4 Comparing and Contrasting Reporting Standards

Comparing and Contrasting Reporting Standards

The sources emphasize that while some reporting standards, such as those for abstracts and introductions, are consistent across all research types, others differ substantially between quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research. These differences in reporting standards reflect the distinct aims, methodologies, and philosophical underpinnings of each research tradition.

Quantitative Research Reporting Standards (JARS-Quant)

• Focus on Objectivity and Measurement: JARS-Quant prioritizes objectivity, precision, and the use of standardized measures. The emphasis is on quantifying observations, controlling for extraneous variables, and drawing inferences based on statistical analysis.
• Detailed Description of Methodology: JARS-Quant requires a thorough description of participant characteristics, sampling procedures, measures and covariates, data collection protocols, data diagnostics, and analytic strategies. This meticulous documentation facilitates replication and allows readers to critically evaluate the rigor and validity of the study.
• Emphasis on Statistical Analysis: JARS-Quant necessitates reporting effect sizes, confidence intervals, and the results of inferential statistical tests. These reporting elements move beyond simply stating whether a finding is statistically significant to convey the practical significance and the level of uncertainty associated with the findings.
• Transparency and Replication: JARS-Quant strongly encourages data sharing, allowing other researchers to reanalyze the data, assess the robustness of the findings, and potentially conduct further research. This practice aligns with the principles of open science and promotes the cumulative nature of scientific knowledge.

Qualitative Research Reporting Standards (JARS-Qual)

• Emphasis on Context and Interpretation: JARS-Qual acknowledges the influence of context, researcher perspectives, and the dynamic nature of qualitative inquiry. The focus is on understanding the participants’ subjective experiences and interpreting the meaning of their perspectives within specific social and cultural contexts.
• Rich Description of Setting and Participants: JARS-Qual emphasizes reporting participant characteristics, researcher-participant relationships, recruitment processes, and data collection contexts. This rich description provides a nuanced understanding of the participants’ lived experiences and the factors that might shape their perspectives.
• Transparency of Analytic Procedures: JARS-Qual calls for a detailed explanation of the analytic strategies used, including coding methods, thematic analysis, and the use of software. This transparency allows readers to understand how the researchers derived their interpretations from the data and to assess the trustworthiness of the findings.
• Demonstrating Methodological Integrity: JARS-Qual highlights the importance of demonstrating methodological integrity, emphasizing the trustworthiness, credibility, and transferability of the findings. Researchers are encouraged to address potential biases, acknowledge the limitations of their study, and provide evidence to support the validity of their interpretations.

Mixed Methods Research Reporting Standards (JARS-Mixed)

• Integration of Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches: JARS-Mixed emphasizes the need for clear justification for using a mixed methods approach and a comprehensive description of the specific mixed methods design employed. It requires authors to clearly articulate how the integration of qualitative and quantitative data enhances the study’s findings.
• Distinct Reporting for Each Strand: JARS-Mixed recommends separate sections for reporting qualitative findings, quantitative results, and the integrated mixed methods findings. This approach ensures clarity and allows readers to understand the unique contributions of each research strand.
• Transparency in Data Integration: JARS-Mixed calls for a clear explanation of how the qualitative and quantitative data were integrated, whether through merging, connecting, or embedding the data. This transparency helps readers understand how the researchers combined different data sources and drew conclusions based on the integrated findings.
• Emphasis on Added Value: JARS-Mixed stresses that the combined findings should offer a more comprehensive and insightful understanding of the research problem than either approach alone. Researchers need to justify the use of a mixed methods approach by demonstrating how it leads to a deeper and more nuanced understanding of the phenomenon under investigation.