the difference between the .02 and the .01 levels, or a one-tailed test versus a two-tailed test. Think in terms of meaningfulness. For example, if two methods of teaching bowling result in an average difference of 0.5 pins, what does it matter whether the difference is significant? On the other hand, if a big difference is present but not significant, further investigation is warranted, especially if the study involved a small number of participants. Knowing the concepts of the types of statistical analysis is certainly helpful, but it is not crucial to being able to read a study. Just skip that part.
- Be critical but objective. You can usually assume that a national research journal selects studies for publication by the jury method. Two or three qualified people read and judge the relevance of the problem, the validity and reliability of the procedures, the efficacy of the experimental design, and the appropriateness of the statistical analysis. Certainly, some studies are published that should not be. Yet if you are not an expert in research, you do not need to be suspicious about the scientific worth of a study that appears in a recognized journal. If it is too far removed from any practical application to your situation, do not read it.
You will find that the more you read, the more you understand, simply because you become more familiar with the language and the methodology, like the man who was thrilled to learn he had been speaking prose all his life.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Formatting for journal publications
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report.
Structure of the Journal Format
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report. The format that we suggest has three major parts. Preliminary materials include such items as the title page, table of contents, acknowledgments, and abstract. The body of the thesis and dissertation is a complete manuscript prepared in journal form. Included are the standard parts of a research report, such as the introduction, methods, results, discussion, references, figures, and tables. The appendixes often include a more thorough literature review, additional detail about methods, and additional results not placed in the body of the thesis or dissertation.
Journal style (IMRD) in theses and dissertations is appropriate when the goal is publication as an article in a journal, which should be the goal for all scientific studies. There are exceptions, however; the traditional chapter format may be appropriate for studies of the history or philosophy of sport because the likely publication would be in book form. Also, some modification of the IMRD format may be best for areas such as the sociology of sport.
Following are the parts of the thesis and dissertation for quantitative studies using the journal format:
1.0 Preliminary materials
- 1.1 Title Page
- 1.2 Acknowledgments
- 1.3 Abstract
- 1.4 Table of contents
- 1.5 List of tables
- 1.6 List of figures
2.0 Body of the thesis or dissertation (IMRD)
- 2.1 Introduction
- 2.2 Methods
- 2.3 Results
- 2.4 Discussion
- 2.5 References
- 2.6 Tables
- 2.7 Figures
3.0 Appendixes
- 3.1 Extended literature review
- 3.2 Additional methodology
- 3.3 Additional results
- 3.4 Other additional materials
4.0 One-page curriculum vitae
How can this format overcome the limitations of the chapter style? For both master's and doctoral students, a manuscript (body of the thesis or dissertation, IMRD) is developed that is ready for journal submission. All that remains is to add the title page and abstract, and the paper can be sent to a suitable journal.
The advantage of the journal format for doctoral students should be apparent. Because PhD recipients who fail to publish their dissertations within two years are unlikely to publish afterward, a more functional format encourages publication. Especially when we consider that dissertations appear to make important contributions to knowledge, the evaluation and subsequent publication of that knowledge through refereed journals is an important step. Although master's theses are not as likely as dissertations to be published, any format that encourages the publication of quality thesis work is desirable.
We want to make one final point before proceeding to the structure of the journal format: Your graduate school probably requires that the thesis or dissertation follow a standard style manual (or at least the style of a journal). The three most common are the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (American Psychological Association, 2010),American Physiological Society style(Curran-Everett & Benos, 2004), and The Chicago Manual of Style (University of Chicago Press, 2010).The journal format adapts nicely to any of these styles. University regulations usually do not specify a particular style, but frequently, an academic department may adopt one or two styles. If the journal format is to be used, a department might want to allow more than one style. For example, many journals reporting exercise physiology and biomechanical studies use the American Physiological Society style. Journals publishing articles in motor behavior, sport psychology and sociology, and professional preparation frequently use the APA manual. Journals that publish articles on the history and philosophy of sport frequently use The Chicago Manual of Style. Graduate students benefit considerably by having the flexibility to choose the style recommended by the journal to which the paper will be submitted.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Choosing the right participants for your study
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study.
Describing Participants
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study. These are questions to consider when selecting participants:
- Are participants with special characteristics necessary for your research?
- Age (children, elderly)
- Sex (females, males, or both)
- Level of training (trained or untrained)
- Level of performance (experts or novices)
- Size (weight, fatness)
- Special types (athletes, cyclists, runners)
- Can you obtain the necessary permission and cooperation from the participants?
- Can you find enough participants?
Of course, you want to select participants who will respond to the treatments and measures used in the study. For example, if you want to see the results of training a group of children in overhand throwing, selecting expert 12-year-old baseball pitchers as participants will not likely produce a change in measures of throwing outcome. An intense, long-term training program would be required to have any influence on these participants. Selecting children who are soccer players and have never played organized baseball would offer better odds for a training program to produce changes.
In experimental research, the interactions among participants, measures, and the nature of the treatment program are essential in allowing the treatment program to have a chance to work (Thomas, Lochbaum, Landers, & He, 1997). If you select participants who have high levels of physical fitness, subjecting them to a moderate training program will not produce changes in fitness. Also, participants high in physical fitness will have a small range of scores on a measure of cardiorespiratory endurance (e.g., O2max). For example, you will not find a significant correlation between O2max and marathon performance in world-class marathon runners. Their range of scores in O2max is small, as is their range of scores in marathon performance times. Because the range of scores is small in both measures, no significant correlation will be found. This result does not mean that running performance and cardiorespiratory endurance are not related. It means that you have restricted the range of participants' performance so much that the correlation cannot be exhibited. If you had selected moderately trained runners (e.g., women who jog three times per week for 40 min each time), a significant correlation would be found between running performance on a 5K run and O2max. (We discuss procedures for selecting sample participants in chapter 6.)
Participants, measures, and treatment programs are interrelated. Be sure to choose participants who will respond to the treatment program and have a broad enough range of results when measured with the chosen techniques.
You may have to offer something to the participants to make being in the study worthwhile.
What to Tell About the Participants
The exact number of participants should be given, as should any loss of participants during the time of study. In the proposal, some of this information may not be exact. For example, the following might describe the potential participants:
Participants: For this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, will be randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained distance runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who have been competitive runners for at least 2 years. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
After the study is completed, details are available on the participants, so now this section might read as follows:
Participants: In this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, were randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who had been competitive runners for at least 2 years. The participants had the following characteristics (standard deviations in parentheses): age, M = 26 years (3.3); height, M = 172.5 cm (7.5); weight, M = 66.9 kg (8.7); and O2max, M = 65 ml · kg · min - 1 (4.2). Participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
The participant characteristics listed are extremely pertinent in an exercise physiology study but not at all pertinent, for example, in a study of equipment used by children on the playground. The nature of the research dictates the participant characteristics of interest to the researcher. Carefully think through the characteristics that you will report in your research. Look at related studies for ideas about important characteristics to report.
The characteristics of participants that you identify and report must be clearly specified. Note in the example that well-trained runners were exactly defined; that is, their O2max must be equal to 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher. When participants of different ages are to be used is another good example. Saying only that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be the participants is not sufficient. How wide is the age range for 7-year-olds? Is it ±1 month, ±6 months, or what? In the proposal, you may say that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be included in the study. At the time of testing, each age will be limited to a range of ±6 months. Then, when the thesis or dissertation is written, it may read as follows:
At each age level, 15 children were selected for this study. The mean ages are as follows (standard deviations in parentheses): the youngest group, 7.1 years (4.4 months); 9-year-olds, 9.2 years (3.9 months); and the oldest group, 11.2 years (4.1 months).
A graduate student we know was in his committee meeting when a faculty member on his committee asked him to describe one of his participants. The student said, "Hewas 6 feet tall, had brown hair and a beard, and trained regularly by distance running." The really sharp faculty member then asked, "Was this a male or female?" to which the student was unable to respond because of laughter.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
How to wade through research jargon
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation.
Reading Research
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation. We writers are often guilty of trying to use language to dazzle the reader and perhaps to give the impression that our subject matter is more esoteric than it really is. We tend to write for the benefit of a rather small number of readers - that is, other researchers in our field.
We have the problem of jargon, of course. In any field, whether it is physics, football, or cake baking, jargon confounds the outsider. The use of jargon serves as a kind of shorthand. It provides meaning to the people within the field because everyone uses those words in the same context. Research literature is famous for using a three-dollar word when a nickel word would do. As Day and Gastel (2006, p. 200)asked, what self-respecting writer would use a three-letter word such as now when he or she could use the elegant expression at this point in time? Researchers never do anything, they perform it; they never start, they initiate; and they terminate instead of end. Day and Gastel further remarked that an occasional author slips and uses the word drug, but most salivate like Pavlov's dogs in anticipation of using chemotherapeutic agent.
The need to bridge the gap between the researcher and the practitioner has been recognized for years. For example, the Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance has a feature called "Research Works," which disseminates applied research information to teachers, coaches, and fitness and recreation leaders. The website for the American Kinesiology Association (www.americankinesiology.org) regularly has a section on applied research. Yet despite these and other attempts to bridge the gap between researchers and practitioners, the gap is still imposing.
It goes without saying that if you are not knowledgeable about the subject matter, you cannot read the research literature. Conversely, if you know the subject matter, you can probably wade through the researcher's jargon more effectively. For example, if you know baseball and the researcher is recommending that by shortening the radius, the hitter can increase the angular velocity, you can figure out that the researcher means to choke up on the bat.
One of the big stumbling blocks is the statistical analysis part of research reports. Even the most ardent seeker of knowledge can be turned off by such descriptions as this: "The tetrachoric correlations among the test variables were subjected to a centroid factor analysis, and orthogonal rotations of the primary axes were accomplished by Zimmerman's graphical method until simple structure and positive manifold were closely approximated." Please note that we are not criticizing the authors for such descriptions, because reviewers and editors usually require them. We are just acknowledging that statistical analysis is frightening to someone who is trying to read a research article and does not know a factor analysis from a volleyball. The widespread use of computers and "computerese" probably compounds the mystery associated with statistics. Many people believe anything that comes out of a computer. Others are more old-fashioned and check the computer's accuracy with their calculators. A classic, yet fictional, case of a computer mistake occurred in a high school in which the computer printed the students' locker numbers in the column where their IQs were supposed to go. It is classic because no one noticed the error at the time, but at the end of the year the students with the highest locker numbers got the best grades.
How to Read Research
Despite all the hurdles that loom in the practitioner's path when reading research, we contend that you can read and profit from (usually not materially, but then consider the data on the new Speedo swimsuit and its influence on the 2008 swimming results in Beijing)the research literature even if you are not well grounded in research techniques and statistical analysis. We would like to contend that after you read this book, you will be able to read any journal in any field, but the publisher would not let us say that. We offer the following suggestions on reading the research literature:
- Become familiar with a few publications that contain pertinent research in your field. You might get some help on choosing the publications from a professor or librarian.
- Read only studies that are of interest to you. This point may sound too trite to mention, but some people feel obligated to wade through every article.
- Read as a practitioner would. Do not look for eternal truths. Look for ideas and indications. No study is proof of anything. Only when it has been verified repeatedly does it constitute knowledge.
- Read the abstract first. This saves time by helping you determine whether you wish to read the whole thing. If you are still interested, then you can read the study to gain a better understanding of the methodology and the interpretations, but do not get bogged down with details.
- Do not be too concerned about statistical significance. Understanding the concept of significance certainly helps, but a little common sense serves you about as well as knowing the difference between the .02 and the .01 levels, or a one-tailed test versus a two-tailed test. Think in terms of meaningfulness. For example, if two methods of teaching bowling result in an average difference of 0.5 pins, what does it matter whether the difference is significant? On the other hand, if a big difference is present but not significant, further investigation is warranted, especially if the study involved a small number of participants. Knowing the concepts of the types of statistical analysis is certainly helpful, but it is not crucial to being able to read a study. Just skip that part.
- Be critical but objective. You can usually assume that a national research journal selects studies for publication by the jury method. Two or three qualified people read and judge the relevance of the problem, the validity and reliability of the procedures, the efficacy of the experimental design, and the appropriateness of the statistical analysis. Certainly, some studies are published that should not be. Yet if you are not an expert in research, you do not need to be suspicious about the scientific worth of a study that appears in a recognized journal. If it is too far removed from any practical application to your situation, do not read it.
You will find that the more you read, the more you understand, simply because you become more familiar with the language and the methodology, like the man who was thrilled to learn he had been speaking prose all his life.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Formatting for journal publications
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report.
Structure of the Journal Format
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report. The format that we suggest has three major parts. Preliminary materials include such items as the title page, table of contents, acknowledgments, and abstract. The body of the thesis and dissertation is a complete manuscript prepared in journal form. Included are the standard parts of a research report, such as the introduction, methods, results, discussion, references, figures, and tables. The appendixes often include a more thorough literature review, additional detail about methods, and additional results not placed in the body of the thesis or dissertation.
Journal style (IMRD) in theses and dissertations is appropriate when the goal is publication as an article in a journal, which should be the goal for all scientific studies. There are exceptions, however; the traditional chapter format may be appropriate for studies of the history or philosophy of sport because the likely publication would be in book form. Also, some modification of the IMRD format may be best for areas such as the sociology of sport.
Following are the parts of the thesis and dissertation for quantitative studies using the journal format:
1.0 Preliminary materials
- 1.1 Title Page
- 1.2 Acknowledgments
- 1.3 Abstract
- 1.4 Table of contents
- 1.5 List of tables
- 1.6 List of figures
2.0 Body of the thesis or dissertation (IMRD)
- 2.1 Introduction
- 2.2 Methods
- 2.3 Results
- 2.4 Discussion
- 2.5 References
- 2.6 Tables
- 2.7 Figures
3.0 Appendixes
- 3.1 Extended literature review
- 3.2 Additional methodology
- 3.3 Additional results
- 3.4 Other additional materials
4.0 One-page curriculum vitae
How can this format overcome the limitations of the chapter style? For both master's and doctoral students, a manuscript (body of the thesis or dissertation, IMRD) is developed that is ready for journal submission. All that remains is to add the title page and abstract, and the paper can be sent to a suitable journal.
The advantage of the journal format for doctoral students should be apparent. Because PhD recipients who fail to publish their dissertations within two years are unlikely to publish afterward, a more functional format encourages publication. Especially when we consider that dissertations appear to make important contributions to knowledge, the evaluation and subsequent publication of that knowledge through refereed journals is an important step. Although master's theses are not as likely as dissertations to be published, any format that encourages the publication of quality thesis work is desirable.
We want to make one final point before proceeding to the structure of the journal format: Your graduate school probably requires that the thesis or dissertation follow a standard style manual (or at least the style of a journal). The three most common are the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (American Psychological Association, 2010),American Physiological Society style(Curran-Everett & Benos, 2004), and The Chicago Manual of Style (University of Chicago Press, 2010).The journal format adapts nicely to any of these styles. University regulations usually do not specify a particular style, but frequently, an academic department may adopt one or two styles. If the journal format is to be used, a department might want to allow more than one style. For example, many journals reporting exercise physiology and biomechanical studies use the American Physiological Society style. Journals publishing articles in motor behavior, sport psychology and sociology, and professional preparation frequently use the APA manual. Journals that publish articles on the history and philosophy of sport frequently use The Chicago Manual of Style. Graduate students benefit considerably by having the flexibility to choose the style recommended by the journal to which the paper will be submitted.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Choosing the right participants for your study
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study.
Describing Participants
This section of the method of a thesis or dissertation describes how and why the participants were selected and which of their characteristics are pertinent to the study. These are questions to consider when selecting participants:
- Are participants with special characteristics necessary for your research?
- Age (children, elderly)
- Sex (females, males, or both)
- Level of training (trained or untrained)
- Level of performance (experts or novices)
- Size (weight, fatness)
- Special types (athletes, cyclists, runners)
- Can you obtain the necessary permission and cooperation from the participants?
- Can you find enough participants?
Of course, you want to select participants who will respond to the treatments and measures used in the study. For example, if you want to see the results of training a group of children in overhand throwing, selecting expert 12-year-old baseball pitchers as participants will not likely produce a change in measures of throwing outcome. An intense, long-term training program would be required to have any influence on these participants. Selecting children who are soccer players and have never played organized baseball would offer better odds for a training program to produce changes.
In experimental research, the interactions among participants, measures, and the nature of the treatment program are essential in allowing the treatment program to have a chance to work (Thomas, Lochbaum, Landers, & He, 1997). If you select participants who have high levels of physical fitness, subjecting them to a moderate training program will not produce changes in fitness. Also, participants high in physical fitness will have a small range of scores on a measure of cardiorespiratory endurance (e.g., O2max). For example, you will not find a significant correlation between O2max and marathon performance in world-class marathon runners. Their range of scores in O2max is small, as is their range of scores in marathon performance times. Because the range of scores is small in both measures, no significant correlation will be found. This result does not mean that running performance and cardiorespiratory endurance are not related. It means that you have restricted the range of participants' performance so much that the correlation cannot be exhibited. If you had selected moderately trained runners (e.g., women who jog three times per week for 40 min each time), a significant correlation would be found between running performance on a 5K run and O2max. (We discuss procedures for selecting sample participants in chapter 6.)
Participants, measures, and treatment programs are interrelated. Be sure to choose participants who will respond to the treatment program and have a broad enough range of results when measured with the chosen techniques.
You may have to offer something to the participants to make being in the study worthwhile.
What to Tell About the Participants
The exact number of participants should be given, as should any loss of participants during the time of study. In the proposal, some of this information may not be exact. For example, the following might describe the potential participants:
Participants: For this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, will be randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained distance runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who have been competitive runners for at least 2 years. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
After the study is completed, details are available on the participants, so now this section might read as follows:
Participants: In this study, 48 males, ranging in age from 21 to 34 years, were randomly selected from a group (N = 147) of well-trained runners (O2max = 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher) who had been competitive runners for at least 2 years. The participants had the following characteristics (standard deviations in parentheses): age, M = 26 years (3.3); height, M = 172.5 cm (7.5); weight, M = 66.9 kg (8.7); and O2max, M = 65 ml · kg · min - 1 (4.2). Participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 12).
The participant characteristics listed are extremely pertinent in an exercise physiology study but not at all pertinent, for example, in a study of equipment used by children on the playground. The nature of the research dictates the participant characteristics of interest to the researcher. Carefully think through the characteristics that you will report in your research. Look at related studies for ideas about important characteristics to report.
The characteristics of participants that you identify and report must be clearly specified. Note in the example that well-trained runners were exactly defined; that is, their O2max must be equal to 60 ml · kg · min - 1 or higher. When participants of different ages are to be used is another good example. Saying only that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be the participants is not sufficient. How wide is the age range for 7-year-olds? Is it ±1 month, ±6 months, or what? In the proposal, you may say that 7-, 9-, and 11-year-olds will be included in the study. At the time of testing, each age will be limited to a range of ±6 months. Then, when the thesis or dissertation is written, it may read as follows:
At each age level, 15 children were selected for this study. The mean ages are as follows (standard deviations in parentheses): the youngest group, 7.1 years (4.4 months); 9-year-olds, 9.2 years (3.9 months); and the oldest group, 11.2 years (4.1 months).
A graduate student we know was in his committee meeting when a faculty member on his committee asked him to describe one of his participants. The student said, "Hewas 6 feet tall, had brown hair and a beard, and trained regularly by distance running." The really sharp faculty member then asked, "Was this a male or female?" to which the student was unable to respond because of laughter.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
How to wade through research jargon
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation.
Reading Research
Someone once said (facetiously) that scientific papers are meant not to be read but to be published. Unfortunately, we find considerable truth in this observation. We writers are often guilty of trying to use language to dazzle the reader and perhaps to give the impression that our subject matter is more esoteric than it really is. We tend to write for the benefit of a rather small number of readers - that is, other researchers in our field.
We have the problem of jargon, of course. In any field, whether it is physics, football, or cake baking, jargon confounds the outsider. The use of jargon serves as a kind of shorthand. It provides meaning to the people within the field because everyone uses those words in the same context. Research literature is famous for using a three-dollar word when a nickel word would do. As Day and Gastel (2006, p. 200)asked, what self-respecting writer would use a three-letter word such as now when he or she could use the elegant expression at this point in time? Researchers never do anything, they perform it; they never start, they initiate; and they terminate instead of end. Day and Gastel further remarked that an occasional author slips and uses the word drug, but most salivate like Pavlov's dogs in anticipation of using chemotherapeutic agent.
The need to bridge the gap between the researcher and the practitioner has been recognized for years. For example, the Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance has a feature called "Research Works," which disseminates applied research information to teachers, coaches, and fitness and recreation leaders. The website for the American Kinesiology Association (www.americankinesiology.org) regularly has a section on applied research. Yet despite these and other attempts to bridge the gap between researchers and practitioners, the gap is still imposing.
It goes without saying that if you are not knowledgeable about the subject matter, you cannot read the research literature. Conversely, if you know the subject matter, you can probably wade through the researcher's jargon more effectively. For example, if you know baseball and the researcher is recommending that by shortening the radius, the hitter can increase the angular velocity, you can figure out that the researcher means to choke up on the bat.
One of the big stumbling blocks is the statistical analysis part of research reports. Even the most ardent seeker of knowledge can be turned off by such descriptions as this: "The tetrachoric correlations among the test variables were subjected to a centroid factor analysis, and orthogonal rotations of the primary axes were accomplished by Zimmerman's graphical method until simple structure and positive manifold were closely approximated." Please note that we are not criticizing the authors for such descriptions, because reviewers and editors usually require them. We are just acknowledging that statistical analysis is frightening to someone who is trying to read a research article and does not know a factor analysis from a volleyball. The widespread use of computers and "computerese" probably compounds the mystery associated with statistics. Many people believe anything that comes out of a computer. Others are more old-fashioned and check the computer's accuracy with their calculators. A classic, yet fictional, case of a computer mistake occurred in a high school in which the computer printed the students' locker numbers in the column where their IQs were supposed to go. It is classic because no one noticed the error at the time, but at the end of the year the students with the highest locker numbers got the best grades.
How to Read Research
Despite all the hurdles that loom in the practitioner's path when reading research, we contend that you can read and profit from (usually not materially, but then consider the data on the new Speedo swimsuit and its influence on the 2008 swimming results in Beijing)the research literature even if you are not well grounded in research techniques and statistical analysis. We would like to contend that after you read this book, you will be able to read any journal in any field, but the publisher would not let us say that. We offer the following suggestions on reading the research literature:
- Become familiar with a few publications that contain pertinent research in your field. You might get some help on choosing the publications from a professor or librarian.
- Read only studies that are of interest to you. This point may sound too trite to mention, but some people feel obligated to wade through every article.
- Read as a practitioner would. Do not look for eternal truths. Look for ideas and indications. No study is proof of anything. Only when it has been verified repeatedly does it constitute knowledge.
- Read the abstract first. This saves time by helping you determine whether you wish to read the whole thing. If you are still interested, then you can read the study to gain a better understanding of the methodology and the interpretations, but do not get bogged down with details.
- Do not be too concerned about statistical significance. Understanding the concept of significance certainly helps, but a little common sense serves you about as well as knowing the difference between the .02 and the .01 levels, or a one-tailed test versus a two-tailed test. Think in terms of meaningfulness. For example, if two methods of teaching bowling result in an average difference of 0.5 pins, what does it matter whether the difference is significant? On the other hand, if a big difference is present but not significant, further investigation is warranted, especially if the study involved a small number of participants. Knowing the concepts of the types of statistical analysis is certainly helpful, but it is not crucial to being able to read a study. Just skip that part.
- Be critical but objective. You can usually assume that a national research journal selects studies for publication by the jury method. Two or three qualified people read and judge the relevance of the problem, the validity and reliability of the procedures, the efficacy of the experimental design, and the appropriateness of the statistical analysis. Certainly, some studies are published that should not be. Yet if you are not an expert in research, you do not need to be suspicious about the scientific worth of a study that appears in a recognized journal. If it is too far removed from any practical application to your situation, do not read it.
You will find that the more you read, the more you understand, simply because you become more familiar with the language and the methodology, like the man who was thrilled to learn he had been speaking prose all his life.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Formatting for journal publications
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report.
Structure of the Journal Format
To develop a better model for theses and dissertations, we must overcome the limitations of the chapter format for reporting while maintaining the contents of a complete research report. The format that we suggest has three major parts. Preliminary materials include such items as the title page, table of contents, acknowledgments, and abstract. The body of the thesis and dissertation is a complete manuscript prepared in journal form. Included are the standard parts of a research report, such as the introduction, methods, results, discussion, references, figures, and tables. The appendixes often include a more thorough literature review, additional detail about methods, and additional results not placed in the body of the thesis or dissertation.
Journal style (IMRD) in theses and dissertations is appropriate when the goal is publication as an article in a journal, which should be the goal for all scientific studies. There are exceptions, however; the traditional chapter format may be appropriate for studies of the history or philosophy of sport because the likely publication would be in book form. Also, some modification of the IMRD format may be best for areas such as the sociology of sport.
Following are the parts of the thesis and dissertation for quantitative studies using the journal format:
1.0 Preliminary materials
- 1.1 Title Page
- 1.2 Acknowledgments
- 1.3 Abstract
- 1.4 Table of contents
- 1.5 List of tables
- 1.6 List of figures
2.0 Body of the thesis or dissertation (IMRD)
- 2.1 Introduction
- 2.2 Methods
- 2.3 Results
- 2.4 Discussion
- 2.5 References
- 2.6 Tables
- 2.7 Figures
3.0 Appendixes
- 3.1 Extended literature review
- 3.2 Additional methodology
- 3.3 Additional results
- 3.4 Other additional materials
4.0 One-page curriculum vitae
How can this format overcome the limitations of the chapter style? For both master's and doctoral students, a manuscript (body of the thesis or dissertation, IMRD) is developed that is ready for journal submission. All that remains is to add the title page and abstract, and the paper can be sent to a suitable journal.
The advantage of the journal format for doctoral students should be apparent. Because PhD recipients who fail to publish their dissertations within two years are unlikely to publish afterward, a more functional format encourages publication. Especially when we consider that dissertations appear to make important contributions to knowledge, the evaluation and subsequent publication of that knowledge through refereed journals is an important step. Although master's theses are not as likely as dissertations to be published, any format that encourages the publication of quality thesis work is desirable.
We want to make one final point before proceeding to the structure of the journal format: Your graduate school probably requires that the thesis or dissertation follow a standard style manual (or at least the style of a journal). The three most common are the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (American Psychological Association, 2010),American Physiological Society style(Curran-Everett & Benos, 2004), and The Chicago Manual of Style (University of Chicago Press, 2010).The journal format adapts nicely to any of these styles. University regulations usually do not specify a particular style, but frequently, an academic department may adopt one or two styles. If the journal format is to be used, a department might want to allow more than one style. For example, many journals reporting exercise physiology and biomechanical studies use the American Physiological Society style. Journals publishing articles in motor behavior, sport psychology and sociology, and professional preparation frequently use the APA manual. Journals that publish articles on the history and philosophy of sport frequently use The Chicago Manual of Style. Graduate students benefit considerably by having the flexibility to choose the style recommended by the journal to which the paper will be submitted.
Learn more about Research Methods in Physical Activity.
Related Books
