Introduction
As part of the study’s research design and methodology, the covered areas in this section include determining the target population and identifying the sample of the study, the recruitment of participants based on ideal sampling strategies, and the data collection methods.
Research Population
Elmes, Kantowitz, and Roediger, define a population as the entire group of subjects that meet the set conditions, including the whole group of people that is important to the researcher and to whom the results of the study can be applicable (2011, p.25). The population for this research comprises of all adolescent girls aged between 10 and 19 years and with an identified tendency to self-harm.
The inclusion criteria
For this study, every female with a history of self-harm aged between 10 and 19 years will be an eligible participant. For one group researcher will include self-harm patients who are currently undergoing an intervention program as will provide the comparison parameters necessary for the research. In the second group, there will be Self-harm patients who are receiving group therapy as they would help determine whether or not group therapy is more effective than the identified intervention methods defined above. Finally, all underage respondents need a written and valid consent from parents before participation.
The exclusion criteria
Foremost, respondents who lack medical evidence of self-harm cannot participate as they will lack the validity required for the sample group. Secondly, since self-harm patients who are not receiving any form of therapy will not be able to provide the necessary information for this research, they are also set for exclusion. Next, while any male self-harm patient cannot participate as the study focuses on female adolescents, the study will exclude underage respondents without a written and valid consent from parents as part of the ethical considerations that the researcher will uphold.
Recruitment Strategies
The recruitment methods identified in Green et al. (2011) revolves around the eligibility of respondents to the study’s objectives (p.5). Similarly, Sadeh et al. employed feasible and valid strategies in the identification and recruitment of eligible persons to their study on Functions of Non-suicidal Self-injury by finding participants in “an outpatient psychotherapy clinic” specializing in their area of interest (2014, p.218). Finally, Slee et al. recorded a 17% withdrawal rate as participants withdrew from the study for one reason or another, while others failed to adhere to treatment (2008, p.209).
The Sample
Elmes, Kantowitz, and Roediger (2011) define a sample as the representation of the target population for whom one designs the research question[s] in a study (p.119). Hence, the sample in this study will encompass a portion of the respondents that meet the inclusion criteria mentioned above. With proper selection methods, the sample will be able to provide data as representatives of the rest of the population.
Concurrently, since the researcher aims to distribute questionnaires to participants, this study will use non-probability sampling, otherwise dubbed convenience sampling. Not every adolescent girl who self-harms herself will have an equal chance to participate because there is no census of all self-harming girls, aged between 10 and 19 years, who live in the target area. Consequently, there is no sampling frame from which the researcher can draw randomly and ensure that every adolescent girl who self-harms herself has a chance of inclusion in the sample. Accordingly, the researcher will combine the convenience techniques that will ensure the privacy of every respondent. For example, confidential meetings will certainly put the respondents at ease as opposed to group discussions, which can also help others, especially so when they realize there are others who self-harm and become more willing to share their experiences. After all, people respond to different incentives.
First, the researcher will seek the assistance of therapists and other hospital personnel in identified facilities to determine potential participants. The selection of possible participants will come after the use of the inclusion criteria to distinguish the most eligible respondents from the pre-selected group. Next, the researcher will explain the study to the prospective participants who make it to the short-list and ask them personally if they are willing to participate in the same. As part of the ethical considerations, the underage respondents will receive letters of consent for their parents to sign and an explanation of the study’s objectives will be part of the missives. Finally, the researcher will identify those willing to engage in focus group discussions along with those who would rather respond to questions through in-person interviews.
Data Collection Methods
Elmes, Kantowitz, and Roediger define data as the “facts” that allow the development of theoretical explanations (2011, p.7). This research will use questionnaires to obtain data appropriate for the research questions and the study’s objectives. Every individual that meets the conditions of the inclusion criteria will receive a letter with an explanation of the study, a consent form [to be signed by parents in case the respondent is underage], and a questionnaire. Where needed, the researcher will email scanned copies of the surveys to the respondents.
Advantages of questionnaires in this study
Participants will have the chance to enter responses in private while saving the researcher’s time as they do not need supervision. On a similar note, respondents will have the benefit of anonymity, and that would help them give truthful answers without fear of condemnation and identification. Additionally, it is possible to fill in questionnaires over multiple platforms, including the emails mentioned before, and that would be less expensive compared to seeking out participants to hold personal interviews. The questionnaire is very efficient as a survey method where the adolescent respondents do not wish to have their parents and friends know their current attitudes towards self-harm. Thus, for the aims of this study, it will be feasible to collect wide-ranged data within a short period. For example, through questionnaires, one can cluster respondents into specific age groups and at the same time determine attitude trends in each one based on the variables of the study. Most importantly, the format remains constant and is safe from the researcher’s mood and personal ideologies.
Advantages of group-administered surveys and in-person interviews
The researcher will also use focus group discussions and in-person interviews with respondents to fill any loopholes in the questionnaire. A perfect illustration is evident in the fact that a written survey electronically mailed to an informant does not allow the researcher to observe the participant and gain personal insight into the matter. Thus, through the interactions availed by the given forms of discussions, data collection and understanding will be efficient. For this study, the researcher will interview participants who share common characteristics of self-harm to elicit ideas and perceptions about the issues linked to an area of interest. At the time, it is an assumption that the causes of self-harm among high school girls differ from those who are in college. However, the time at which the behavior began is relevant to the same. It is also possible to interview caregivers in hospitals for their opinion on the subject of interest.
In-person interviews and group-administered surveys are considerably cheaper that the use of written questionnaires which require much printing of multiple pages with the chances of respondents destroying them or answering them wrongly. For the participants, some need the encouragement of others to respond to posed questions while others will require the privacy of an in-person interview. Still, in group discussions, respondents will have the opportunity to react and reflect other peoples’ opinions with which they might be unaware or just disagree. All the participants and the researcher engaging in group discussions will have an opportunity to ask questions that could aid in information gathering and raise more awareness on self-harm. Informants participating as a unit will have the chance to build on the answers of others and help the researcher interpret certain observable facts. For instance, why adolescents who self-harm choose not to approach parents with their problems.
References
Elmes, D. G., Kantowitz, B. H., & Roediger H. L. (2011). Research Methods in Psychology. Massachusetts: Cengage Learning.
Green, J. M., Wood, A. J., Kerfoot, M. J., Trainor, G., Roberts, C., Rothwell, J., Woodham, A., Ayodeji, E., Barrett, B., Byford, S., & Harrington, R. (2011). Group Therapy For Adolescents With Repeated Self Harm: Randomised Controlled Trial With Economic Evaluation. The BMJ, 1-12. doi:10.1136/bmj.d682
Slee N., Garnefski N., van der Leeden, R., Arensman, E., & Spinhoven, P. (2008). Cognitive- Behavioural Intervention For Self-Harm: Randomised Controlled Trial. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 192(3), 202-211. doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.107.037564.
Sadeh N., Londahl-Shaller, E. A., Piatigorsky, A., Fordwood, S., Stuart, B.K., McNiel, D. E., Klonsky E. D., Ozer, E. M., & Yaeger, A. M. (2014). Functions Of Non-Suicidal Self- Injury In Adolescents And Young Adults With Borderline Personality Disorder Symptoms. Psychiatry Research, 216(2), 217-222.
