Putting the Quantitative Pieces Together to Maximize the Possibilities for a Successful Project

  • Robert M. Capraro
  • Ali Bicer
  • Yujin Lee
  • Katherine Vela
Part of the Research in Mathematics Education book series (RME)


In this chapter, the authors outline key steps and considerations to take into account when entering into the realm of quantitative research. The primary question guiding this chapter is the following: “How does one conduct quality quantitative research as a novice researcher?” Several equally important questions are subsumed within this general question, such as “What are the first steps to conducting quantitative research?” and “What are the best statistical methods to use?” The authors address each of these questions based on their experience with quantitative research in academia. The authors include senior and junior professors as well as senior doctoral students, each of whom began their research career with as many questions and concerns as any novice beginning their research journey is likely to have. That said, the authors aim to help novice researchers explore how quantitative research in mathematics education requires several sequential and coordinated steps and to outline tips and precautions to take as well.


Quantitative research design Quantitative statistical analysis Novice researchers Mathematics educational research 


  1. Belia, S., Fidler, F., Williams, J., & Cumming, G. (2005). Researchers misunderstand confidence intervals and standard error bars. Psychological Methods, 10, 389–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bicer, A., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2017). Hispanic students’ mathematics achievement in the context of their high school types as STEM and non-STEM schools. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 49, 705–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Byrd, J. K. (2007). A call for statistical reform in EAQ. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43, 381–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cohen, J. (1994). The earth is round (p < 0.05). American Psychologist, 49, 997–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Hofmann, D. A. (1997). An Overview of the Logic and Rationale of Hierarchical Linear Models. Journal of Management, 23, 723–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jonker, J., & Pennink, B. (2010). The essence of research methodology: A concise guide for master and PhD students in management science. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.Google Scholar
  9. Kichuk, S. L., & Wiesner, W. H. (1998). Work teams: Selecting members for optimal performance. Canadian Psychology, 39(12), 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kirk, R. E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whose time has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 746–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lei, P. W., & Wu, Q. (2007). Introduction to structural equation modeling: Issues and practical considerations. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 26(3), 33–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Neu, W. A. (2015). Social cues of (un)trustworthy team members. Journal of Marketing Education, 37(1), 36–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Padilla, M. A., & Thompson, J. N. (2016). Burning out faculty at doctoral research universities. Stress and Health, 32, 551–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Silvia, C. (2018). Picking the team: A preliminary experimental study of the activation of collaborative network members. Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory, 28(1), 120–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Terjesen, S., Hessels, J., & Li, D. (2016). Comparative international entrepreneurship: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 42(1), 299–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Thompson, B. (2001). Significance, effect sizes, stepwise methods, and other issues: Strong arguments move the field. Journal of Experimental Education, 70(1), 80–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Thompson, B. (2002). “Statistical”, “practical”, and “clinical”: How many kinds of significance do counselors need to consider? Journal of Counseling & Development, 80(1), 64–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Thompson, B. (2007). Effect sizes, confidence intervals, and confidence intervals for effect sizes. Psychology in the Schools, 44, 423–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Trusty, J., Thompson, B., & Petrocelli, J. V. (2004). Practical guide for reporting effect size in quantitative research in the Journal of Counseling & Development. Journal of Counseling & Development, 82(1), 107–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wahyuni, D. (2012). The research design maze: Understanding paradigms, cases, methods and methodologies. Journal of Applied Management Accounting Research, 10(1), 69–80.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert M. Capraro
    • 1
  • Ali Bicer
    • 2
  • Yujin Lee
    • 3
  • Katherine Vela
    • 1
  1. 1.Texas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA
  2. 2.University of WyomingLaramieUSA
  3. 3.Indiana University-Purdue University IndianapolisIndianapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations