Skip to Main Content

HLSV 6200: Research Methods and Design

A guide to library and other resources suggested for students in HLSR 6200

Theoretical and conceptual framing

Althanasou, J. A., Mpofu, E., Gitchel, W. D., Elias, M. J. (2012). Theoretical, conceptual and structural aspects of thesis writing. In J. G. Maree (Ed.). Complete your thesis or dissertation successfully: Practical guidelines (pp. 40-55). Cape Town: Juta and Company.
Bem, D. J. (2004). Writing the empirical journal article. In M. P. Zanna & J. M.Darley (Eds,), The compleat academic: A practical guide for beginning social scientist (2 nd ed., pp. 185-219). Washington, DC, American Psychological Association.
Campbell, M., Egan, M. T., Lorenc, T., Bond, L., Popham, F., Fenton, C.,et. al. (2014). Considering methodologial options for reviews of theory: Illustrated by a review of theories linking income and health. Systematic Reviews, 3, p. 114.
Cerniauskaite, M., Quintas, R., Boldt, C., Raggi, A., Cieza, A., Bickenbach, J. E., & Leonardi, M. (2011). Systematic literature review on ICF from 2001 to 2009: Its use, implementation and operationalisation. Disability and Rehabilitation, 33(4), 281-309.
Cochrane Collaboration (n.d.) About Cochrane reviews. https://www.cochranelibrary.com/about/about-cochrane-reviews
Elton, L. (2010). Academic writing and tacit knowledge. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(2), 151-160.
Gitchel, W. D., & Mpofu, E. (2012). Basic issues in thesis writing. In J.G. Maree (Ed.). Complete your thesis or dissertation successfully: Practical guidelines (pp. 56-68). Cape Town: Juta and Company.
Gernsbacher, M. A., & Devine, P. G. (2013). How to write a research statement. Observer, 26(78).
Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91-108.
Gray, K., & Wegner, D. M. (2014). Six guidelines for interesting research. Perspectives in Psychological Science, 8(5), 549-553. doi: 10.1177/1745691613497967.
Green, L. W. (2008). Making research relevant: If it is an evidence-based practice, where's the practice-based evidence? Family Practice, 25(suppl l), i20-i24.
Greenhalgh, T., & Peacock, R. (2005). Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: Audit of primary sources. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 331(7524), 1064-1065.
Higgins, J. P. T., & Green, S. (Eds.). (2011). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration. https://training.cochrane.org/handbook
Institute of Medicine. (2011). Finding what works in health care: Standards for systematic reviews. Washington D.C.: The National Academies Press.
Kastner, M., Anthony, J., Soobiah, C., Straus, S. E., & Tricco, A. C. (2016). Conceptual recommendations for selecting the most appropriate knowledge synthesis method to answer research questions related to complex evidence. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 73, 43-49.
Shakespeare, T. (2014). Disability Research Today: International Perspectives. New York: Routledge.
Sighn, A., Hartford, J., Schuch, H. S., Watt, R. G., Peres, M. A. (2016). Theoretical basis and explanation for the relationship between area-level social inequalities and population oral health outcomes: A scoping review. SSM Population Health, 2, 451-452.
Stimson, B. (2009). Approaches to the research process and framing the research question. ACR Research Network.
Sussman, V., Valente, T. W., Rohrbach, L. A., Skara, S., & Pentz, M. A. (2006). Translation in the health professions: Converting science into action. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 29(1), 7-31.

Formulating the research question

Writing reporting guidelines

Arskey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19-32. doi: 10.1080/1364557032000119616
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (2009). Systematic Reviews: CRD's Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Health Care. Retrieved from https://www.york.ac.uk/media/crd/Systematic_Reviews.pdf
Dilkers, M. P. J. M. for the NCDDR Task Force on Systematic Review and Guidelines. (2009). When the best is the enemy of the good: The nature of research evidence used in systematic reviews and guidelines. Austin: SEDL. Retrieved from http://ktdrr.org/ktlibrary/articles_pubs/ncddrwork/tfsr_best/
Gernsbacher, M. A. (2018). Writing empirical articles: Transparency, reproducibility, clarity and memorability. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(3), 403-414.
Hess, D. R. (2004). How to write an effective discussion. Respiratory Care, 49(10), 1238-1241. Retrieved from http://rc.rcjournal.com/content/49/10/1238.short
Kitchenbaum, B. (July, 2004). Procedures for Performing Systematic Reviews. NICTA Technical Report 004400011T.1. Retrieved from http://www.inf.ufsc.br/~aldo.vw/kitchenham.pdf
Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., Altman, D., for the CONSORT Group. (2001). The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. JAMA, 285(15), 1987-1991. doi:10.1001/jama.285.15.1987
Moher, D., Cook, D. J., Eastwood, S., Olkin, I., Rennie, D., Stroup, D. F., & QUOROM Grp. (1999). Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: The QUOROM statement. The Lancet, 354(9193), 1896-1900. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(99)04149-5
Peters, M. D., Godfrey, C. M., Khalil, Hl, McInerney, P., Parker, D., & Soares, C. B. (2015). Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare, 13(3), 141-146.
Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., Moher, D., CONSORT Grp, CONSORT Group, & for the CONSORT Group. (2010). CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Bmj, 340(7748), 698-702. doi:10.1136/bmj.c332
Silberzahn, R. et al. (2018). Many Analysts, One Data Set: Making Transparent How Variations in Analytic Choices Affect Results. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, Vol. 1(3) 337–356.
Siwek, J., & Gourlay, M. L. (2002). How to write an evidence based clinical review article. American Family Physician, 65 (2), 251-258.
Stanley, D. J. & Spence, J. R. (2018), Reproducible tables in psychology using theapaTables package. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1 (3), 415-431.
Stroup, D. F., Berlin, J. A., Morton, S. C., Olkin, I., Williamson, G. D., Rennie, D., . . . MOOSE Grp. (2000). Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: A proposal for reporting. Jama, 283(15), 2008-2012. doi:10.1001/jama.283.15.2008
Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349-357. doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
Tricco, A., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O'Brien, K., Colquhoun, H., Kastner, M., . . . Straus, S. (2016). A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews. Bmc Medical Research Methodology, 16(1), 1-10. doi:10.1186/s12874-016-0116-4
Uman, L. S. (2011). Systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 20(1). 57.
Von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Egger, M., Pocock, S. J., Gotzsche, & Vandenbroucke, J. P. (2008). The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 61, 344-349.
Zaza, S., Wright-De Agüero, L. K., Briss, P. A., Truman, B. I., Hopkins, D. P., Hennessy, M. H., Sosin, D. M., et. al. (2000). Data collection instrument and procedure for systematic reviews in the guide to community preventive services. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 18(1), 44-74. doi:10.1016/S0749-3797(99)00122-1

Research design

Emerging technology innovation trails

Macefield, R. (2009). How to specify the participant group size for usability studies: a practitioner's guide. Journal of Usability Studies, 5(1), 34-45.
Guest, G., Namey, E., & McKenna, K. (2017). How many focus groups are enough? building an evidence base for nonprobability sample sizes. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications. doi:10.1177/1525822X16639015
Rouder, J. N., & Haaf, J. M. (2018). Power, dominance, and constraint: A note on the appeal of different design traditions. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(1), 19-26. Retrieved from link
Turner, C. W., Lewis, J. R., & Nielson, J. (2003). Determining usability test sample size in usability testing. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 35(3): 379-383.
Faulkner, L. (2003). Beyond the five-user assumption: Benefits of increased sample size in usability testing. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35: 379. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195514
Woolrych, A. & Cockton, G. (2001). Why and when five test users aren't enough. In IHM-HCI 2001 Conference. Toulouse, France: Cepadeus.
Nielson, J. (2000). Alertbox: Why you only need to test with 5 users. Retrieved from: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/why-you-only-need-to-test-with-5-users/

Systematic review models from the literature

Software

processmacro.org - PROCESS macro for mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis for SPSS and SAS
Huisman, M., & van Dijin, M. A. J., Software for Social Network Analysis In Carrington, P.J., Scott, J., and Wasserman,
S. (Eds.) (2005), ‘Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis’, pp. 270-316, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from link
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. (2009). Statistical power analyses using GPower 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149-1160. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
Meta-analysis comprehensive software -- www.meta-analysis.com

UNT: Apply now UNT: Schedule a tour UNT: Get more info about the University of North Texas

UNT: Disclaimer | UNT: AA/EOE/ADA | UNT: Privacy | UNT: Electronic Accessibility | UNT: Required Links | UNT: UNT Home