In the beginning, I was fascinated to discover how news media portrays Pro- Life versus Pro- Choice differently to Americans. Analyzing various scholarly journals, I wished to analyze what type of research the authors incorporated into their study and how it affected their outcomes. Furthermore, I was interested in examining statistical data and interviews conducted that illuminates on how women view abortion differently based on social status or age group. Key similarities I found between all of these scholarly journals centered on incorporating both qualititative and quantitative research to examine the subject at hand and studying women of all age groups to gain an open-minded evaluation of the topic.
While I do agree with their methods, I personally believe they restricted their studies since it always focused on a specific area to interview women, thus limiting their options and not providing diversity in their findings. Therefore, I prefer qualitative research that aims on interviewing women of all age groups in different states to receive wide-ranging and unique answers.
The general aim of my project aims to understand the participant’s view of abortion and how they see it presented in news media.
While interviews provide the opportunity to have personal and descriptive responses, the participants might feel nervous in the discussion and resort to providing answers that are not truthful or they are unaware that they are avoiding the question. If I were to use quantitative research, I would receive answers that are straightforward yet not descriptive. My goal of this research aims to gather information from women and their personal beliefs of abortion presented in news media. Giving a short quiz about abortion to my participants could limit my opportunities to understand their thoughts and opinions of the subject. Thus, I favor qualitative research for the reward and risk of collecting personal and intriguing replies.
Due to the advancement of technology and medicine, women have access to medical assistance that was impossible hundreds of years ago. If a woman in the seventh century became pregnant, she was forced to bear the child. This is not the case in the twenty first century. Nowadays, there are dozens of abortion clinics that work with the patient’s budget, schedule an appointment, and finding a doctor available to perform the activity. While abortion itself is simple and private to the individual, the subject of the procedure has always become an enormous argument over moral and ethical rights. This intense argument over legalizing or not legalizing abortion is what news stations thrive for in their industry. The whole concept of my research paper aims to understand how news media portrays Pro- Life verses Pro- Choice to families around America. News stations do not broadcast new healthcare plans that work with the patient’s budget or abortion clinics provided around a specific state since it is easily accessible to the public. At the end of the day, news stations seek passionate and controversial debates that do not provide a solid solution. Rather than educating the public of resource centers that can inform women struggling to gain access to abortion, broadcasters will invite advocates of both abortion sides to argue endlessly on the same topic of allowing abortion to society or not, thus increasing viewer ratings and profit. Furthermore, news stations can manipulate information presented on screen by choosing specific subjects that will have more success in ratings, thus limiting important knowledge to oblivious families. Overall, there is no right or wrong side to the abortion issue. If anything, it is news stations fault for restricting access of knowledge to families in pursuit of wealth and fame.
Diversity is a crucial factor for my research experiment. To gather a variety of diverse women of different sex, race, age, and social status, I aim to focus my project on numerous states. To illustrate, I would gather participants of all ages in states like California, Idaho, Wisconsin, Texas, Kentucky, Florida, and Pennsylvania. The reason why I would expand my study all over America focuses on my desire to gather different responses based on an individual’s unique environment and society. If I were to focus on one specific state, I would be manipulating my research by choosing participants that were raised with similar ideologies and background. Therefore, it is important to branch out my study to become an open-minded and unbiased researcher to recognize how women all over America view abortion. In the interviews, I would ask numerous questions focusing on how their background has affected their view of abortion presented in news media. How has your social status changed your view of abortion? If school institutions did not educate you of the process of abortion and the resources provided around your area, would you seek news media to educate you of this crucial knowledge? How has your age and sex affected your view of abortion?
Throughout this study, I have mentioned multiple times how women of all ages are the center focus of my research when analyzing how news media portrays Pro- Life versus Pro- Choice to American society. To grasp the concept of my research, it only makes sense I interview women from different age, sex, race, and social status groups to gather descriptive responses. It is not difficult to find participants for this research since it is very broad and open topic to the public. Since I decided to use qualitative research, I will focus on non-probability experiments involving quota sampling to differentiate women that promote Pro- Life beliefs from women supporting Pro- Choice. First, I will invite a variety of women to participate in the research. Once I have found a large cast of people, I will separate them into groups based on their political beliefs. When this is established, I will ask them a series of questions about abortion and note down similar or different themes responded between the two groups. This is why I chose quota sampling compared to the other non-probability sampling methods. By choosing a specific sex and ideology to study, I open a door to possibilities of examining women with different beliefs of abortion.
Even though the debate of abortion is an intriguing topic to discuss, some participants are reluctant to share their opinions in fear of their identity leaking to the public. To ease their worries, I promise them confidentiality where I keep their name and appearance anonymous. While their background is an important aspect to comprehend their beliefs on the issue, I will keep the information private for research purposes. If an individual did not mind expressing their identity to the public, I would provide them a contract where they fully acknowledge the guidelines of the research and the steps taken to guarantee the participant’s security and happiness.