Chapter 3 Lecture Transcript - Research Process PDF

Lecture Transcript: Chapter 3 - The Research Process Introduction Welcome to our discussion on Chapter 3, titled "The Research Process." In Chapter 1, we explored how scientific research is a process of acquiring knowledge using the scientific method. Today, we delve deeper into how such research is...

Lecture Transcript: Chapter 3 - The Research Process Introduction Welcome to our discussion on Chapter 3, titled "The Research Process." In Chapter 1, we explored how scientific research is a process of acquiring knowledge using the scientific method. Today, we delve deeper into how such research is conducted, the underlying assumptions, and the outcomes of this process. Paradigms of Social Research Our approach to research is significantly influenced by our mental models or frames of reference, commonly known as paradigms. These paradigms shape our reasoning and observations. Thomas Kuhn, in his seminal book "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions," introduced the concept of paradigms in the context of natural sciences, but this concept is equally applicable in the social sciences. These paradigms influence how we perceive and reason about social phenomena. For example, the contrasting views of conservatives and liberals on government roles reflect differing paradigms. Paradigms are often implicit and taken for granted, yet recognizing them is crucial for understanding and reconciling different perceptions of social phenomena. For instance, differing beliefs about improving secondary education between liberals and conservatives stem from their respective paradigms. In social science research, two dominant paradigms are positivism and postpositivism. Positivism, originating from Auguste Comte, focuses on observable and measurable phenomena. In contrast, post-positivism, which evolved in response to the limitations of positivism, combines empirical observations with logical reasoning, acknowledging that our understanding of science is probabilistic and contingent. Burrell and Morgan's work categorizes social science research based on two philosophical assumptions: ontology (our view of the world) and epistemology (how we study the world). This leads to four research paradigms: functionalism, interpretivism, radical structuralism, and radical humanism, each with its unique approach to understanding social phenomena. The majority of social science research follows the functionalist paradigm, focusing on studying social order through objective methods like surveys. However, post-positivist thinking has led to a growing interest in subjectivist techniques like interviews. Radical humanism and radical structuralism, while less common, are crucial for understanding dynamic social changes. Let’s now turn our attention to an overview of the Research Process Scientific research is iterative, involving observation, rationalization, and validation. Researchers may start with observations (inductive research) or with a theory (deductive research). Traditional research is often deductive and functionalistic, involving a series of stages like exploration, research design, and execution. Stage 1, Exploration Phase This phase includes selecting research questions, conducting literature reviews, and identifying relevant theories. The aim is to understand the current knowledge state, identify gaps, and formulate research questions that are broad, address real problems, and where answers are not obvious. Let’s take a deeper dive into the definition, application, usefulness, and finally some examples of research questions. The research question is the starting point in the research process; depending on the type of question, different designs and/or data collection strategies are needed. All research questions should be: 1. Focused on a single problem or issue 2. Researchable using primary and/or secondary sources 3. Feasible to answer within the timeframe and practical constraints 4. Specific enough to answer thoroughly 5. Complex enough to develop the answer over the space of a paper or thesis 6. Relevant to your field of study and/or society more broadly You will usually write a single research question to guide your progress in a research paper or academic essay. Your answer then forms your thesis statement—the central assertion or position that your paper will argue. Larger projects, such as a thesis or dissertation, may necessitate multiple research questions or problem statements. However, they should all be clearly connected and focused around a central research problem. What makes a strong research question? Research questions anchor your whole project, so it’s important to spend some time refining them. The following criteria can help you evaluate the strength of your research question. What makes a strong research question? Research questions anchor your whole project, so it’s important to spend some time refining them. The criteria below can help you evaluate the strength of your research question. Your central research question should work together with your research problem to keep your work focused. If you have multiple questions, they should all clearly tie back to your central aim. Your question must be answerable using quantitative and/or qualitative data, or by reading scholarly sources on the topic to develop your argument. If such data is impossible to access, you likely need to rethink your question. Avoid subjective words like good, bad, better and worse. These do not give clear criteria for answering the question. Don’t compose a research question such as: Is X or Y a better policy? Instead, write: How effective are X and Y policies at reducing rates of Z? Make sure you have enough time and resources to do all research required to answer your question. If it seems you will not be able to gain access to the data you need, consider narrowing down your question to be more specific. All the terms you use in the research question should have clear meanings. Avoid vague language, jargon, and too-broad ideas. Don’t compose a research question such as: What effect does social media have on people’s minds? Instead, write: What effect does daily use of Twitter have on the attention span of 16-year-olds at your local high school? Research is about informing, not instructing. Even if your project is focused on a practical problem, it should aim to improve understanding rather than demand a ready-made solution. If ready-made solutions are necessary, consider conducting action research instead. Action research is a research method that aims to simultaneously investigate an issue as it is solved. In other words, as its name suggests, action research conducts research and takes action at the same time. Don’t compose a research question such as: What should the government do about low voter turnout? Instead, write: What are the most effective communication strategies for increasing voter turnout among those aged 18-30? Closed-ended, yes/no questions are too simple to work as good research questions—they don’t provide enough scope for robust investigation and discussion. Don’t compose a research question such as: Has there been an increase in those experiencing homelessness in the US in the past ten years? Instead, write: How have economic and political factors affected patterns of experiencing homelessness in the US over the past ten years? If you can answer the question through a single Google search, book, or article, it is probably not complex enough. A good research question requires original data, synthesis of multiple sources, and original interpretation and argumentation prior to providing an answer. Your research question should be developed based on initial reading around your topic. It should focus on addressing a problem or gap in the existing knowledge in your field or discipline. The question should aim to contribute to an existing and current debate in your field or in society at large. It should produce knowledge that future researchers or practitioners can later build on. You don’t have to ask something that nobody has ever thought of before, but your question should have some aspect of originality. For example, you can focus on a specific location, or explore a new angle. Using sub-questions to strengthen your main research question Chances are that your main research question likely can’t be answered all at once. That’s why sub-questions are important: they allow you to answer your main question in a step-by-step manner. Good sub-questions should be: 1. Less complex than the main question 2. Focused only on 1 type of research 3. Presented in a logical order Here are a few examples of descriptive and framing questions: 1. Descriptive: According to current government arguments, how should a European bank tax be implemented? 2. Descriptive: Which countries have a bank tax/levy on financial transactions? 3. Framing: How should a bank tax/levy on financial transactions look at a European level? Keep in mind that sub-questions are by no means mandatory. They should only be asked if you need the findings to answer your main question. If your main question is simple enough to stand on its own, it’s okay to skip the sub-question part. As a rule of thumb, the more complex your subject, the more sub-questions you’ll need. Try to limit yourself to 4 or 5 sub-questions, maximum. If you feel you need more than this, it may be indication that your main research question is not sufficiently specific. In this case, it’s is better to revisit your problem statement and try to tighten your main question up. In quantitative research, one way to divide the universe of questions is into descriptive, normative, and relationship questions i. Descriptive questions seek to capture a snapshot of the current situation, process, or program. ii. Normative questions compare the current situation (what is) to what someone thinks it should be in terms of a quantifiable target, standard, benchmark, or criterion. iii. Relationship questions are called by many names: causal, cause-and-effect, impact, correlation, and association. They are intended to determine the extent to which two or more variables are related. Qualitative research questions may concern broad areas of research or more specific areas of study. Similar to quantitative research questions, qualitative research questions are linked to research design. Unlike their quantitative counterparts, though, qualitative research questions are usually adaptable, nondirectional, and more flexible, producing a different set of question types such as: 1. Contextual research questions seek to describe the nature of what already exists. 2. Descriptive research questions attempt to describe a phenomenon. 3. Emancipatory research questions aim to produce knowledge that allows for engagement in social action, especially for the benefit of disadvantaged people. 4. Evaluative research questions assess the effectiveness of existing methods or paradigms. 5. Explanatory research questions seek to expound on a phenomenon or examine reasons for and associations between what exists. 6. Exploratory research questions investigate little-known areas of a particular topic. 7. Generative research questions aim to provide new ideas for the development of theories and actions. 8. Ideological research questions are used in research that aims to advance specific ideologies of a position. Mixed-methods studies typically require a set of both quantitative and qualitative research questions. Separate questions are appropriate when the mixed-methods study focuses on the significance and differences in quantitative and qualitative methods and not on the study's integrative component. Changing topics, let’s discuss literature reviews. a. the The Literature Review is An early and essential step in doing a study is to review the accumulated knowledge on your research question. b. This applies to all research questions and all types of studies. c. Doing a literature review builds on the idea that knowledge accumulates and that we can learn from and build on what others have done. d. The review rests on the principle that scientific research is a collective effort, one in which many researchers contribute and share results with one another. e. We read studies to learn from, compare, replicate, or criticize them. Literature reviews vary in scope and depth. f. Different kinds of reviews are stronger at fulfilling one or another of four goals g. To begin a review, you must pick a topic area or research question, determine how much time and effort you can devote to the study, settle on the appropriate level of depth, and decide on the best type of review for your situation So, what are the goals of a literature review? EXPANSION BOX Goals of a Literature Review To demonstrate a familiarity with a body of knowledge and establish credibility: A review tells a reader that the researcher knows the research in an area and knows the major issues A good review increases a readers confidence in the researcher's professional competence, ability, and background. To show the path of prior research and how a current project is linked to it. A review outlines the direction of research on a question and shows the development of knowledge. A good review places a research project in a context and demonstrates its relevance by making connections to a body of knowledge. To integrate and summarize what is known in an area. A review pulls together and synthesizes different results. A good review points out areas in which prior studies agree, disagree, and major questions remain. It collects what is known up to a point in time and indicates the direction for future research. To learn from others and stimulate new ideas A review tells what others have found so that a researcher can benefit from the efforts of others. A good review identifies blind alleys and suggests hypotheses for replication. It divulges procedures, techniques, and research designs worth copying so that a researcher can better focus hypotheses and gain new insights. Finally, what are the types of literature reviews? Six Types of Literature Reviews 1. Context review. A common type of review in which the author links a specific study to a larger body of knowledge. It often appears at the beginning of a research report and introduces the study by situating it within a broader framework and showing how it continues or builds on a developing line of thought or study. 2. Historical review. A specialized review in which the author traces an issue over time. It can be merged with a theoretical or methodological review to show how a concept, theory, or research method developed over time. 3. Integrative review. A common type of review in which the author presents and summarizes the current state of knowledge on a topic, highlighting agreements and disagreements within it. This review is often combined with a context review or may be published as an independent article as a service to other researchers. 4. Methodological review. A specialized type of integrative review in which the author compares and evaluates the relative methodological strength of various studies and shows how different methodologies (e.g., research designs, measures, samples) account for different results. 5. Self-study review. A review in which an author demonstrates his or her familiarity with a subject area. It is often part of an educational program or course requirement. 6. Theoretical review. A specialized review in which the author presents several theories or concepts focused on the same topic and compares them on the basis of assumptions, logical consistency, and scope of explanation. Stage 2, Research Design In this phase, researchers create a blueprint for answering research questions. This involves selecting a research method, operationalizing constructs, and devising sampling strategies. Stage 3, At this point, a research proposal is generally developed. Stage 4, Research Execution This phase involves pilot testing, data collection, and data analysis. Pilot testing ensures the reliability and validity of the measurement instruments. Data collection can be quantitative or qualitative, depending on the method employed, followed by appropriate data analysis techniques. The final phase, stage 5, is documenting the research process and findings. This documentation is vital for the incremental progress of science, allowing others to replicate or test the study's findings. What are some Common Research Mistakes? Novice researchers often encounter pitfalls, such as choosing insufficiently motivated research questions, pursuing research fads, or selecting problems that are difficult or impossible to study. It's crucial to avoid these mistakes and to choose research methods that best fit the problem, rather than adapting the problem to fit preferred methods. Conclusion In summary, the research process in social sciences is complex and multi-faceted. It requires careful consideration of paradigms, philosophical assumptions, and rigorous planning and execution. Understanding and applying multiple paradigms can lead to a more comprehensive understanding of social phenomena. This chapter lays the groundwork for the intricate journey of scientific inquiry in social sciences.