Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Research in Nursing
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pryjmachuk, S.
Right arrow Articles by Richards, D. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Look before you leap and don’t put all your eggs in one basket

The need for caution and prudence in quantitative data analysis

Steven Pryjmachuk

School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester

David A. Richards

Department of Health Sciences, University of York

This paper’s aim is to draw attention to the pitfalls that novice and, sometimes, experienced researchers fall into when undertaking quantitative data analysis in the health and social sciences, and to offer some guidance as to how such pitfalls might be avoided.

Many health and social science students are routinely instructed that the procedure for undertaking data analysis in quantitative research is as follows: specify hypotheses; collect data and enter it into a computerised statistical package; run various statistical procedures; examine the computer outputs for p-values that are statistically significant. If significant differences are found, jubilation often exists because statistically significant results are deemed to be a clear indicator that something worthwhile (and publishable) has been discovered. This paper argues that this approach has two major oversights: a failure to explore the raw data prior to analysis and an overdependence on p-values. Both of these oversights are routinely present in much health and social-science research, and both create problems for scientific rigour.

Researchers need to exercise caution (‘look before you leap’) and prudence (‘don’t put all your eggs in one basket’) when undertaking quantitative data analyses. Caution demands that, prior to full data analysis, researchers employ procedures such as data cleaning, data screening and exploratory data analysis. Prudence demands that researchers see p-values for their true worth, which exists only within the context of statistical theory, confidence intervals, effect sizes and the absolute meaning of statistical significance.

Key Words: statistics • research methods • quantitative approaches • statistical significance • exploratory data analysis

Journal of Research in Nursing, Vol. 12, No. 1, 43-54 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1744987106070260


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?