Chapter Three: Methods

CHAPTER THREE: METHODS

This chapter outlines the research methodology implemented in this study, detailing the procedures, participants, intervention strategies, materials used, measurement instruments, and data analysis techniques. It provides a comprehensive overview of the methodological framework designed to explore the research questions and hypotheses articulated in previous chapters. The approach adopted in this study aligns with established qualitative and quantitative research standards, ensuring the reliability and validity of findings.

Introduction

The purpose of this chapter is to delineate the methodological approach employed to investigate the effects of the intervention on the targeted population. Given the exploratory nature of this research, a mixed-methods design was chosen to facilitate a nuanced understanding of both quantifiable outcomes and participant experiences. The methodological considerations were guided by research objectives emphasizing the assessment of intervention efficacy and participant engagement. Ethical considerations, including informed consent and confidentiality, were prioritized throughout the research process.

Setting

The study was conducted in a community-based organization (CBO) situated within an urban area characterized by diverse socioeconomic backgrounds. The CBO provides various youth programs, serving as an accessible environment for participant recruitment and intervention delivery. The setting was selected due to its strategic location, supportive staff, and existing infrastructure conducive to conducting research with minors. Data collection occurred over a three-month period, with designated sessions held in a private conference room within the facility to ensure participant privacy and comfort.

Participants

The sample comprised ten male participants aged between 7 and 17 years (mean age = 12.4 years). Participants were recruited through the CBO's outreach programs and were selected based on specific inclusion criteria: (a) age within 7–17 years, (b) current engagement in at least one youth program at the CBO, and (c) parental consent and participant assent. The exclusion criteria included any known cognitive impairments or psychological conditions that could interfere with participation. Participant demographics in terms of ethnicity, educational background, and socioeconomic status were documented to contextualize findings and assess generalizability. This purposive sampling aimed to provide diverse perspectives and capture developmental differences across the age span.

Intervention

The intervention consisted of a structured program designed to enhance social-emotional skills amongst participants. It was delivered over a six-week period, with weekly sessions lasting approximately 90 minutes. The program incorporated evidence-based activities such as group discussions, role-playing, and problem-solving exercises, grounded in social-emotional learning (SEL) frameworks (Ref: CASEL, 2020). Each session focused on specific themes such as self-awareness, emotion regulation, empathy, and peer communication. The intervention was facilitated by trained research assistants with backgrounds in psychology and education to ensure fidelity and consistency. Additionally, fidelity checks were conducted through session observation and facilitator checklists to maintain standardized delivery.

Materials

Materials utilized during the intervention and data collection phases included participant handouts, activity worksheets, and visual aids designed to facilitate engagement and reinforce learning objectives. Audio and video recordings of session activities were made, with appropriate consents secured for observational data. Additionally, standardized assessment tools and questionnaire packets were employed to measure outcomes pre- and post-intervention. Technological devices such as laptops and tablets supported data collection and analysis, as well as multimedia presentations used during sessions.

Measurement Instruments

Quantitative data were gathered through validated measurement instruments, including the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) (Ref: Goodman, 1997) to assess behavioral and emotional adjustment and the Social Skills Rating System (SSRS) (Ref: Gresham & Elliott, 1999) for evaluating social competence. These instruments were administered at baseline (pre-intervention) and immediately following the completion of the intervention (post-test). Qualitative data were obtained via semi-structured interviews and participant reflective journals, providing insights into participant experiences and perceived changes. The use of multiple measurement modalities aimed to enrich data robustness and facilitate triangulation to strengthen validity.

Procedure

The research process commenced with obtaining Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval and parental consent, along with participant assent. Initial assessments were conducted during the first session to establish baseline data. Participants then engaged in the weekly intervention sessions, with attendance monitored and recorded. The facilitators adhered to a scripted curriculum, with deviations documented and justified. Data collection points included pre-intervention assessments, session observations, and post-intervention evaluations. To facilitate trust and rapport, all interactions were conducted in a manner sensitive to the needs and preferences of minors. Confidentiality was maintained through coded data and secure storage. The concluding phase involved debriefing participants and guardians, sharing preliminary findings, and discussing potential implications for practice.

Data Analysis

Quantitative data analyses involved descriptive statistics to summarize participant characteristics and inferential statistics to assess intervention effects. Paired t-tests were used to compare pre- and post-test scores within subjects, with significance set at p

References

• Case, A., & Swanson, J. (2020). Developing social-emotional learning programs in community settings. Journal of Youth Development, 15(3), 45–59.
• Gresham, F. M., & Elliott, S. N. (1999). Social Skills Rating System. American Guidance Service.
• Goodman, R. (1997). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: A research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38(5), 581–586.
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
• Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL). (2020). Effective social and emotional learning programs. CASEL.
• Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
• Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications.
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
• Field, A. P. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics. Sage Publications.
• Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage Publications.