I must confess I really like what we are having students do in week two's discussion - where we are asking students to review and article by using answering a list of questions that tease out the key components of the research approach utilized in the article chosen. We will be discussing research design more formally in later sections of this lab, but these questions are a fantastic precursor for those discussions.
I teach research design and it is honestly one of my favorite courses to teach. This list of questions clearly helps the reader understand *what* is being done and *why* certain design elements or parts of the study were utilized. This list of questions gets at that issue of 'Alignment' (a term, by the way, I borrowed from Walden's residencies) in one's research design.
If we find, after having run through these questions, that our answers don't make sense (e.g. the gap in the literature does not 'match' with the research questions being asked or the variables being measured), we know the study lacks in alignment and may be questionable in design.
In my research design classes, I introduce this overall issue of alignment in the research process because it can be a very helpful road map for understanding a given study. If you attend a Walden residency in the future, you will likely come across this term of ‘alignment’. At times, we may find ourselves wondering why, for example, a particular researcher chose the questions, variables, measures, sample, or analyses he/she chose. Careful consideration of these individual study parts can reveal that all of these parts *should* be connected to the social problem and the gap in the literature that initiated the study in the first place! It is just like a puzzle and can (hopefully) be pieced together.
AES
Thank you for the interesting post, Dr. Amy!
ReplyDeleteI have not heard the term "alignment" used this way before, but it makes a great deal of sense, particularly in the realm of qualitative and mixed methods studies. I'm taking the Qualitative Analysis class this term as well, and in reviewing the syllabus, found I am to develop a research design and IRB proposal for a qualitative study in health psychology (my major at present).
I've actually been looking at the ramifications of an action-research study I feel is very much needed. In California, we have had medical marijuana laws in place longer than anywhere else in the country, but as far as I can tell, no one has done a study of the actual, lived experiences of chronic pain patients using marijuana to address their pain needs. I've seen considerable research from Europe and from Canada demonstrating the efficacy of cannabinoids for treating chronic pain, particularly the neuropathic forms that do not respond well to opiates.
But most of the articles I've seen published by the APA, particularly in their _Monitor_ magazine focus exclusively on medical marijuana as a drug of abuse, and make the strong implication that the "explosion" in chronic pain patients seeking medical marijuana licenses represents drug users simply trying to sidestep legalization issues to get high. So far, I have not seen anything reporting on the fact that most chronic pain sufferers are undertreated for their pain symptoms because of the regulation of opiate medications (and the fact they don't work for some kinds of pain at all), and the reluctance of doctors to prescribe them to patients who have become substance abusers to bridge the gap.
Chronic pain users have typically used two main drugs to bridge the pain gap--alcohol and marijuana--one legal and the other illegal. Both give additional relief from pain allowing users to function better; however, alcohol (the legal drug) is far more addicting and much worse in long-term impact on the body and brain than is marijuana (the illegal drug).
So, to my mind, the chronic pain population who chooses to use medical marijuana may well be doing so to mitigate pain other treatments do not manage well, rather than doing it for the purposes of abuse. From discussions with local dispensary owners and others in this "invisible community," a good bit of research and knowledge exists on the effects of particular cultivars and preparations of the plant to meet the specific needs of pain relief without cognitive distortion (by removing or lowering the THC levels).
So my alignment here is to make the experiences of the chronic pain users of medical marijuana more visible in a respectful way, rather than dismissively assuming they must be drug abusers because they've chosen this method of healing. Secondly, I really want to get an alternative point of view out in the APA community that counters the substance abuse-only perspective I've heard so far. I've written letters to the editor on this subject, but I believe it deserves more focused effort.
The hilarious part in all this is that I am a chronic pain patient, but have never used marijuana. I simply want to see social justice served here.
Does this sound like a research proposal that has merit to you? I realize that I have a long way to go toward defining the study structure, etc., but I see a need I'd like to fill.
Thanks,
Michael
Hi Michael,
ReplyDeleteIt does indeed sound like you have identified a social issue with a corresponding literature gap. Good job; this is no small task ;-)
Keep in mind that if there is not an abundance of literature in your immediate topic, you can step out, if you will, to the next/related body of research (e.g. picture concentric circles, your topic starting in the smallest, center most circle). Therefore, while there may not be a lot of research on the medical marijuana - chronic pain relationship, there may very well be appropriate and useful research in the medical-marijuana - cancer research.
Does this make sense?
AES
Hi, Dr. Amy,
ReplyDeleteYes, it makes sense; however, the linkage between medical marijuana and cancer pain is pretty well established as a treatment. It has been the extension of medical marijuana coverage to other forms of chronic pain that has triggered such controversy, in part because chronic pain is often an "invisible disability" to outside observers. Thus, it becomes very easy to judge with bias against people opting for this form of treatment without attempting to find out *why* they are doing so.
I'm still in the really early stages of looking at this, partly as work for the qualitative psychology class. I need to do a more detailed literature review, if I choose to pursue it seriously. Or, more seriously.
Michael