Question

A researcher randomly assigns 33 subjects to one of three groups. Group 1 receives technical dietary information interactively from an on-line website. Group 2 receives the same information from a nurse practitioner, while Group 3 receives the information from a video tape made by the same nurse practitioner.

The researcher looked at three different ratings of the presentation; difficulty, usefulness, and importance to determine if there is a difference in the modes of presentation. In particular, the researcher is interested in whether the interactive website is superior because that is the most cost-effective way of delivering the information.

1. Run the appropriate analysis of the data and interpret the results.

2. How could this study have been done differently? Why or why not would this approach be better?

Group	Usefulness	Difficulty	Importance
1	20	5	18
1	25	9	8
1	23	15	20
1	16	9	22
1	20	6	22
1	28	14	8
1	20	6	13
1	25	8	13
1	24	10	24
1	18	10	20
1	17	9	4
2	28	7	14
2	25	14	5
2	26	9	20
2	19	15	22
2	29	14	12
2	15	6	2
2	29	10	5
2	26	11	1
2	22	5	2
2	15	15	14
2	29	6	4
2	15	6	3
3	22	8	12
3	27	9	14
3	21	10	7
3	17	9	1
3	16	7	12
3	19	9	7
3	23	10	1
3	27	9	5
3	23	9	6
3	16	14	22

Answer 1

Aim of Research:

The researcher wanted to study effectiveness of interactive on-line information delivery system. Hence research question formed here is "is interactive on-line information delivery system effective than direct/offline mode of information delivery?"

The researcher has assigned 11 members to each group randomly without considering age, educational background, physiologic status, etc. Hence, we do not know participants age group, qualification, profession, interests, physical ability, etc.

Mode of Research:
1. The researcher has delivered the dietary information to participants in group 1 with interactive on-line information delivery system. For group 2, the same information is conveyed manually by nurse practitioner through direct contact. For group 3, the information is delivered through taped video of nurse practitioner.
2. After the information conveyed, the researcher has taken feedback from participants of each group on three dimensions of information in the form ratings, namely usefulness, difficulty and importance.
3. Usefulness corresponds to how useful the information provided, difficulty means how difficult it was to understand the information and importance means how important the information for the participant.

Data Analysis:
1. The average rating for usefulness of information by participants in group 1 who received information through interactive on-line platform is 21.5 where highest rating 28 and lowest rating 16 (frequency range), median is 22.

2 The average rating for usefulness from group 2 who received information through nurse practitioner is 23.15 with highest being 29 with frequency of two and lowest being 15 also with frequency of two.

3. The average rating for usefulness from group 3 who received information through taped version of nurse practitioner's lecture is 21.1 with highest being 27 and lowest being 16 (range).

4. Similarly, the average of difficulty level from group 1, group 2 and group 3 are 9.18, 9.8 and 9.4. Four participants from group 1 indicated difficulty level to be 10 and higher, six participants from group 2 indicated difficulty level to be 10 and higher, and only one participant from group 3 indicated difficulty to be more than 10 but two have indicated difficulty as equal to 10.

5. Participants of group 1 indicated importance of the information to be on an average 15.6 with lowest being 4 and highest being 24. Participants of group 2 indicated importance of information as 8.9 on an average with highest being 22 and lowest being 2. Participants of group 3 indicated importance of information 8.7 on an average with lowest being 1 and highest being 22.

Observations:
1. The relationship between rating corresponding to importance of information and usefulness can be observed no matter which type of communication used. This is positive correlation as importance being high, usefulness also high (participant dependent and not communication). Example: Participant in group 1 who indicated importance as 4, also indicated low usefulness as 17.

2. Participants from group 2 indicated bit difficulty in understanding information in direct face to face contact. This may be due to demographic, age, and other reasons.

3. Participants from group 2 rated high on usefulness as direct lecturing also can be interactive.

4. Comparatively, the usefulness rating from participants from group 3 is less than their counterparts from group 1 and group 2.

Conclusion:
By analyzing the above data, we can conclude that effectiveness of the information delivery depends on interest, ability to learn and medium of delivery, where as interest (importance scale) plays utmost role in effectiveness of absorbing and also interactive method ensures effective delivery only in people interested in receiving the information.

Suggestion for Improvement:
In fact, the groups could have been divided depending on age, ability to understand computer based delivery, cognitive ability of the participant, interest, etc. For example: group 1 with youngsters who have some interest in subject matter, group 2 with elders who are not so well versed with internet based lectures but is eager to learn, group 3 with elders who is well versed with internet based information delivery but yet needs some support. Through segregating the groups, the accuracy of the researcher could have been improved and could have effectively tested the hypothesis.