Skip to main content

Abstract

In the social sciences different graphical methods have been developed to represent research designs. The chapter starts with a review of some of these methods: figures often turn out to be ambiguous, in particular where the interpretation of the arrows between nodes is concerned. Furthermore, rendering the placement in time of the various operations stays mostly implicit, while indication of strategy is not depicted graphically. A functional notation is sketched which allows the drawing of well-defined diagrams using a graphical node-and-arrow language. An alternative to the representation of an experimental design is given first and, at the end, a diagram of an actual survey study. Finally, the consequences for various fields are discussed. This kind of diagramming could be beneficially used in methodological consultation and education. Modelling meta data and meta analysis are other potential application fields.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adèr, H.J. (1995). Methodological knowledge: Notation and implementation in expert systems. Phd thesis, University of Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  2. Eveline Bleiker, E., Van der Ploeg, H.M., Adèr, H.J., Van Daal, W.A.J. and Hendriks, J.H.C.L. (1995). Personality traits of women with breast cancer: Before and after diagnosis. Psychological Reports 76:1139–1146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cook, T.D. and Campbell, D.T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: RandMcNally.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dube, R. and Weiss, S.M. (1989). A state transition model for building rule-based systems. International Journal of Expert Systems 2(3/4):291–329.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Genesereth, M.R. and Nillson, N.J. (1987). Logical foundations of artificial intelligence. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Judd, C.M., Smith, E.R. and Kidder, L.H. (1991). Research methods in social relations. (6th edn). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Stenning, K. and Inder, R. (1995). Applying semantic concepts to analyzing media and modalities. In J. Glasgow, N.H. Narayanan, and B. Chandrasekaran (Eds), Diagrammatic reasoning: Cognitive and computational perspectives, Ch. 10. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press /MIT Press,

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sewel Wright, S. (1934). The method of path coefficients. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 5:161–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Adèr, H.J. (2002). Diagramming Research Designs. In: Anderson, M., Meyer, B., Olivier, P. (eds) Diagrammatic Representation and Reasoning. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0109-3_27

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0109-3_27

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-85233-242-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-0109-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics