PLEASE CAN YOU ASSIST IN RESPONSE TO A STUDENT DISCUSSION BELOW. THANKS

My research question was about attraction to violence in televised media. As we all did it was a quantitative study using Likert scales to measure the participants emotional effects, boredom, interest, excitement, etc., after watching a mildly violent video and then a nature video. When thinking about how to conduct this study in a more qualitative style I can use interviews, observations, or both. By using interviews I could ask general questions about their viewing habits and preferences. I could add the videos back in and then use more of an open ended question format afterwards. By using observation I could observe participants as they watch the videos and see if they have any behavioral changes or changes to body language. If I chose to use both ways I could just combine the two by observing while they are watching and then interviewing them after they are done.

The strengths of a design like this compared to a qualitative one is with observation, especially if they are not aware, you get more realistic reactions instead of a question they have time to think about an answer too. However, if the participants are aware of the observation they could be more stiff and react less or more. An interview allows the participants to be more vocal about their answers and provide a more in-depth realization into why they felt that way. However, this also allows for possible falsification of answers, they overthink the answer, or try to answer in such a way they may think is beneficial.