Cross Sectional Research Methods

Words: 1374
Pages: 6

The purpose of the study done by Nyamathi et al. (2014) was to highlight some potential predictors of hostility among recently homeless men on parole. The authors wanted to highlight a need to understand potential predictors of hostility and how it is connected to recidivism. The research design used in this study was a cross sectional research design. Cross sectional research designs look at one group at one particular point in time (Maxfield & Babbie, 2012). The authors collected data from an intervention used for recently released incarcerated men. The men were analyzed to measure correlates of hostility (Nyamathi et al, 2014). This study was approved by the Institutional Human Subjects Committee. Data collected was from February 2010 to …show more content…
The first independent variable was coping behaviors. Coping behaviors was measured using 6 subscales of the Brief Cope. “The six 2-item subscales were self-blame coping, denial coping, disengagement coping, planning coping, instrumental support coping and religious coping” (Nyamathi et al, 2014, 100). A 4-point Likert scale was used to measure the items. Second are childhood family relationships. This variable was measured using a 5-point scale. This was measured by asking about the closeness of family. This includes whether the respondent was raised in a 2 parent home and if their parents were ever treated for any alcohol or drug problems (Nyamathi et al, …show more content…
The first weakness was the use of a cross sectional research design. The purpose of the study was to look at possible indicators of hostility and how those indicators may be related to recidivism. Testing that using a cross sectional research design may have not been ideal because it prevents causal inferences. Typically the aim for cross sectional designs is “to understand casual processes that occur over time, but the conclusions are based on observations made at only one time” (Maxfield & Babbie, 2012, 66). Using a longitudinal research design might have been better.
The second weakness was the sampling. This was a convenience sample. The authors used these specific men from the RDT facility because it was convenient for the study and for the research being conducted. The third weakness is generalizability. The study was done in one clinic in Los Angeles. The findings cannot be generalized to other homeless parolees in other cities in the United States. Reliability issues are present in this study. There is the question of whether or not other cities or clinics will have the same results (Maxfield & Babbie, 2012). This study should be replicated to see if the results would be the same in another city or clinic. The sample only consisted of men so it creates another weakness of this method. The findings cannot be generalized to women who are on parole and who are homeless. With all the weaknesses