CSU MBA5652 All discussions

MBA5652 all discussion

Unit 1 discussion

Introduce yourself to your fellow students and instructor. Share your college degree plans, briefly explaining what degree you are pursuing, why, and how you think taking this course will assist you in achieving your personal or professional goals.

You can choose to introduce yourself via a video clip on YouTube. Simply provide the hyperlink to your video in the Discussion Board where you would normally insert your answer to the discussion question. All comments regarding the videos must be made in Blackboard DB (not on YouTube). Please note that the video is optional.

(Optional) Comment on the following statement:
Any significant business decision requires input from a research project. Please defend or refute this statement.

Unit II discussion

Secondary data have been called the first line of attack for business researchers. Discuss this description.

Please include the name of the person or question to which you are replying in the subject line. For example, "Tom's response to Susan's comment."

Unit III discussion

Yogi Berra, a former New York Yankee catcher, said, “You can observe a lot just by watching.” How does this fit in with the definition of scientific observation?

Unit IV discussion

Explain each term and provide a corresponding, real-world example to demonstrate your understanding.

· Sample

· Sample distribution

· Sampling distribution

Unit V discussion

Compare and contrast deductive logic with inductive logic. Give a detailed example of both.

Unit VI discussion

Class

List three research obligations for research participants, researchers, and research clients; explain why these obligations are important.

Unit VII discussion

Discuss three ways that researchers can help maximize the integrity of data files for research clients.

Unit VIII discussion

What is your opinion of the course? Did it meet your expectations? What suggestions can you offer for improvements of this course for future students?

(Optional): Provide a work-related example in which a Type I error may be more serious than a Type II error.