B.S B.S B.S B.S Nishat Education

B.
S Nishat Education
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
Course: (8604)
Semester:
ASSIGNMENT No.1
Q.1 Discuss scientific method as a tool of acquiring knowledge. Compare it with various steps in the research
process?
Ans: The scientific method is an empirical method of knowledge acquisition which has characterized the
development of science since at least the 17th century. It involves careful observation, which includes
rigorous skepticism about what is observed, given that cognitive assumptions about how the world works
influence how one interprets a percept. It involves formulating hypotheses, via induction, based on such
observations; experimental and measurement-based testing of deductions drawn from the hypotheses; and
refinement of the hypotheses based on the experimental findings. These are principles of the scientific method,
as opposed to a definitive series of steps applicable to all scientific enterprises.
Though there are diverse models for the scientific method available, in general there is a continuous process that
includes observations about the natural world. People are naturally inquisitive, so they often come up with
questions about things they see or hear, and they often develop ideas or hypotheses about why things are the
way they are. The best hypotheses lead to predictions that can be tested in various ways. The most conclusive
testing of hypotheses comes from reasoning based on carefully controlled experimental data. Depending on how
well additional tests match the predictions, the original hypothesis may require refinement, alteration, expansion
or even rejection. If a particular hypothesis becomes very well supported, a general theory may be developed.
Although procedures vary from one field of inquiry to another, they are frequently the same from one to
another. The process of the scientific method involves making conjectures (hypotheses), deriving predictions
from them as logical consequences, and then carrying out experiments or empirical observations based on those
predictions. A hypothesis is a conjecture, based on knowledge obtained while seeking answers to the question.
The hypothesis might be very specific, or it might be broad. Scientists then test hypotheses by conducting
experiments or studies. A scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable, implying that it is possible to identify a
possible outcome of an experiment or observation that conflicts with predictions deduced from the hypothesis;
otherwise, the hypothesis cannot be meaningfully tested.
The purpose of an experiment is to determine whether observations agree with or conflict with the predictions
derived from a hypothesis. Experiments can take place anywhere from a garage to CERN's Large Hadron
Collider. There are difficulties in a formulaic statement of method, however. Though the scientific method is
often presented as a fixed sequence of steps, it represents rather a set of general principles. Not all steps take
place in every scientific inquiry and they are not always in the same order. Some philosophers and scientists
have argued that there is no scientific method; they include physicist Lee Smolin and philosopher Paul
Feyerabend . Robert Nola and Howard Sankey remark that "For some, the whole idea of a theory of scientific
method is yester-year's debate, the continuation of which can be summed up as yet more of the proverbial
deceased equine castigation. We beg to differ."
The term "scientific method" did not come into wide use until the 19th century, when other modern scientific
terminologies began to emerge such as "scientist" and "pseudoscience" and significant transformation of science
was taking place. Throughout the 1830s and 1850s, by which time Baconianism was popular, naturalists like
William Whewell, John Herschel, John Stewart Mill engaged in debates over "induction" and "facts" and were
Office # 74, Posh Arcade Plaza, near new post office, G-9 Markaz, Islamabad
Page 1
B.S Nishat Education
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
focused on how to generate knowledge In the late 19th a debate over realism vs. antirealism was conducted as
powerful scientific theories extended beyond the realm of the observable.
The term "scientific method" came to be used prominently in the twentieth century, with no scientific
authorities over its meaning despite it popping up in textbooks and dictionariesThough there was a steady
growth on the concept into the twentieth century, by the end of that century numerous influential philosophers
of science like Thomas Kuhn and Paul Feyerabend had questioned the universality of the "scientific method"
and in doing so largely replaced the notion of science as a homogeneous and universal method with that of it
being a heterogeneous and local practice. In particular, Paul Feyerabend argued against there being any
universal rules of science.
Overview
The scientific method is the process by which science is carried out. As in other areas of inquiry, science
(through the scientific method) can build on previous knowledge and develop a more sophisticated
understanding of its topics of study over time. This model can be seen to underlie the scientific revolution.
The ubiquitous element in the model of the scientific method is empiricism, or more precisely,
epistemologic sensualism. This is in opposition to stringent forms of rationalism: the scientific method
embodies that reason alone cannot solve a particular scientific problem. A strong formulation of the scientific
method is not always aligned with a form of empiricism in which the empirical data is put forward in the form
of experience or other abstracted forms of knowledge; in current scientific practice, however, the use
of scientific modelling and reliance on abstract typologies and theories is normally accepted. The scientific
method is of necessity also an expression of an opposition to claims that e.g. revelation, political or
religious dogma, appeals to tradition, commonly held beliefs, common sense, or, importantly, currently held
theories, are the only possible means of demonstrating truth.
Different early expressions of empiricism and the scientific method can be found throughout history, for
instance with the ancient Stoics, Epicurus Alhazen Roger Bacon, and William of Ockham. From the 16th
century onwards, experiments were advocated by Francis Bacon, and performed by Giambattista della
Porta, Johannes Kepler, and Galileo Galilei.There was particular development aided by theoretical works
by Francisco Sanches, John Locke, George Berkeley, and David Hume.
The hypothetico-deductive model formulated in the 20th century, is the ideal although it has undergone
significant revision since first proposed. Staddon (2017) argues it is a mistake to try following rules which are
best learned through careful study of examples of scientific investigation.
Process
The overall process involves making conjectures (hypotheses), deriving predictions from them as logical
consequences, and then carrying out experiments based on those predictions to determine whether the
original conjecture was correct. There are difficulties in a formulaic statement of method, however. Though the
scientific method is often presented as a fixed sequence of steps, these actions are better considered as general
principles. Not all steps take place in every scientific inquiry and they are not always done in the same order. As
noted by scientist and philosopher William Whewell (1794–1866), "invention, sagacity, [and] genius are
required at every step.
Formulation of a question
The question can refer to the explanation of a specific observation, as in "Why is the sky blue?" but can also be
open-ended, as in "How can I design a drug to cure this particular disease?" This stage frequently involves
finding and evaluating evidence from previous experiments, personal scientific observations or assertions, as
Page 2
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
well as the work of other scientists. If the answer is already known, a different question that builds on the
evidence can be posed. When applying the scientific method to research, determining a good question can be
very difficult and it will affect the outcome of the investigation.
Hypothesis
A hypothesis is a conjecture, based on knowledge obtained while formulating the question, that may explain
any given behavior. The hypothesis might be very specific; for example, Einstein'sequivalence
principle or Francis Crick's "DNA makes RNA makes protein", or it might be broad; for example, unknown
species of life dwell in the unexplored depths of the oceans. Astatistical hypothesis is a conjecture about a
given statistical population. For example, the population might be people with a particular disease. The
conjecture might be that a new drug will cure the disease in some of those people. Terms commonly associated
with statistical hypotheses are null hypothesis and alternative hypothesis. A null hypothesis is the conjecture
that the statistical hypothesis is false; for example, that the new drug does nothing and that any cure is caused
by chance. Researchers normally want to show that the null hypothesis is false. The alternative hypothesis is the
desired outcome, that the drug does better than chance. A final point: a scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable,
meaning that one can identify a possible outcome of an experiment that conflicts with predictions deduced from
the hypothesis; otherwise, it cannot be meaningfully tested.
Prediction
This step involves determining the logical consequences of the hypothesis. One or more predictions are then
selected for further testing. The more unlikely that a prediction would be correct simply by coincidence, then
the more convincing it would be if the prediction were fulfilled; evidence is also stronger if the answer to the
prediction is not already known, due to the effects of hindsight bias . Ideally, the prediction must also
distinguish the hypothesis from likely alternatives; if two hypotheses make the same prediction, observing the
prediction to be correct is not evidence for either one over the other.
Testing
This is an investigation of whether the real world behaves as predicted by the hypothesis. Scientists (and other
people) test hypotheses by conducting experiments. The purpose of an experiment is to determine
whether observations of the real world agree with or conflict with the predictions derived from a hypothesis. If
they agree, confidence in the hypothesis increases; otherwise, it decreases. Agreement does not assure that the
hypothesis is true; future experiments may reveal problems. Karl Popper advised scientists to try to falsify
hypotheses, i.e., to search for and test those experiments that seem most doubtful. Large numbers of successful
confirmations are not convincing if they arise from experiments that avoid risk.Experiments should be designed
to minimize possible errors, especially through the use of appropriate scientific controls. For example, tests of
medical treatments are commonly run as double-blind tests. Test personnel, who might unwittingly reveal to
test subjects which samples are the desired test drugs and which are placebos, are kept ignorant of which are
which. Such hints can bias the responses of the test subjects. Furthermore, failure of an experiment does not
necessarily mean the hypothesis is false. Experiments always depend on several hypotheses, e.g., that the test
equipment is working properly, and a failure may be a failure of one of the auxiliary hypotheses Experiments
can be conducted in a college lab, on a kitchen table, at CERN's Large Hadron Collider, at the bottom of an
ocean, on Mars and so on. Astronomers do experiments, searching for planets around distant stars. Finally, most
individual experiments address highly specific topics for reasons of practicality. As a result, evidence about
broader topics is usually accumulated gradually.
Page 3
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
Analysis
This involves determining what the results of the experiment show and deciding on the next actions to take. The
predictions of the hypothesis are compared to those of the null hypothesis, to determine which is better able to
explain the data. In cases where an experiment is repeated many times, a statistical analysis such as a chi-
squared test may be required. If the evidence has falsified the hypothesis, a new hypothesis is required; if the
experiment supports the hypothesis but the evidence is not strong enough for high confidence, other predictions
from the hypothesis must be tested. Once a hypothesis is strongly supported by evidence, a new question can be
asked to provide further insight on the same topic. Evidence from other scientists and experience are frequently
incorporated at any stage in the process. Depending on the complexity of the experiment, many iterations may
be required to gather sufficient evidence to answer a question with confidence, or to build up many answers to
highly specific questions in order to answer a single broader question.
Characterizations
The scientific method depends upon increasingly sophisticated characterizations of the subjects of investigation.
For example, Benjamin Franklin conjectured, correctly, that St. Elmo's fire was electrical in nature, but it has
taken a long series of experiments and theoretical changes to establish this. While seeking the pertinent
properties of the subjects, careful thought may also entail some definitions and observations;
the observations often demand careful measurements and/or counting.
The systematic, careful collection of measurements or counts of relevant quantities is often the critical
difference betweenpseudo-sciences, such as alchemy, and science, such as chemistry or biology. Scientific
measurements are usually tabulated, graphed, or mapped, and statistical manipulations, such
as correlation and regression, performed on them. The measurements might be made in a controlled setting,
such as a laboratory, or made on more or less inaccessible or unmanipulatable objects such as stars or human
populations. The measurements often require specialized scientific instruments such
as thermometers, spectroscopes, particle accelerators, or voltmeters, and the progress of a scientific field is
usually intimately tied to their invention and improvement.
I am not accustomed to saying anything with certainty after only one or two observations.
— Andreas Vesalius, (1546)
.
Hypothesis development
A hypothesis is a suggested explanation of a phenomenon, or alternately a reasoned proposal suggesting a
possible correlation between or among a set of phenomena.
Normally hypotheses have the form of a mathematical model. Sometimes, but not always, they can also be
formulated asexistential statements, stating that some particular instance of the phenomenon being studied has
some characteristic and causal explanations, which have the general form of universal statements, stating that
every instance of the phenomenon has a particular characteristic.
Scientists are free to use whatever resources they have – their own creativity, ideas from other fields, inductive
reasoning,Bayesian inference, and so on – to imagine possible explanations for a phenomenon under study.
Albert Einstein once observed that "there is no logical bridge between phenomena and their theoretical
principles." Charles Sanders Peirce, borrowing a page from Aristotle described the incipient stages of inquiry,
instigated by the "irritation of doubt" to venture a plausible guess, as abductive reasoning. The history of
science is filled with stories of scientists claiming a "flash of inspiration", or a hunch, which then motivated
Page 4
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
them to look for evidence to support or refute their idea. Michael Polanyi made such creativity the centerpiece
of his discussion of methodology.
William Glen observes that
the success of a hypothesis, or its service to science, lies not simply in its perceived "truth", or power to
displace, subsume or reduce a predecessor idea, but perhaps more in its ability to stimulate the research that will
illuminate ... bald suppositions and areas of vagueness.
In general scientists tend to look for theories that are "elegant" or "beautiful". In contrast to the usual English
use of these terms, they here refer to a theory in accordance with the known facts, which is nevertheless
relatively simple and easy to handle. Occam's Razor serves as a rule of thumb for choosing the most desirable
amongst a group of equally explanatory hypotheses.
To minimize the confirmation bias which results from entertaining a single hypothesis, strong
inference emphasizes the need for entertaining multiple alternative hypotheses.
Paying special attention to the generation of explanations, Peirce outlined the scientific method as a
coordination of three kinds of inference in a purposeful cycle aimed at settling doubts, as follows (in §III–IV in
"A Neglected Argument"except as otherwise noted):
1. Abduction (or retroduction). Guessing, inference to explanatory hypotheses for selection of those best worth
trying. From abduction, Peirce distinguishes induction as inferring, on the basis of tests, the proportion of truth
in the hypothesis. Every inquiry, whether into ideas, brute facts, or norms and laws, arises from surprising
observations in one or more of those realms (and for example at any stage of an inquiry already underway). All
explanatory content of theories comes from abduction, which guesses a new or outside idea so as to account in a
simple, economical way for a surprising or complicative phenomenon. Oftenest, even a well-prepared mind
guesses wrong. But the modicum of success of our guesses far exceeds that of sheer luck and seems born of
attunement to nature by instincts developed or inherent, especially insofar as best guesses are optimally
plausible and simple in the sense, said Peirce, of the "facile and natural", as by Galileo's natural light of reason
and as distinct from "logical simplicity". Abduction is the most fertile but least secure mode of inference. Its
general rationale is inductive: it succeeds often enough and, without it, there is no hope of sufficiently
expediting inquiry (often multi-generational) toward new truths. Coordinative method leads from abducing a
plausible hypothesis to judging it for its testabilityand for how its trial would economize inquiry itself. Peirce
calls his pragmatism "the logic of abduction"His pragmatic maxim is: "Consider what effects that might
conceivably have practical bearings you conceive the objects of your conception to have. Then, your conception
of those effects is the whole of your conception of the object". His pragmatism is a method of reducing
conceptual confusions fruitfully by equating the meaning of any conception with the conceivable practical
implications of its object's conceived effects – a method of experimentational mental reflection hospitable to
forming hypotheses and conducive to testing them. It favors efficiency. The hypothesis, being insecure, needs to
have practical implications leading at least to mental tests and, in science, lending themselves to scientific tests.
A simple but unlikely guess, if uncostly to test for falsity, may belong first in line for testing. A guess is
intrinsically worth testing if it has instinctive plausibility or reasoned objective probability, while subjective
likelihood, though reasoned, can be misleadingly seductive. Guesses can be chosen for trial strategically, for
their caution (for which Peirce gave as example the game of Twenty Questions), breadth, and
incomplexity. One can hope to discover only that which time would reveal through a learner's sufficient
experience anyway, so the point is to expedite it; the economy of research is what demands the leap, so to
speak, of abduction and governs its art.
Page 5
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
2. Deduction. Two stages:
i. Explication. Unclearly premissed, but deductive, analysis of the hypothesis in order to render its parts as clear
as possible.
ii. Demonstration: Deductive Argumentation, Euclidean in procedure. Explicit deduction of hypothesis's
consequences as predictions, for induction to test, about evidence to be found. Corollarial or, if needed,
theorematic.
3. Induction. The long-run validity of the rule of induction is deducible from the principle (presuppositional to
reasoning in general) that the real is only the object of the final opinion to which adequate investigation would
lead;anything to which no such process would ever lead would not be real. Induction involving ongoing tests or
observations follows a method which, sufficiently persisted in, will diminish its error below any predesignate
degree. Three stages:
i. Classification. Unclearly premissed, but inductive, classing of objects of experience under general ideas.
ii. Probation: direct inductive argumentation. Crude (the enumeration of instances) or gradual (new estimate of
proportion of truth in the hypothesis after each test). Gradual induction is qualitative or quantitative; if
qualitative, then dependent on weightings of qualities or characters; if quantitative, then dependent on
measurements, or on statistics, or on countings.
iii. Sentential Induction. "...which, by inductive reasonings, appraises the different probations singly, then their
combinations, then makes self-appraisal of these very appraisals themselves, and passes final judgment on the
whole result".
Science of complex systems
Science applied to complex systems can involve elements such as transdisciplinarity, systems
theory and scientific modelling. The Santa Fe Institute studies such systems; Murray Gell-Mann interconnects
these topics with message passing.
In general, the scientific method may be difficult to apply stringently to diverse, interconnected systems and
large data sets. In particular, practices used within Big data, such as predictive analytics, may be considered to
be at odds with the scientific method.
Documentation and replication
Sometimes experimenters may make systematic errors during their experiments, veer from standard methods
and practices (Pathological science) for various reasons, or, in rare cases, deliberately report false results.
Occasionally because of this then, other scientists might attempt to repeat the experiments in order to duplicate
the results.
Archiving
Researchers sometimes practice scientific data archiving, such as in compliance with the policies of government
funding agencies and scientific journals. In these cases, detailed records of their experimental procedures, raw
data, statistical analyses and source code can be preserved in order to provide evidence of the methodology and
practice of the procedure and assist in any potential future attempts to reproduce the result. These procedural
records may also assist in the conception of new experiments to test the hypothesis, and may prove useful to
engineers who might examine the potential practical applications of a discovery.
Data sharing
When additional information is needed before a study can be reproduced, the author of the study might be asked
to provide it. They might provide it, or if the author refuses to share data, appeals can be made to the journal
editors who published the study or to the institution which funded the research.
Page 6
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
Limitations
Since it is impossible for a scientist to record everything that took place in an experiment, facts selected for their
apparent relevance are reported. This may lead, unavoidably, to problems later if some supposedly irrelevant
feature is questioned. For example, Heinrich Hertz did not report the size of the room used to test Maxwell's
equations, which later turned out to account for a small deviation in the results. The problem is that parts of the
theory itself need to be assumed in order to select and report the experimental conditions. The observations are
hence sometimes described as being 'theory-laden'.
Dimensions of practice
The primary constraints on contemporary science are:
• Publication, i.e. Peer review
• Resources (mostly funding)
It has not always been like this: in the old days of the "gentleman scientist" funding (and to a lesser extent
publication) were far weaker constraints.
Both of these constraints indirectly require scientific method – work that violates the constraints will be difficult
to publish and difficult to get funded. Journals require submitted papers to conform to "good scientific practice"
and to a degree this can be enforced by peer review. Originality, importance and interest are more important –
see for example the author guidelinesfor
Nature.
Smaldino and McElreath 2016 have noted that our need to reward scientific understanding is being nullified by
poor research design and poor data analysis, which is leading to false-positive findings.
Role of chance in discovery
Somewhere between 33% and 50% of all scientific discoveries are estimated to have been stumbled upon,
rather than sought out. This may explain why scientists so often express that they were lucky. Louis Pasteur is
credited with the famous saying that "Luck favours the prepared mind", but some psychologists have begun to
study what it means to be 'prepared for luck' in the scientific context. Research is showing that scientists are
taught various heuristics that tend to harness chance and the unexpected. This is what Nassim Nicholas
Taleb calls "Anti-fragility"; while some systems of investigation are fragile in the face of human error, human
bias, and randomness, the scientific method is more than resistant or tough – it actually benefits from such
randomness in many ways (it is anti-fragile). Taleb believes that the more anti-fragile the system, the more it
will flourish in the real world.
Psychologist Kevin Dunbar says the process of discovery often starts with researchers finding bugs in their
experiments. These unexpected results lead researchers to try to fix what they think is an error in their method.
Eventually, the researcher decides the error is too persistent and systematic to be a coincidence. The highly
controlled, cautious and curious aspects of the scientific method are thus what make it well suited for
identifying such persistent systematic errors. At this point, the researcher will begin to think of theoretical
explanations for the error, often seeking the help of colleagues across different domains of expertise.
Relationship with mathematics
Science is the process of gathering, comparing, and evaluating proposed models against observables. A model
can be a simulation, mathematical or chemical formula, or set of proposed steps. Science is like mathematics in
that researchers in both disciplines try to distinguish what is known from what is unknown at each stage of
discovery. Models, in both science and mathematics, need to be internally consistent and also ought to
be falsifiable (capable of disproof). In mathematics, a statement need not yet be proven; at such a stage, that
Page 7
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
statement would be called a conjecture. But when a statement has attained mathematical proof, that statement
gains a kind of immortality which is highly prized by mathematicians, and for which some mathematicians
devote their lives.
Mathematical work and scientific work can inspire each other. For example, the technical concept of time arose
inscience, and timelessness was a hallmark of a mathematical topic. But today, the Poincaré conjecture has been
proven using time as a mathematical concept in which objects can flow .
Nevertheless, the connection between mathematics and reality (and so science to the extent it describes reality)
remains obscure. Eugene Wigner's paper, The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural
Sciences, is a very well known account of the issue from a Nobel Prize-winning physicist. In fact, some
observers (including some well known mathematicians such as Gregory Chaitin, and others such as Lakoff and
Núñez) have suggested that mathematics is the result of practitioner bias and human limitation (including
cultural ones), somewhat like the post-modernist view of science.
George Pólya's work on problem solving, the construction of mathematical proofs, and heuristic show that the
mathematical method and the scientific method differ in detail, while nevertheless resembling each other in
using iterative or recursive steps.
Mathematical method Scientific method
1 Understanding Characterization from experience and observation
2 Analysis Hypothesis: a proposed explanation
3 Synthesis Deduction: prediction from the hypothesis
4 Review/Extend Test and experiment
In Pólya's view, understanding involves restating unfamiliar definitions in your own words, resorting to
geometrical figures, and questioning what we know and do not know already; analysis, which Pólya takes
from Pappus, involves free and heuristic construction of plausible arguments, working backward from the goal,
and devising a plan for constructing the proof; synthesis is the strict Euclidean exposition of step-by-step
details of the proof; review involves reconsidering and re-examining the result and the path taken to it.
Gauss, when asked how he came about his theorems, once replied "durch planmässiges Tattonieren"
(through systematic palpable experimentation).
Imre Lakatos argued that mathematicians actually use contradiction, criticism and revision as principles for
improving their work. In like manner to science, where truth is sought, but certainty is not found, in Proofs and
refutations (1976), what Lakatos tried to establish was that no theorem of informal mathematics is final or
perfect. This means that we should not think that a theorem is ultimately true, only that no counterexample has
yet been found. Once a counterexample, i.e. an entity contradicting/not explained by the theorem is found, we
adjust the theorem, possibly extending the domain of its validity. This is a continuous way our knowledge
accumulates, through the logic and process of proofs and refutations. (If axioms are given for a branch of
mathematics, however, Lakatos claimed that proofs from those axioms were tautological, i.e. logically true,
by rewriting them, as did Poincaré (Proofs and Refutations, 1976).)
Lakatos proposed an account of mathematical knowledge based on Polya's idea of heuristics. In Proofs and
Refutations, Lakatos gave several basic rules for finding proofs and counterexamples to conjectures. He thought
that mathematical 'thought experiments' are a valid way to discover mathematical conjectures and proofs.
Page 8
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
Relationship with statistics
The scientific method has been extremely successful in bringing the world out of medieval thinking, especially
once it was combined with industrial processes. However, when the scientific method employs statistics as part
of its arsenal, there are mathematical and practical issues that can have a deleterious effect on the reliability of
the output of scientific methods. This is described in a popular 2005 scientific paper "Why Most Published
Research Findings Are False" by John Ioannidis.
The particular points raised are statistical ("The smaller the studies conducted in a scientific field, the less likely
the research findings are to be true" and "The greater the flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and
analytical modes in a scientific field, the less likely the research findings are to be true.") and economical ("The
greater the financial and other interests and prejudices in a scientific field, the less likely the research findings
are to be true" and "The hotter a scientific field (with more scientific teams involved), the less likely the
research findings are to be true.") Hence: "
Research process
Most research findings are false for most research designs and for most fields" and "As shown, the majority of
modern biomedical research is operating in areas with very low pre- and poststudy probability for true
findings." However: "Nevertheless, most new discoveries will continue to stem from hypothesis-generating
research with low or very low pre-study odds," which means that *new* discoveries will come from research
that, when that research started, had low or very low odds (a low or very low chance) of succeeding. Hence, if
the scientific method is used to expand the frontiers of knowledge, research into areas that are outside the
mainstream will yield most new discoveries
with various steps in the research process
Define the Problem

Identifying a compelling research question is the first step to a successful research project. What issue,
problem, or topic are you interested in exploring?
This worksheet will guide you through the process of developing your research question.
This video and powerpoint are additional resources to help you develop a research question.2. Review the
Literature
The purpose of conducting research is to "fill in the gaps" of our knowledge about a particular field or subject,
to identify a new problem, or to "test" a new solution or recommendation for an existing issue or phenomenon.
To frame your research project, and to ensure that your research question has not already been examined, you
must conduct a literature review.
3. Formulate a Hypothesis or a Problem Statement
Depending on your research question and methodology, you will be required to formulate a research hypothesis
OR a problem statement based on your research question.
A research hypothesis is an educated prediction that provides an explanation for an observable (measurable)
event or condition.
A problem statement is both a reiteration of the problem that the study will address and the justification for
studying the problem. Learn more about how to develop a problem statement.
4. Select a Research Design
Deciding what you will research will help to determine how you will design your research project.
Page 9
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
Will it be qualitative or quantitative? What methodology and design will you choose? What methods -
techniques and tools - will you use to collect, analyze, and interpret your data?
5. Carry Out the Research
Now you can finally conduct your research!
For many, this is the most enjoyable part of the process; but, it's also the step that requires the greatest attention
to detail to ensure that your research design and methods are followed accurately - to generate good data - and
that the research is conducted ethically.
Read more about how to be a responsible researcher.
6. Interpret Your Results
Once your experiment has concluded and/or data have been collected, it is time to analyze the data using
methods determined by your research methodology and design. Next, you must interpret the results.
It is important that your interpretetation is supported by the evidence. Avoid spurious conclusions
of causality or correlation.
7. Report the Research Findings
The purpose of research is to share knowledge.
Once your research has concluded, it is important to share your results. You might write an article for
publication, prepare a white paper, or present your research at a conference either as part of a panel discussion
or a poster presentation.
Here are some tips for designing a better research poster
8. Repeat
Research is an iterative process.
New knowledge leads to more questions, further research, and the generation of more new knowledge
Q2: Describe different types of research by method .Why and where we use these types (Descriptive,
historical, and co relational research to discuss the educational phenomena?
ANS :
Research Methods/Types of Research:
Research can be classified in many different ways on the basis of the methodology of research, the knowledge it
creates, the user group, the research problem it investigates etc.
Basic research
This research is conducted largely for the enhancement of knowledge, and is research which does not have
immediate commercial potential. The research which is done for human welfare, animal welfare and plant
kingdom welfare. It is called basic, pure, fundamental research. The main motivation here is to expand man's
knowledge, not to create or invent something. According to Travers, “Basic Research is designed to add to an
organized body of scientific knowledge and does not necessarily produce results of immediate practical value.”
Such a research is time and cost intensive (Example: An experimental research that may not be or will be
helpful in the human progress). It is used to solve a problem by adding to the field of application of a discipline.
Applied Research
Applied research is designed to solve practical problems of the modern world, rather than to acquire knowledge
for knowledge's sake. The goal of applied research is to improve the human condition. It focuses on analysis
Page 10
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
and solving social and real life problems. This research is generally conducted on a large scale basis and is
expensive. As such, it is often conducted with the support of some financing agency like the national
government, public corporation, world bank, UNICEF, UGC, Etc. According to Hunt, “applied research is an
investigation for ways of using scientific knowledge to solve practical problems” for example:- improve
agriculture crop production, treat or cure a specific disease, improve the energy efficiency of homes, offices,
how can communication among workers in large companies be improved.
Problem oriented research
Research is done by industry apex body for sorting out problems faced by all the companies. Eg:- WTO does
problem oriented research for developing countries, in India agriculture and processed food export development
authority (APEDA) conduct regular research for the benefit of agri-industry.
• As the name indicates, Problem identifying researches are undertaken to know the exact nature of problem
that is required to be solved.
• Here, one clarification is needed when we use the term ‘Problem’, it is not a problem in true sense. It is
usually a decision making dilemma or it is a need to tackle a particular business situation.
• It could be a difficulty or an opportunity.
For e.g.:-Revenue of Mobile company has decreased by 25% in the last year. The cause of the problem can be
any one of the following:
• Poor quality of the product. • Lack of continuous availability. • Not so effective advertising campaign. • High
price. • Poor calibre / lack of motivation in sales people/marketing team. • Tough competition from imported
brands. • Depressed economic conditions
• In the same case, suppose the prime cause of problem is poor advertising campaign & secondary cause is
higher pricing. • To tackle the problem of poor advertising, we have to answer questions like, what can be the
new advertising campaign, who can be the brand ambassador, which media, which channel, at what time &
during which programme advertisements will be broadcast.
Problem solving
This type of research is done by an individual company for the problem faced by it. Marketing research and
market research are the applied research. For eg:- videocon international conducts research to study customer
satisfaction level, it will be problem solving research. In short, the main aim of problem solving research is to
discover some solution for some pressing practical problem.
Quantitative Research
This research is based on numeric figures or numbers. Quantitative research aim to measure the quantity or
amount and compares it with past records and tries to project for future period. In social sciences, “quantitative
research refers to the systematic empirical investigation of quantitative properties and phenomena and their
relationships”. The objective of quantitative research is to develop and employ mathematical models, theories or
hypothesis pertaining to phenomena.
The process of measurement is central to quantitative research because it provides fundamental connection
between empirical observation and mathematical expression of quantitative relationships. Statistics is the most
widely used branch of mathematics in quantitative research. Statistical methods are used extensively with in
fields such as economics and commerce.
Page 11
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
In sum, the research using the normative approach conducts why may be called quantitative research as the
inferences from it are largely based on quantitative data. Moreover, objectivity is the primary guard so that the
research may be replicated by others, if necessary.
Qualitative Research
Qualitative research presents a non-quantitative type of analysis. Qualitative research is collecting, analyzing
and interpreting data by observing what people do and say. Qualitative research refers to the meanings,
definitions, characteristics, symbols, metaphors, and description of things. Qualitative research is much more
subjective and uses very different methods of collecting information,mainly individual, in-depth interviews and
focus groups.
The nature of this type of research is exploratory and open ended. Small number of people are interviewed in
depth and or a relatively small number of focus groups are conducted. Qualitative research can be further
classified in the following type.
I. Phenomenology:-a form of research in which the researcher attempts to understand how one or more
individuals experience a phenomenon. Eg:-we might interview 20 victims of bhopal tragedy.
II. Ethnography:- this type of research focuses on describing the culture of a group of people. A culture is the
shared attributes, values, norms, practices, language, and material things of a group of people. Eg:-the
researcher might decide to go and live with the tribal in Andaman island and study the culture and the
educational practices.
III. Case study:-is a form of qualitative research that is focused on providing a detailed account of one or more
cases. Eg:-we may study a classroom that was given a new curriculum for technology use.
IV. Grounded theory:- it is an inductive type of research,based or grounded in the observations of data from
which it was developed; it uses a variety of data sources, including quantitative data, review of records,
interviews, observation and surveys
V. Historical research:-it allows one to discuss past and present events in the context of the present condition,
and allows one to reflect and provide possible answers to current issues and problems. Eg:-the lending pattern
of business in the 19th century.
In addition to the above, we also have the descriptive research. Fundamental research, of which this is based on
establishing various theories
Also the research is classified into:
1. Descriptive research
2. Analytical research
3. Fundamental research
4. Conceptual research
5. Empirical research
6. One time research or longitudinal research
7. Field-setting research or laboratory research or simulation research
8. Clinical or diagnostic research
9. Exploratory research
10. Historical research
11. Conclusion oriented research
12. Case study research
13. Short term research
Page 12
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
Descriptive research is defined as a research method that describes the characteristics of the population or
phenomenon that is being studied. This methodology focuses more on the “what” of the research subject rather
than the “why” of the research subject.In other words, descriptive research primarily focuses on describing the
nature of a demographic segment, without focusing on “why” a certain phenomenon occurs. In other words, it
“describes” the subject of the research, without covering “why” it happens.
For example, an apparel brand that wants to understand the fashion purchasing trends among New York buyers
will conduct a demographic survey of this region, gather population data and then conduct descriptive research
on this demographic segment. The research will then uncover details on “what is the purchasing pattern of New
York buyers”, but not cover any investigative details on “why” the patterns exeunt. Because for the apparel
brand trying to break into this market, understanding the nature of their market is the objective of the study.
Characteristics of Descriptive Research: The term descriptive research then, refers to research
questions, design of the research and data analysis that would be conducted on that topic. It is called an
observational research method because none of the variables that are part of the research study are influenced in
any capacity.
Some distinctive characteristics of descriptive research are:
Quantitative research: Descriptive research is a quantitative research method that attempts to collect
quantifiable information to be used for statistical analysis of the population sample. It is an popular market
research tool that allows to collect and describe the nature of the demographic segment.
1. Uncontrolled variables: In descriptive research, none of the variables are influenced in any way. This uses
observational methods to conduct the research. Hence, the nature of the variables or their behavior is not in the
hands of the researcher.
2. Cross-sectional studies: Descriptive research is generally a cross-sectional study where different sections
belonging to the same group are studied.
3. Basis for further research: The data collected and analyzed from descriptive research can then be further
researched using different research techniques. The data also can help point towards the types of research
methods are to be used for the subsequent research.
The 3 Basic Types of Descriptive Research Methods
One of the goals of science is description (other goals include prediction and explanation). Descriptive research
methods are pretty much as they sound — they describesituations. They do not make accurate predictions, and
they do not determine cause and effect.
There are three main types of descriptive methods: observational methods, case-study methods and survey
methods. This article will briefly describe each of these methods, their advantages, and their drawbacks. This
may help you better understand research findings, whether reported in the mainstream media, or when reading a
research study on your own.
Observational Method
With the observational method animal and human behavior is closely observed. There are two main categories
of the observational method — naturalistic observation and laboratory observation.
The biggest advantage of the naturalistic method of research is that researchers view participants in their natural
environments. This leads to greater ecological validity than laboratory observation, proponents say.
Ecological validity refers to the extent to which research can be used in real-life situations.
Page 13
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
Proponents of laboratory observation often suggest that due to more control in the laboratory, the results found
when using laboratory observation are more meaningful than those obtained with naturalistic observation.
Laboratory observations are usually less time-consuming and cheaper than naturalistic observations. Of
course, both naturalistic and laboratory observation are important in regard to the advancement of scientific
knowledge.
Case Study Method
Case study research involves an in-depth study of an individual or group of indviduals. Case studies often lead
to testable hypotheses and allow us to study rare phenomena. Case studies should not be used to determine
cause and effect, and they have limited use for making accurate predictions.
There are two serious problems with case studies — expectancy effects and atypical individuals. Expectancy
effects include the experimenter’s underlying biases that might affect the actions taken while conducting
research. These biases can lead to misrepresenting participants’ descriptions. Describing atypical individuals
may lead to poor generalizations and detract from external validity.
Survey Method
In survey method research, participants answer questions administered through interviews or questionnaires.
After participants answer the questions, researchers describe the responses given. In order for the survey to be
both reliable and valid it is important that the questions are constructed properly. Questions should be written
so they are clear and easy to comprehend.
Another consideration when designing questions is whether to include open-ended, closed-ended, partially
open-ended, or rating-scale questions. Advantages and disadvantages can be found with each type:
Open-ended questions allow for a greater variety of responses from participants but are difficult to analyze
statistically because the data must be coded or reduced in some manner. Closed-ended questions are easy to
analyze statistically, but they seriously limit the responses that participants can give. Many researchers prefer to
use a Likert-type scale because it’s very easy to analyze statistically.
In addition to the methods listed above some individuals also include qualitative (as a distinct method) and
archival methods when discussing descriptive research methods.
It is important to emphasize that descriptive research methods can only describe a set of observations or the data
collected. It cannot draw conclusions from that data about which way the relationship goes — Does A cause B,
or does B cause A?
Unfortunately, in many studies published today, researchers forget this fundamental limitation of their research
and suggest their data can actually demonstrate or “suggest” causal relationships. Nothing could be further from
the truth
CORRELATION RESEARCH
To carried out to help explain important human behaviours or to predict likely outcomes. Purposes of
correlational research
Explanatory studies It is to clarify out understanding of important phenomena by identifying relationship among
variables. Always investigate a number of variables they believe are related to a more complex variables such as
motivation or learning. Types of correlational research
Selecting a problem Choosing a sample Selecting or developing instrument Determining procedures Collecting
and analyzing data Interpreting result Basic steps
Page 14
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
Teacher about to study the causes of the amount of descriptive behaviours display in class. Student having
difficulty in mathematic subject. Teacher about to study the causes of student does not perform in the subject.
Example
What? Investigator attempt to determine the cause or consequences of differences that already exist between or
among group of individuals. Sometimes viewed, along with correlational
Historical research
The searches had been carried out the next step was to build up a picture of the situation in each region for each
of the three years using the “6 - I” model as a framework. This was done by combining the results of the
searches ordered by category, sub-category and year for each of the two regions and the national situation. This
data was used as a basis to describe developments in that region during 1985 to 2005. As with the first round of
data collection further refinement took place during the writing up process, duplications and overlaps were
identified and articles were reassigned to different categories as appropriate. The data collection process is
summarised in Table 5. Stage Method Analysis First Round Interviews with significant Data coded using
NVivo with figures working in each region. 6-I model used as overall conceptual framework. Second Round
Regional newspapers scanned Data coded using Access for relevant articles for years database with 6-I model
used as 1985, 1995 and 2005. overall conceptual framework. National & regional reports Data used to
supplement and produced by Government, confirm data from newspaper economic development bodies,
articles. NGO’s and Statistics New Zealand collected for period from 1985 to 2005. Historical source material
consists of primary and secondary sources. Historians select the events and people that they consider important.
By doing so they don’t so much recreate the past as rediscover it, and to some extent colour it with their own set
of valu e judgements. The historical researcher’s most important role is to choose reliable sources, in order to
create reliable narratives about the past (Howell et al. 2001). There needs to be a systematic approach to
gathering data, as collecting only the most compelling evidence can result in material that is unrepresentative
(Wenger et al. 2000). Utilising the authoritative source only is not a wise approach. Evidence should be
collected from a wide range of sources, each of which will have their own strengths and weaknesses (Tosh
2000). Any source material collected should be subjected to both external and internal criticism. The
authenticity of the evidence is determined by external criticism, whereas credibility is established by internal
criticism (Shafer 1980). The use of external criticism involves establishing whether a document can be traced
back to the purported originator, establishing whether it is consistent with known facts, and studying the form of
the document (Tosh 2000). Internal criticism consists of trying to establish the author’s meaning and making a
judgement as to the inten tions and prejudices of the writer (Tosh 2000).
Context 2
criticism consists of trying to establish the author's meaning and making a judgement as to the intentions and
prejudices of the writer (Tosh 2000). An overview of the two techniques is shown as . Regional newspapers are
an authentic primary source. ...
Citations
• It easily leads to a distorted understanding of the subject matter and, perhaps, to a subjective attitude of
superiority. Some believe this could be balanced with 'empathy' which would aid in imagining how events were
experienced, and would also color history more appealing and interesting to others (cf.Toland and Yoong
2013;LévesqueLévesque 2008, Mason et al. 1997a). Historical empathy was argued by historians in the mid-
nineteenth century: however, answers/facts/evidence are not sought from empathy but from historical
sources. ...
Page 15
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
... An example of this type of focusing question can be found in Jaana Porra, Rudy Hirschheim and Michael S.
Parks (2006): " What significant changes did the Texaco IT function face over its existence? " However, these
types of open-ended questions often provide descriptions only and, ultimately, do not satisfy the historian,
whose main task is to explain past events and development and whose main focus is the question of Why (see
alsoHepsø et al. 2009;Toland and Yoong 2013;Bryant et al. 2013). The historian looks after the causes of
events, the change that occurred, and the many consequences, both intended and unintended. ...
... Toland and Yoong (2013) comment that an important technique of historical research is to " listen for
silences, " but, as a matter of fact, an argument from silence—argumentum ex silentio—is generally regarded as
unreliable by historians. IS historians need to be aware of the questionable credibility of some sources (Toland
and Yoong 2013). The credibility of a source depends on which questions are about to be addressed.
Dsicuss the concept of educational research ,also examine the need and importance of research in education ?
ANS: Research
Research is an in depth inquiry in to a problem which need an amicable solution. Every invention in the world
happens as a result of a scientific enquiry. See the example of Isaac Newton when the apple falls on his head, he
started the question with why? He searched for truth, reason or discover to new knowledge. He applied
commonsense in his enquiry. The continuous search resulted in solving his problem. Finally he built a theory
named as Gravitation force theory with empirically proved body of knowledge. Hence research can be termed as
the search for truth or discovery of new things or builds body of knowledge regarding a phenomenon. Research
is a systematic, scientific, objective activity, which includes the collection relevant information, and careful
analysis of data, recording and reporting of valid conclusion, that may lead to creation of new knowledge,
development of theory, principles, and generalization. The developed theory, Knowledge, principles or
generalization may help the researcher or concerned authority to predict occurrences of certain possible events
and thereby make possible to ultimate control of unwanted events. Research also means that the process of
testing the validity of assumptions and formulated hypotheses. When we come to the educational research it is
the process of scientific inquiry to solve the problems of educational sector of a country. It includes theoretical
elaboration, quality enhancement matters, policy draft and implication, classroom dimension and so forth. It
involves a continuous enquiry in search of knowledge, advancement, problem solving methodology and an
attempt to realize the truth from an objective point of view based on factual understanding and systematic study.
Scope Educational Research
Education is considered as a vital tool for social as well as national development. It has significant role in
evaluating the human development of a country. When we assessing the development of a person, society,
community or a Nation, the educational attributes, such as educational qualifications, number of educated person
in the society or community, number of educational institution in the state or country (elementary, secondary,
higher, professional educational sector) with respects to its population, rate of enrolment, retention, quality of
education provided, equity and equality for educational opportunity and so forth are considered as the prime
criteria for consideration. Hence every nation in the world has been giving emphasis to the development
educational sector of their country. Many innovative programmes and projects are preparing by the policy
makers as well as the academic bodies across the world to improve their educational quantity as well as the
quality.. Educational Researches are the main input as well as the output to bring such change in the educational
sector. Research findings identify the shortcomings, strength and weakness of the educational sector of the
country and it recommends implementing such and such programme for the development of their educational
Page 16
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
sector. Educational research also helps to evaluate the effectiveness as well as the impact of particular
programmes and project which has been undertaken by any governmental or non governmental agencies. Hence
the breadth and width of the educational research is unlimited. It has a scope to conduct research in any area of
education which has a chance to contribute knowledge for the development of education of a society, community
and Nation as well.
Purpose of Educational Research
The Educational research has enormous purposes. Some important purposes are presented as following.
• To identify truth regarding Enrolment, retention, dropout, quality of Education and so
• forth
• To build new knowledge regarding the methodology, pedagogy or other core subject areas
• Adding of existing stock of knowledge related to educational field
• To solve a problem related to classroom, institution, administrative level, policy level
• Invention of new teaching methods, curriculum transaction strategies, effective grouping
• technique and so forth
• Realizing the exact problem of educational sector
• Assess the Effect of New methodology of teaching
• Identify and assess the ICT enabled classroom and teaching
• To understand the teachers knowledge on latest evaluation techniques
• To identify the hindrances to achieve universalization of education
Characteristics of a good research
While analyzing the discussions of eminent educationalists and social scientists, we can draw the following
characteristics of a good research.
• 1. Research is directed towards the solution of a problem
• 2. Research is a continuous enquiry in search of knowledge
• 3. Research emphasis the development of generalization, principles, theories
• 4. Research is based upon observable experiences and empirical evidences
• 5. Research rejects revelation and dogmas as methods of establishing knowledge
• 6. Research employs in depth review of related literature
• 7. Research depends on valid and reliable data gathering procedure
• 8. Research demands accurate observations and descriptions
• 9. Research applies systematic and scientific procedure for the study
• 10. Research involves gathering of new data from first hand sources (primary) or existing
• data (secondary sources) for a new purposes
• 11. Research is based on carefully designed procedure with rigorous analysis
• 12. Research requires expertise
• 13. Research is a objective, logical process and eliminate personal bias
• 14. Research involve the quest for answer to unsolved problems
• 15. Possibility for Replication
• 16. Research is characterized by patient and unhurried activity
• 17. Research is carefully recorded and reported
• 18. Research sometimes required courage
• 19. Quantitative Research involves hypotheses testing using suitable statistical techniques
Page 17
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
• 20. Qualitative Research involve objective thick description on thin data
Replication
Research is considered as process of searching for new knowledge. However, there will be some administrative
or academic urgency to deliberately repeat the previous study using same procedure with another sample, in a
new setting and at different time. This process is called replication. It is the fusion of words of repetition and
duplication. Replication is used to conform the validity of the conclusion drawn by the previous studies which
are under questioned from different academic as well as political corner. Besides, replication is also necessary to
understand the trend, progress, development among generations in particular area. For example, a researcher can
replicate the study conducted by a researcher on the problem of ICT awareness and use among the secondary
school teachers. The result may evidence that what progress has been made in the areas of ICT among the
secondary school teachers while the time has passed after the earlier study.
Importance :
Educational research is important because it is conducted in order to provide trustworthy information regarding
educational problems and their solutions. There are many things that need to be considered when looking at
what educational research is for example some thought needs to be put into looking at current paradigms, what
counts as evidence in educational research, maintaining quality, and the role of peer review in validating new
knowledge in educational research.
There are many different approaches to educational research which are shaped by many different research
paradigms. Koul (2008) states that “the various research paradigms have different criteria for ontology and
epistemology to maintain quality standards. The ontology and epistemology of a research paradigm influence
researchers applying the quality standards, methodology and methods (para. 1).
What is a Paradigm:
The use of this fashionable word came about from the philosopher of science, Thomas Kuhn. The word comes
from the Greek work paradeigma which translates literally as ‘pattern’. It is used in social science to describe an
entire way of looking at the world (Davidson & Tolich, 1999). It can be viewed as a basic set of beliefs held by
an individual that represent a worldview which defines “the nature of the “world”, the individual’s place in it
and the range of possible relationships to that world and its parts” (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 200) A
paradigm relates to a particular set of philosophical assumptions about what the world is made of and how it
works. One way to consider a paradigm is as a collection of ontological and epistemological assumptions
(Davidson & Tolich, 1999).
Inquiry paradigms define for inquirers what it is they are about, and what falls within and outside the limits of
legitimate inquiry. (http://prk.dreamwidth.org/60977.html)
Examining paradigms define for inquirers what paradigms are about and what fall within in and outside the
limits of that paradigm?
Denzin and Lincon (1998) state that there are three fundamental questions that need to be addressed in order to
complete research. These questions are; the epistemological question, the ontological question, and the
methodological question it is important to note that however one answers a question it effects how they answer
the other two.
The epistemological question is asking what the form and nature of reality is and, what can be known about it?
Denzin and Lincoln (1998) uses the example of if a ‘real’ world is assumed, then what can be known about it
Page 18
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
are “how things really are” or “how things really work” where as other questions like matters of aesthetic or
moral significance, fall outside the realm of legitimate scientific inquiry. (pp. 201)
Questions for analysing paradigms
Research paradigms
Positivism
Epistemological questions
Nature of knowledge
Knowledge can be described in a systematic way
Knowledge consists of verified hypotheses that can be regarded as facts or laws.
Probabilistic – i.e. holds true for large groups of people or occurs in many situations
Knowledge is accurate and certain
Role of theory
Theories are:
Normative
Present ‘models’
General propositions explaining causal relationships between variables
Theory building/testing
Postulate a theories that can be tested in order to confirm or reject
Prove a theory from observable phenomena / behaviour
Test theories in a controlled setting, empirically supporting or falsifying hypotheses through process of
experimentation
Role of research
Uncover reality i.e. natural laws
Scientifically explain / describe, predict and control phenomena
Research findings are true if:
Can be observed an measured
Can be replicated and are generalizable
Role of common sense
None – only deductive reasoning
(Voce, 2004 pp. ??)
The Ontological Question:
Ontology is defined by … as…
What is the nature of the relationship between the knower or would be knower and what can be known? Denzin
& Lincoln (1998) continue with their example of reality being assumed because one has already answered the
epistolocial question the posture of the knower must be one of objective detachment or value freedom in order
to discover these thing…..
What is the nature of the relationship between the knower or would be knower and what can be known? The
answer that can be given to this question is constrained by the answer already given to the ontological question;
that is, not just any relationship can now be postulated. So if, for example, a “real” reality is assumed, then the
posture of the knower must be one of objective detachment or value freedom in order to discover “how things
really are” and “how things really work” (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 201).
Page 19
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
Research paradigms
Positivism
Ontological
Questions
Nature of reality
An objective, true reality exists which is governed by unchangeable natural cause-effect laws
Consists of stable pre-existing patterns or order that can be discovered
Reality is not time- nor context-bound
Reality can be generalised
Nature of human beings
Rational
Shaped by external factors (same cause has the same effect on everyone) i.e. mechanical model / behaviourist
approach. Under certain conditions people will probably engage in a specified behaviour
(Voce, 2004)
The Methodological Question:
Methodology is defined by the free dictionary as “a body of practices, procedures, and rules used by those who
work in a discipline or engage in an inquiry; a set of working methods”
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/methodological
Therefore the methodological question surrounds how the inquirer goes about finding out what they believe can
be known? Depending on what answers have already been given to the above questions they will constrain the
answer to this one, whether the methods are qualitative or quantitave. “The methodological question cannot be
reduced to a question of methods; methods must be fitted to a predetermined methodology” (Denzin & Lincoln,
1998, pp. 201)
How can the inquirer (would be knower) go about finding out whatever he or she believes can be known? The
answer that can be given to this question in constrained by answers already given to the first two questions; that
is, not just any methodology is appropriate. For example, a “real” reality pursued by an “objective” inquirer
mandates control of possible confounding factors, whether the methods are qualitative (e.g. observational) or
quantitative (e.g. analysis of covariance). The methodological question cannot be reduced to a question of
methods; methods must be fitted to a predetermined methodology (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 201).
Research paradigms
Positivism
Methodological questions
Role of researcher
Objective, independent from the subject
Investigator often controls the investigated
Role of values
Science is value-free
Values have no place in research – must eliminate all bias
Methods
Empirical
Page 20
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
Structured and replicable observation
Quantification / measurement
Experimental – directly manipulate variables and observe
Type of studies
Survey studies
Verification of hypotheses
Statistical analysis
Quantitative descriptive studies
What is Positivism:
“Knowledge is based not on unchallengeable, rock-solid foundations, but rather upon human conjectures”
(Phillips & Burbules, 2000).
Positivism is an epistemological perception which states that only knowledge which is based on sensory
experience and positive verification is authentic knowledge. More simply worded, positivism is the view that all
true knowledge is scientific, and that all things are ultimately measureable.
Positivism emerged from the success of the scientific approach in natural sciences such as physics, chemistry,
and biology. The impetus for this came from the overwhelming success of science in understanding and solving
problems in the natural world.
The ontology of positivism is realism; an apprehend able reality that is assumed to exist, driven by immutable
natural laws and mechanisms. Knowledge of the “ways things are” is conventionally summarised in the form of
time- and context-free generalizations, some of which take the form of cause-effect laws. Research can, in
principle, converge on the “true” state of affairs. The basic posture of the paradigm is argued to be both
reductionist and deterministic (Hesse, 1980, cited in Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 204).
The epistemology of positivism is dualist and objectivist; meaning the investigator and the investigated “object”
are assumed to be independent entities, and the investigator to be capable of studying the object without
influencing it or being influenced by it. When influence in either direction (threats to validity) is recognised, or
even suspected, various strategies are followed to reduce or eliminate it. Inquiry takes place as through a one-
way mirror. Values biases are prevented from influencing outcomes, so long as the prescribed procedures are
rigorously followed. Replicable findings are, in fact, “true” (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 204).
The methodology of positivism is experimental and manipulative. Questions and/or hypotheses are stated in
propositional form and subjected to empirical tests to verify them; possible confounding conditions must be
carefully controlled (manipulated) to prevent outcomes from being improperly influenced (Denzin & Lincoln,
1998, pp. 204).
Originally conceptualised by Auguste Comte in the early 19th Century (Pickering, 1993), positivism has been
greatly criticised, including by positivist themselves. A number of the concerns raised have influenced the
epistemological position taken within this research; particularly that knowledge is a social variable, knowing
one is the subject of a study, changes in one’s behaviour, and the notion of subjectivity and value orientation.
What is Social Construction of Reality/ Post-Positivism:
The Social Construction Reality/ Post-positivism paradigm include the following paradigms: interpretive,
critical, feminist, and postmodern paradigm. I think interpretive paradigm is the paradigm that most education
research is based on at the University of Waikato.
The social construction of reality assumes that knowledge is subjective and unique therefore researchers
undertake “systematic and painstaking analysis of social episodes” (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2007, pp.
Page 21
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
19). This is a less reductionist approach to research recognizing the importance of context and aiming to
represent how participants view their world. Rather than seeking generalisations this paradigm accepts that
“reality is multilayered and complex” (Cohen et al, 2007, pp. 21) therefore data collected are open to multiple
interpretations. This approach is more speculative based on the assumption that theory is emergent therefore the
researcher should not be seeking evidence purely to support a predetermined hypothesis.
Post-positivism is a meta-theoretical stance that analyses and adjusts positivism in light of the criticisms which
positivism, as a scientific paradigm, has received. Post-positivism offers primary amendments to the positivist
paradigm. Firstly, that the absolute separation of the knower and the known is not assumed; and secondly, that a
single, shared reality which excludes all others is not assumed to be a true basis for reasoning. It is critical to
note that post-positivism is not a rejection of the scientific paradigm, but seeks to amend the criticisms
associated with positivism (Phillips & Burbules, 2000; Zammito, 2004).
Post-positivism states that knowledge is based not on unchallengeable, rock-solid foundations, but rather on
human conjectures (Phillips & Burbules, 2000; Zammito, 2004). Epistemologically speaking post-positivism
works on the position that facts and law deduced through research are probably true (Guba & Lincoln, 2005) in
light of evidence provided (Phillips & Burbules, 2000; Zammito, 2004). Post-positivism of this type is common
place in social science for conceptual and practical reasons (Phillips & Burbules, 2000; Zammito, 2004).
What are the differences between the two Meta-Paradigms:
Based on the literature, the most fundamental differences between both paradigms are how they search for the
truth and define validity and reliability. The positivist paradigm seeks and finds them in a (perceived) value free
and objective evidence based world and the constructivists in a subjective, contextual and interpretive world
Research as creating new knowledge:
Positivism and Post-positivism create knowledge by a process of accretion, with each fact (or probable fact)
serving as a kind of building block that, when placed into its proper niche, adds to the growing “edifice of
knowledge”. When the facts take the form of generalisation or cause-effect linkages, they may be used most
efficiently for prediction and control. Generalisations may then be made, with predicable confidence, to a
population of settings (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, pp. 212).
What counts as evidence in Educational Research:
What counts as evidence in educational research depends on what is being asked. If one is looking at
effectiveness of direct impact then there would be a different type of key evidence compared to if the question
was in relation to the nature of a problem, or how some intervention worked or how a naturally occurring
process takes place. Basically the kinds of evidence that will count will depend on the nature of the proposition.
Anyone that is interested in the ‘evidence’ needs to remember that the evidence is always connected to what
was being asked or the proposition. One cannot take for granted that it is true one needs to still ask: how is the
connection made possible? And what values, assumptions and conventions are behind that kind of connection?
Maintaining quality in Educational Research:
The quality standards related to the post/positivist paradigm are validity and reliability. This is because the
focus of this is to discover the ‘truth’ using empirical investigation. Anderson and Arsenault (1998) write that
“validity refers to the extent to which what we measure reflects what we expected to measure [which] has two
forms: internal and external (pp. 257). Related to the research, the term internal validity refers to how the
findings meet the expected results. While, external validity refers to being able to generalise the findings to
other situations and contexts. Therefore, an experiment is valid if the results are appropriate to the manipulated
Page 22
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
independent variable and if they are able to be generalised to individuals or contexts other than the experiment’s
setting (Gay & Airasian 2000, pp. 371).
Because the focus of this paradigm is to find out the ‘truth’, reliability is an important indicator for the
consistency of the research findings. Anderson and Arsenault (1998) state that “reliability refers to the extent
that an instrument will yield the same results each time it is administered” (pp. 256) an example of this is, if you
were to administer a survey the larger the source of the data you collect the more it will be reliable as the results
become more generalised the more it will give the same results the next time you did it.
Furthermore, trustworthiness is a foundational criteria to maintaining quality. Trustworthiness can be broken
down into four quality standards these being, credibility using multiple methods and perspectives and member
checking, transferablility by providing rich data and thick descriptions, dependability by having a detailed audit
trail, and comformability can be achieved by giving readers clear track of data and interpretations. (Anderson
and Arsenault 1998)
Peer Review….
Research shows the benefits of Peer review doesn’t only improve the language that authors use and they way
their ideas are presented, but also alerts them to statistical and scientific errors in their research, inappropriate
methodology, or accuracies in referencing which they can then correct before the publication. (Taylor and
Francis Author Services, 2010) An example of this is when one submits his/her work to an international journal
for anonymous refereeing by unknown peers, they read they article critically and then suggest for it to be
accepted, rejected, or most often revised and improved before it is published. Without this external ‘seal of
approval’ many scientists “would consider any results as preliminary, potentially flawed” (Gannon, 2001).:
Educational research with its characteristics is influenced by four major paradigms. Each paradigm has its own
epistemology, ontology, and quality standards which influence the researchers to find the truth and see the
reality. The important point is that knowing the nature of each paradigm which can help the researchers to
conduct their research process. Researchers can conduct the research within and across paradigms which is
called multi-paradigmatic research paradigms (Taylor, 2008).
The nature of educational research is analogous with the nature of research itself, which is systematic, reliable
and valid to find the “truth”, investigates knowledge, and solves problems. Moreover, educational research
process involves steps to collect the information in order to investigate problems and knowledge. However, the
educational research is more complex because it can use various approaches and strategies to solve problems in
educational setting. It also can involve many disciplines such as anthropology, sociology, behaviour, and
history. In addition, educational research is important because of contributing knowledge development,
practical improvement, and policy information. Therefore, educators can use those research findings to improve
their competences and teaching and learning process (Yulirahmawati, 2008).
--------------------------------------
Q.4 What is experiment and how you will conduct experimental research ,what will be the threats to internel and
externel validity to minimize these threats ?
ANS : Non-Experimental & Experimental Research
Alright! It's time to learn something using research by … performing a non-experimental study?
Wait, wait, and wait! Is it possible to have a non-experimental study? Is that sort of like sugar free candy? Is it
something that you're supposed to have that is replaced by something that makes you scratch your head? Before
Page 23
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
we discuss research designs, though, you need a brief walkthrough of some of the terms I am going to throw at
you.
A predictor variable is the portion of the experiment that is being manipulated to see if it has an effect on the
dependent variable. For example, do people eat more Gouda or cheddar cheese? The predictor variable in this is
the type of cheese. Now, every time you eat cheese, you'll think about predictor variables. When I say subjects,
I just mean the people in the experiment or the people being studied.
Experimental research is when a researcher is able to manipulate the predictor variable and subjects to identify a
cause-and-effect relationship. This typically requires the research to be conducted in a lab, with one group being
placed in an experimental group, or the ones being manipulated, while the other is placed in a placebo group, or
inert condition or non-manipulated group. A laboratory-based experiment gives a high level of control and
reliability.
Non-experimental research is the label given to a study when a researcher cannot control, manipulate or alter
the predictor variable or subjects, but instead, relies on interpretation, observation or interactions to come to a
conclusion. Typically, this means the non-experimental researcher must rely on correlations, surveys or case
studies, and cannot demonstrate a true cause-and-effect relationship. Non-experimental research tends to have a
high level of external validity, meaning it can be generalized to a larger population
Experimental and non-experimental research design
By The U.S. Food and Drug Administration [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons
Experimental research design
Experimental research designs are based on a clear hypothesis, the purpose of the research is to confirm or
refute the validity of the hypothesis. Experimental research designs have an independent variable, a dependent
variable, and a control group. Most of the experiments are conducted in a laboratory in a controlled
environment. The purpose of the experiment is to find out the causation and experimental studies are causal
studies. These studies answer what, why and even how questions in the research. The experimenter can
manipulate the variables and he has a control group and a placebo. The control group receives the treatment that
the experimenter wants to test and the placebo group is tested without any treatment. The change in the results
of both groups are compared. The experimenter repeats the test in the same environment more than one time to
get most valid results. There are basically three different types of experiments: controlled experiments, quasi-
experiments, and field experiments.
Methodology
The experimenter determines two groups to perform an experiment: one group is called the experimental group
and the other group is called a placebo group. The experimental group gets the treatment and the placebo does
not get any treatment. The experimental group is similar to the control group except that the control group does
not get any treatment while the experimental group gets the treatment. The experimenter repeats the test twice
or thrice to increase the validity of the results.
Non-experimental research design
Non-experimental research designs are carried out in natural settings, it does not involve manipulation of the
situation, event, circumstances or people. Survey, case studies, correlational studies comparative studies and
descriptive studies are some of the examples of non-experimental research design. Longitudinal studies are also
non-experimental research and the purpose of these studies is to study a situation, people or phenomenon over a
period of time to observe the change.
Page 24
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
A correlation can be established using non-experimental research design but causation cannot be established. To
establish causation, the researcher should be able to say that the result is the outcome of the observed variable
and not something else. They do not have a control group and the research design is highly flexible. Due to the
absence of the control group the researcher cannot ascertain that the final results are the direct effect of the
variable that has been studied. The non-experimental research design study the phenomenon, people or situation
in a natural setting without manipulating it, therefore, the findings can be applied to a wide audience.
Methodology
In a non-experimental research, the researcher does not manipulate the variables to be tested and therefore he
cannot ascertain the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable. A causation is established in
some of the non experimental studies but not in all of them. The causation is established by determining that a
certain variable has an impact on another variable. It can also compare the results of two or more groups or
people on one or more variables
Steps in Experimental Research
The basic steps involved in conducting experimental research will be presented in this module.
Learning Objectives:
• List the steps that are used in conducting experimental research.
• Describe each step involved in the process.
The following YouTube vide, Experimental Design, offers a visual representation of the process of conducting
experimental research and serves as introduction to the steps discussed in this module.
The following list of steps explains the process of conducting experimental research in more detail. Researchers
should follow these steps in order to ensure the integrity of the process.
1. Select a topic. This involves simply identifying an area of interest or general subject.
2. Identify the research problem. Given the topic or subject, the researcher must now identify specific problems
or questions that relate to the subject. The researcher may be familiar with subject and may already know the
problem they want to research. If the researcher is new to the topic, it may be helpful to examine literature and
previous studies, as well as talk to other researchers. The problem selected should be important to the field and
be of significance to others in the discipline.
3. Conduct a literature search. Once the research problem is identified, a literature search should be conducted
before proceeding to design the experiment. It is helpful to know what studies have been performed, the
designs, the instruments used, the procedures and the findings. This information will guide the researcher and
help them create a project that extends or compliments existing research.
4. Construct a hypothesis. In this step, the researcher states the research question as a hypothesis. This provides the
basis for all other decisions in the process and therefore, it is a critical step.
5. Determine the design of the research. The researcher should review the hypothesis and verify that an
experimental design is the appropriate research design needed to answer the question. Additional information
regarding different types of experimental research design will be covered in the next module.
6. Determine the research methods. In this step, the researcher will identify and plan the details necessary to
conduct the research. This includes identifying the test subjects, materials, data collection instruments and
methods, and the procedures for the conducting the experiment.
7. Conduct the research and test the hypothesis. The experimental procedures will be carried out in this phase.
8. Analyze the data. Experimental research data lends itself to a variety of potential statistical analyses. The
appropriate analysis is determined by the research question and the type of data.
Page 25
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
9. Formulate conclusions. Review the data and determine if it confirms or disproves the hypothesis.
Method Advantages Disadvantages
Many people can be included. If given

Large surveys are expensive and time consuming.
to a random sample of the population,
Survey Although much information is gathered, this
a survey’s results can be generalized
information is relatively superficial.
to the population.
Because experiments do not involve random

If random assignment is used,
samples of the population and most often involve
Experiments experiments provide fairly convincing
college students, their results cannot readily be
data on cause and effect.
generalized to the population.
Observational studies may provide Because observation studies do not involve random
Observation
rich, detailed information about the samples of the population, their results cannot
(field research)
people who are observed. readily be generalized to the population.
Because existing data have already The data set that is being analyzed may not contain
been gathered, the researcher does not data on all the variables in which a sociologist is
Existing data
have to spend the time and money to interested or may contain data on variables that are
gather data. not measured in ways the sociologist prefers.
Surveys
The survey is the most common method by which sociologists gather their data. The Gallup poll is perhaps the
most well-known example of a survey and, like all surveys, gathers its data with the help of a questionnaire that
is given to a group of respondents. The Gallup poll is an example of a survey conducted by a private
organization, but sociologists do their own surveys, as does the government and many organizations in addition
to Gallup. Many surveys are administered to respondents who are randomly chosen and thus constitute
a random sample. In a random sample, everyone in the population (whether it be the whole US population or
just the population of a state or city, all the college students in a state or city or all the students at just one
college, etc.) has the same chance of being included in the survey. The beauty of a random sample is that it
allows us to generalize the results of the sample to the population from which the sample comes. This means
that we can be fairly sure of the behavior and attitudes of the whole US population by knowing the behavior and
attitudes of just four hundred people randomly chosen from that population.
Some surveys are face-to-face surveys, in which interviewers meet with respondents to ask them questions. This
type of survey can yield much information, because interviewers typically will spend at least an hour asking
their questions, and a high response rate (the percentage of all people in the sample who agree to be
interviewed), which is important to be able to generalize the survey’s results to the entire population. On the
downside, this type of survey can be very expensive and time consuming to conduct.
Page 26
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
Because of these drawbacks, sociologists and other researchers have turned to telephone surveys. Most Gallup
polls are conducted over the telephone. Computers do random-digit dialing, which results in a random sample
of all telephone numbers being selected. Although the response rate and the number of questions asked are both
lower than in face-to-face surveys (people can just hang up the phone at the outset or let their answering
machine take the call), the ease and low expense of telephone surveys are making them increasingly popular.
Surveys done over the Internet are also becoming more popular, as they can reach many people at very low
expense. A major problem with web surveys is that their results cannot necessarily be generalized to the entire
population because not everyone has access to the Internet.
Surveys are used in the study of social problems to gather information about the behavior and attitudes of
people regarding one or more problems. For example, many surveys ask people about their use of alcohol,
tobacco, and other drugs or about their experiences of being unemployed or in poor health. Many of the
chapters in this book will present evidence gathered by surveys carried out by sociologists and other social
scientists, various governmental agencies, and private research and public interest firms.
Experiments
Experiments are the primary form of research in the natural and physical sciences, but in the social sciences
they are for the most part found only in psychology. Some sociologists still use experiments, however, and they
remain a powerful tool of social research.
The major advantage of experiments, whether they are done in the natural and physical sciences or in the social
sciences, is that the researcher can be fairly sure of a cause-and-effect relationship because of the way the
experiment is set up. Although many different experimental designs exist, the typical experiment consists of
an experimental group and a control group, with subjectsrandomly assigned to either group. The researcher does
something to the experimental group that is not done to the control group. If the two groups differ later in some
variable, then it is safe to say that the condition to which the experimental group was subjected was responsible
for the difference that resulted.
Most experiments take place in the laboratory, which for psychologists may be a room with a one-way mirror,
but some experiments occur in the field, or in a natural setting (field experiments). In Minneapolis, Minnesota,
in the early 1980s, sociologists were involved in a much-discussed field experiment sponsored by the federal
government. The researchers wanted to see whether arresting men for domestic violence made it less likely that
they would commit such violence again. To test this hypothesis, the researchers had police do one of the
following after arriving at the scene of a domestic dispute: They either arrested the suspect, separated him from
his wife or partner for several hours, or warned him to stop but did not arrest or separate him. The researchers
then determined the percentage of men in each group who committed repeated domestic violence during the
next six months and found that those who were arrested had the lowest rate of recidivism, or repeat offending
(Sherman & Berk, 1984). This finding led many jurisdictions across the United States to adopt a policy of
mandatory arrest for domestic violence suspects. However, replications of the Minneapolis experiment in other
cities found that arrest sometimes reduced recidivism for domestic violence but also sometimes increased it,
depending on which city was being studied and on certain characteristics of the suspects, including whether
they were employed at the time of their arrest (Sherman, 1992).
As the Minneapolis study suggests, perhaps the most important problem with experiments is that their results
are not generalizable beyond the specific subjects studied. The subjects in most psychology experiments, for
example, are college students, who obviously are not typical of average Americans: They are younger, more
educated, and more likely to be middle class. Despite this problem, experiments in psychology and other social
Page 27
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
sciences have given us very valuable insights into the sources of attitudes and behavior. Scholars of social
problems are increasingly using field experiments to study the effectiveness of various policies and programs
aimed at addressing social problems. We will examine the results of several such experiments in the chapters
ahead.
Observational Studies
Observational research, also called field research, is a staple of sociology. Sociologists have long gone into the
field to observe people and social settings, and the result has been many rich descriptions and analyses of
behavior in juvenile gangs, bars, urban street corners, and even whole communities.
Observational studies consist of both participant observation and nonparticipant observation. Their names
describe how they differ. In participant observation, the researcher is part of the group that she or he is studying,
spends time with the group, and might even live with people in the group. Several classical social problems
studies of this type exist, many of them involving people in urban neighborhoods (Liebow, 1967; Liebow, 1993;
Whyte, 1943). In nonparticipant observation, the researcher observes a group of people but does not otherwise
interact with them. If you went to your local shopping mall to observe, say, whether people walking with
children looked happier than people without children, you would be engaging in nonparticipant observation.
Similar to experiments, observational studies cannot automatically be generalized to other settings or members
of the population. But in many ways they provide a richer account of people’s lives than surveys do, and they
remain an important method of research on social problems.
Existing Data
Sometimes sociologists do not gather their own data but instead analyze existing data that someone else has
gathered. The US Census Bureau, for example, gathers data on all kinds of areas relevant to the lives of
Americans, and many sociologists analyze census data on such social problems as poverty, unemployment, and
illness. Sociologists interested in crime and the criminal justice system may analyze data from court records,
while medical sociologists often analyze data from patient records at hospitals. Analysis of existing data such as
these is called secondary data analysis. Its advantage to sociologists is that someone else has already spent the
time and money to gather the data. A disadvantage is that the data set being analyzed may not contain data on
all the topics in which a sociologist may be interested or may contain data on topics that are not measured in
ways the sociologist might prefer.
The Scientific Method and Objectivity
This section began by stressing the need for sound research in the study of social problems. But what are the
elements of sound research? At a minimum, such research should follow the rules of the scientific method. As
you probably learned in high school and/or college science classes, these rules—formulating hypotheses,
gathering and testing data, drawing conclusions, and so forth—help guarantee that research yields the most
accurate and reliable conclusions possible.
An overriding principle of the scientific method is that research should be conducted as objectivelyas possible.
Researchers are often passionate about their work, but they must take care not to let the findings they expect and
even hope to uncover affect how they do their research. This in turn means that they must not conduct their
research in a manner that helps achieve the results they expect to find. Such bias can happen unconsciously, and
the scientific method helps reduce the potential for this bias as much as possible.
This potential is arguably greater in the social sciences than in the natural and physical sciences. The political
views of chemists and physicists typically do not affect how an experiment is performed and how the outcome
of the experiment is interpreted. In contrast, researchers in the social sciences, and perhaps particularly in
Page 28
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
sociology, often have strong feelings about the topics they are studying. Their social and political beliefs may
thus influence how they perform their research on these topics and how they interpret the results of this
research. Following the scientific method helps reduce this possible influence.
---------------------------
Q.5 Define descriptive research and what are the major forms? Strengthen your answer with the example
of Case Studies, Casual Comparative studies and correlation
ANS : Descriptive research is defined as a research method that describes the characteristics of the population
or phenomenon that is being studied. This methodology focuses more on the “what” of the research subject
rather than the “why” of the research subject.In other words, descriptive research primarily focuses on
describing the nature of a demographic segment, without focusing on “why” a certain phenomenon occurs. In
other words, it “describes” the subject of the research, without covering “why” it happens.
For example, an apparel brand that wants to understand the fashion purchasing trends among New York buyers
will conduct a demographic survey of this region, gather population data and then conduct descriptive research
on this demographic segment. The research will then uncover details on “what is the purchasing pattern of New
York buyers”, but not cover any investigative details on “why” the patterns exeunt. Because for the apparel
brand trying to break into this market, understanding the nature of their market is the objective of the study.
Characteristics of Descriptive Research: The term descriptive research then, refers to research questions, design
of the research and data analysis that would be conducted on that topic. It is called an observational research
method because none of the variables that are part of the research study are influenced in any capacity.
Some distinctive characteristics of descriptive research are:
Quantitative research: Descriptive research is a quantitative research method that attempts to collect
quantifiable information to be used for statistical analysis of the population sample. It is an popular market
research tool that allows to collect and describe the nature of the demographic segment.
4. Uncontrolled variables: In descriptive research, none of the variables are influenced in any way. This uses
observational methods to conduct the research. Hence, the nature of the variables or their behavior is not in the
hands of the researcher.
5. Cross-sectional studies: Descriptive research is generally a cross-sectional study where different sections
belonging to the same group are studied.
6. Basis for further research: The data collected and analyzed from descriptive research can then be further
researched using different research techniques. The data also can help point towards the types of research
methods are to be used for the subsequent research.
The 3 Basic Types of Descriptive Research Methods
One of the goals of science is description (other goals include prediction and explanation). Descriptive research
methods are pretty much as they sound — they describesituations. They do not make accurate predictions, and
they do not determine cause and effect.
There are three main types of descriptive methods: observational methods, case-study methods and survey
methods. This article will briefly describe each of these methods, their advantages, and their drawbacks. This
may help you better understand research findings, whether reported in the mainstream media, or when reading a
research study on your own.
Observational Method
With the observational method animal and human behavior is closely observed. There are two main categories
of the observational method — naturalistic observation and laboratory observation.
Page 29
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
The biggest advantage of the naturalistic method of research is that researchers view participants in their natural
environments. This leads to greater ecological validity than laboratory observation, proponents say.
Ecological validity refers to the extent to which research can be used in real-life situations.
Proponents of laboratory observation often suggest that due to more control in the laboratory, the results found
when using laboratory observation are more meaningful than those obtained with naturalistic observation.
Laboratory observations are usually less time-consuming and cheaper than naturalistic observations. Of
course, both naturalistic and laboratory observation are important in regard to the advancement of scientific
knowledge.
Case Study Method
Case study research involves an in-depth study of an individual or group of indviduals. Case studies often lead
to testable hypotheses and allow us to study rare phenomena. Case studies should not be used to determine
cause and effect, and they have limited use for making accurate predictions.
There are two serious problems with case studies — expectancy effects and atypical individuals. Expectancy
effects include the experimenter’s underlying biases that might affect the actions taken while conducting
research. These biases can lead to misrepresenting participants’ descriptions. Describing atypical individuals
may lead to poor generalizations and detract from external validity.
Survey Method
In survey method research, participants answer questions administered through interviews or questionnaires.
After participants answer the questions, researchers describe the responses given. In order for the survey to be
both reliable and valid it is important that the questions are constructed properly. Questions should be written
so they are clear and easy to comprehend.
Another consideration when designing questions is whether to include open-ended, closed-ended, partially
open-ended, or rating-scale qauestions. Advantages and disadvantages can be found with each type:
Open-ended questions allow for a greater variety of responses from participants but are difficult to analyze
statistically because the data must be coded or reduced in some manner. Closed-ended questions are easy to
analyze statistically, but they seriously limit the responses that participants can give. Many researchers prefer to
use a Likert-type scale because it’s very easy to analyze statistically.
In addition to the methods listed above some individuals also include qualitative (as a distinct method) and
archival methods when discussing descriptive research methods.
It is important to emphasize that descriptive research methods can only describe a set of observations or the data
collected. It cannot draw conclusions from that data about which way the relationship goes — Does A cause B,
or does B cause A?
Unfortunately, in many studies published today, researchers forget this fundamental limitation of their research
and suggest their data can actually demonstrate or “suggest” causal relationships. Nothing could be further from
the truth
A causal-comparative design is a research design that seeks to find relationships between independent and
dependent variables after an action or event has already occurred. ... Many similarities exist between causal-
comparative research and correlation research.
"An important difference between causal-comparative and correlation researches that causal-comparative
studies involve two or more groups and one independent variable, while correlation studies involve two or more
variables and one group." ... b) manipulates at least one independent variable.
CORRELATION RESEARCH
Page 30
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
To carried out to help explain important human behaviours or to predict likely outcomes. Purposes of
correlational research
Explanatory studies It is to clarify out understanding of important phenomena by identifying relationship among
variables. Always investigate a number of variables they believe are related to a more complex variables such as
motivation or learning. Types of correlational research
Selecting a problem Choosing a sample Selecting or developing instrument Determining procedures Collecting
and analyzing data Interpreting result Basic steps
Teacher about to study the causes of the amount of descriptive behaviours display in class. Student having
difficulty in mathematic subject. Teacher about to study the causes of student does not perform in the subject.
Example
What? Investigator attempt to determine the cause or consequences of differences that already exist between or
among group of individuals. Sometimes viewed, along with correlational research, as a form of associational
research, since both describe conditions that already exist. CAUSAL COMPARATIVE RESEARCH
That two groups of individuals differ on some variable ( such as teaching style) and then interrupt to determine
the reason for, or the result of this difference. Example
Group Differences The group difference variable in a causal comparative study is: Either a variable that cannot
be manipulated (such as ethnicity) or one that might have been manipulated but for one reasons or another has
not been (such as teaching style) Example: in the effects of a new diet on very young children
It is about one of the type of research method that using comparison between cause and effect. Comparisons
can establish whether something can be explained by the same causes or not. The difference can be a conclusion
but not for the cause of difference. Interpretation of this kind of method is limited because these studies are of
value in identified possible causes of observed variation in the behaviour pattern of students. This kind of
research can be used in prediction about problem such as, the different achievements of student in the class. If it
about teaching methods, it can be research either it is related with art multimedia method or the self-learning
methods.
Case Study Method.
Case studies are in-depth investigations of a single person, group, event or community. Typically, data are
gathered from a variety of sources and by using several different methods (e.g. observations & interviews)
Case studies are in-depth investigations of a single person, group, event or community. Typically, data are
gathered from a variety of sources and by using several different methods (e.g. observations &interviews). The
research may also continue for an extended period of time, so processes and developments can be studied as
they happen. The case study research method originated in clinical medicine (the case history, i.e. the patient’s
personal history).The case study method often involves simply observing what happens to, or reconstructing
‘the case history’ of a single participant or group of individuals (such as a school class or a specific social
group), i.e. the idiographic approach. Case studies allow a researcher to investigate a topic in far more detail
than might be possible if they were trying to deal with a large number of research participants (homothetic
approach) with the aim of ‘averaging’.
The case study is not itself a research method, but researchers select methods of data collection and analysis that
will generate material suitable for case studies. Amongst the sources of data the psychologist is likely to turn to
when carrying out a case study are observations of a person’s daily routine, unstructured interviews with the
participant herself (and with people who know her), diaries, personal notes (e.g. letters, photographs, notes) or
official document (e.g. case notes, clinical notes, appraisal reports). Most of this information is likely to
Page 31
0300-5371884, 0344-5515779, 051-2285833
be qualitative (i.e. verbal description rather than measurement) but the psychologist might collect numerical
data as well. The data collected can be analyzed using different theories (e.g. grounded theory, interpretative
phenomenological analysis, text interpretation, e.g. thematic coding) etc. All the approaches mentioned here use
preconceived categories in the analysis and they are ideographic in their approach, i.e. they focus on the
individual case without reference to a comparison group.
Case studies are widely used in psychology and amongst the best known were the ones carried out by Sigmund
Freud. He conducted very detailed investigations into the private lives of his patients in an attempt to both
understand and help them overcome their illnesses. Freud's most famous case studies include Little Hans
(1909a) and The Rat Man (1909b). Even today case histories are one of the main methods of investigation in
abnormal psychology and psychiatry. For students of these disciplines they can give a vivid insight into what
those who suffer from mental illness often have to endure. Case studies are often conducted in clinical medicine
and involve collecting and reporting descriptive information about a particular person or specific environment,
such as a school. In psychology, case studies are often confined to the study of a particular individual. The
information is mainly biographical and relates to events in the individual's past (i.e. retrospective), as well as to
significant events which are currently occurring in his or her everyday life.In order to produce a fairly detailed
and comprehensive profile of the person, the psychologist may use various types of accessible data, such as
medical records, employer's reports, school reports or psychological test results. Theinterview is also an
extremely effective procedure for obtaining information about an individual, and it may be used to collect
comments from the person's friends, parents, employer, work mates and others who have a good knowledge of
the person, as well as to obtain facts from the person him or herself. This makes it clear that the case study is a
method that should only be used by a psychologist, therapist or psychiatrist, i.e. someone with a professional
qualification. There is an ethical issue of competence. Only someone qualified to diagnose and treat a person
can conduct a formal case study relating to atypical (i.e. abnormal) behavior or atypical development. The
procedure used in a case study means that the researcher provides a description of the behavior. This comes
from interviews and other sources, such as observation. The client also reports detail of events from his or her
point of view. The researcher then writes up the information from both sources above as the case study, and
interprets the information. Interpreting the information means the researcher decides what to include or leave
out. A good case study should always make clear which information is factual description and which is an
inference or the opinion of the researcher.
Page 32

B.S B.S B.S B.S Nishat Education

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

B.S B.S B.S B.S Nishat Education

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

B.

Define the Problem

Method Advantages Disadvantages

Many people can be included. If given

Because experiments do not involve random

You might also like