2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Some recommendations for the reporting of quantitative studies

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
33
0
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 70 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
33
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Computers & Education has previously published an editorial on the reporting of quantitative studies (López, Valenzuela, Nussbaum, & Tsai, 2015). Whilst the criteria used to evaluate qualitative research are different to those used to judge the quality of quantitative research (Braun & Clarke, 2006), the conduct of qualitative research should be equally rigorous as those used to judge quantitative research.…”
Section: Quality Guidelinesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Computers & Education has previously published an editorial on the reporting of quantitative studies (López, Valenzuela, Nussbaum, & Tsai, 2015). Whilst the criteria used to evaluate qualitative research are different to those used to judge the quality of quantitative research (Braun & Clarke, 2006), the conduct of qualitative research should be equally rigorous as those used to judge quantitative research.…”
Section: Quality Guidelinesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Less than 50% of the papers involve studies based on data collection over more than twelve weeks. For being generalizible the sample has to be representative (López et al, 2015) 8) Local or public institutions provide most of the funding for the research published in the papers selected in this review. This results suggests that current research is mainly conducted by scholarly, and that the private sector is not publishing in the channels (Section 3, RQ7).…”
Section: Conclusion and Limitations Of The Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Participants showed their level of agreement for all items from one indicating strong disagreement to seven indicating strong agreement. Several reliability and validity tests were implemented following prior recommendations (e.g., Letz and Gerr, 1995;López et al, 2015). Overall, no items had to be omitted.…”
Section: Measurementmentioning
confidence: 99%