Introduction research methodology
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Introduction research methodology

on

  • 10,696 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
10,696
Views on SlideShare
10,690
Embed Views
6

Actions

Likes
5
Downloads
656
Comments
1

1 Embed 6

http://www.slideshare.net 6

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • While both of these are tools used during research, they are not sufficient for research.
  • These don’t represent some kind of linear plan, but are rather common characteristics shared by almost all legitimate research regardless of the venue by which that research was conducted.
  • The concept of “important” questions is subjective and will depend on who you ask as well as the purpose of the research. For instance, PhD students have a different “bar” than Masters students owing to the requirement that their research be “original and significant.”
  • The first case is really an exercise in data gathering and doesn’t contribute new knowledge. The same argument holds for the second case. The third case is a mathematical statement but doesn’t address the reasons for the correlation (which might lead to new knowledge). A similar argument applies to the fourth case.
  • If other researchers can’t confirm your results, you may be faced with having studied an anomaly. Similarly, without a solid plan, you might have inadvertently introduced errors into the experimental design which immediately calls your results into question.
  • There are very few “perfect” research designs where some flaws aren’t present. That’s normal. However, these flaws must be documented as well as their possible impact on the outcome. While this won’t stop reviewers from criticizing the work, it makes it clear that you are aware of the problems and their impact upon your work.
  • Many of us have professional experience which can lead to possible research. Always be careful to differentiate between research and self-enlightenment. A lot of computer literature, particularly research journals such as IEEE or ACM, show good research problems and possible sources of future work. Such future work can provide a good starting point for research projects. The same groups also host professional conferences. DePaul has a student chapter of the ACM that might provide a good source of inspiration for research. Many of the faculty here at DePaul have all kinds of problems that they’re trying to solve.
  • When documenting the proposed research, you should be as precise as you can. You’ll probably find yourself editing and revising many times to attain the necessary level of precision and clarity.
  • Documenting the delimitations is just as important as documenting the intended research. In essence, the problem and delimitations describe the scope of the project. Keep the delimitations in mind as you move forward. Current delimitations might provide avenues for valuable future work.
  • The accurate and consistent measurement of some phenomenon is called validity and reliability respectively.
  • Many times the ability of a researcher to justify the importance of their research topic is directly proportional to their ability to receive funding. This basically requires good salesmanship.
  • There are some basic variations on this theme, but all of these areas will be covered. This format serves to crystalize your thought process and to help ensure that no critical elements of your research have been neglected.
  • Some journals include IEEE and ACM. Be careful of trade journals; they’re often not peer reviewed which can call the content into question in terms of its reliability and quality. The bibliography could be a Word document, Excel spreadsheet, or bibliographic database. Even if the article doesn’t directly pertain to your current project, it might provide you with ideas.
  • We’ll try to give some guidelines as to how to choose starting and stopping points during your research work. Please keep in mind that the following steps don’t have to be slavishly followed in the sequence in which they are presented.
  • The literature review is often a good source for additional ideas. This is also a good place to go in conjunction with the prior step; there’s no point in wasting good brain cells coming up with hypotheses that solve a problem that has already been adequately addressed.
  • Keep in mind that just because you didn’t find a solution today, doesn’t mean that one won’t show up tomorrow. This is one of the reasons that researchers are always reading and trying to keep up to date with current trends.
  • A statement of causality is very difficult to demonstrate because there often many other confounding factors. For an example of this, do a quick bit of reading on the hoops researchers had to go through while trying to show a causal link between smoking and certain kinds of cancer.
  • The choice of methodology might be governed by the kind of research being conducted. For example, the hard sciences tend to favor quantitative methodologies whereas the social sciences often gravitate toward qualitative approaches. It’s quite common for both methodologies to be used during the course of a single research project.
  • These are some the differences in the intent and approaches between quantitative and qualitative research. There are other significant differences in approach as well, but these are some of the highlights. Keep in mind that research design is not a simple task.

Introduction research methodology Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Research Methodology BY Dr. J K SACHDEVA
  • 2. BY Dr. J. K. SACHDEVA
    • M.B.A. (FINANCE), PGDMM, PH. D (DEVELOPMENT STUDIES)
    • Ex-SUPERINTENDENT OF CUSTOMS (P), Mumbai
    • FACULTY, GNIMS, Matunga, Mumbai
    • Hon Editor – Journal of Global Economy
    • MEMBER
      • INDIAN SOCIETY OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
    • VISITING FACULTY/COUNSELOR
    • ITM, KHARGHAR
    • IGNOU, STUDY CENTRE,
    • SATHEYE COLLEGE, VILLE PARLE
    • JDC-BYTCO, NASIK
    • Chetana Institute of Management and Research, Bandra (E)
    • SPECIAL SPEAKER ON MANAGERIAL ECONOMICS ALL INDIA RADIO FM , IGNOU-GYAN VANI PROGRAMMES
  • 3. Contact me
    • 9892728281
    • 26670461
    • [email_address]
    • www.rcssindia.org
  • 4. Benefits of research to whom
    • As a graduate student...
      • To be able to read and understand the empirical literature in your field; to become a critical consumer of information.
    • As a graduate student preparing for a thesis or dissertation…
      • To be able to both design and implement your thesis or dissertation as well as future studies that interest you.
  • 5. Benefits to whom
    • As a future practitioner…
      • To be able to intelligently participate in research projects, evaluations, and studies undertaken by your institution.
    • As an educated citizen ...
      • To understand the difference between scientifically acquired knowledge and other kinds of information.
  • 6. What Research Is Not
    • Research isn’t information gathering:
      • Gathering information from resources such books or magazines isn’t research.
      • No contribution to new knowledge.
    • Research isn’t the transportation of facts:
      • Merely transporting facts from one resource to another doesn’t constitute research.
      • No contribution to new knowledge although this might make existing knowledge more accessible.
  • 7. What Research Is
    • Research is:
    “… the systematic process of collecting and analyzing information (data) in order to increase our understanding of the phenomenon about which we are concerned or interested.” 1
  • 8. What’s the Difference Between “Method” and “Methodology”?
    • Method:
    • Techniques for gathering evidence
    • The various ways of proceeding in gathering information
    • Methodology:
    • The underlying theory and analysis of how research does or should proceed, often influenced by discipline
  • 9. Epistemology, Methodology, and Method
    • “ a research method is a technique for (or way of proceeding in) gathering evidence" while
    • " methodology is a theory and analysis of how research does or should proceed" and
    • "an epistemology is a theory of knowledge"
  • 10.
    • "It is the theory that decides what can be observed."
          • Albert Einstein
  • 11. Research Characteristics
    • Originates with a question or problem.
    • Requires clear articulation of a goal.
    • Follows a specific plan or procedure.
    • Often divides main problem into subproblems.
    • Guided by specific problem, question, or hypothesis.
    • Accepts certain critical assumptions.
    • Requires collection and interpretation of data.
    • Cyclical (helical) in nature.
  • 12. Research Projects
    • Research begins with a problem.
      • This problem need not be Earth-shaking.
    • Identifying this problem can actually be the hardest part of research.
    • In general, good research projects should:
      • Address an important question.
      • Advance knowledge.
  • 13. Research Project Pitfalls
    • The following kinds of projects usually don’t make for good research:
      • Self-enlightenment.
      • Comparing data sets.
      • Correlating data sets.
      • Problems with yes / no answers.
  • 14. High-Quality Research (1 of 2)
    • Good research requires:
      • The scope and limitations of the work to be clearly defined.
      • The process to be clearly explained so that it can be reproduced and verified by other researchers.
      • A thoroughly planned design that is as objective as possible.
  • 15. High-Quality Research (2 of 2)
    • Good research requires:
      • Highly ethical standards be applied.
      • All limitations be documented.
      • Data be adequately analyzed and explained.
      • All findings be presented unambiguously and all conclusions be justified by sufficient evidence.
  • 16. Sources of Research Problems
    • Observation.
    • Literature reviews.
    • Professional conferences.
    • Experts.
  • 17. Stating the Research Problem
    • Once you’ve identified a research problem:
      • State that problem clearly and completely.
      • Determine the feasibility of the research.
    • Identify subproblems:
      • Completely researchable units.
      • Small in number.
      • Add up to the total problem.
      • Must be clearly tied to the interpretation of the data.
  • 18. Research
    • Acquisition of Knowledge
    • Knowledge
    • v/s
    • Information
    • (Theoretically, concerned with developing, exploring, or testing theories)
  • 19. Theory
    • What exists?
    • Why exists?
    • What will happen in future?
  • 20. How to acquire Knowledge?
    • Inductive Reasoning
      • ( works moving from specific observation to broader generalisation, bottom approach)
    • Deductive Reasoning
      • ( more general to more specific or top down approach)
  • 21. Deductive Reasoning Theory Hypothesis Observation Confirmation
  • 22. Inductive Reasoning
    • Observation
    Pattern Hypothesis Theory
  • 23. Positivism
    • Goal of Knowledge is to describe the phenomena that are experienced,
    • There is interdependence of observation and theory, our observations are theory laden
  • 24. Scientific thought
    • Francis Bacon
    • Rene Descartes
    • John Stuart
    • Karl Popper
    • Thomas Kuhn
    • Feyer bend
    • Steven Hagen
  • 25. Hypotheses
    • Hypotheses are tentative, intelligent guesses as to the solution of the problem.
      • There is often a 1-1 correspondence between a subproblem and a hypothesis.
      • Hypotheses can direct later research activities since they can help determine the nature of the research and methods applied.
  • 26. Delimitations
    • All research has limitations and thus certain work that will not be performed.
    • The work that will not be undertaken is described as the delimitations of the research.
  • 27. Definitions
    • Define each technical term as it is used in relation to your research project.
      • This helps remove significant ambiguity from the research itself by ensuring that reviewers, while they may not agree with your definitions, at least know what you’re talking about.
  • 28. Assumptions
    • Assumptions are those things that the researcher is taking for granted.
      • For example: a given test instrument accurately and consistently measures the phenomenon in question.
    • As a general rule you’re better off documenting an assumption than ignoring it.
      • Overlooked assumptions provide a prime source of debate about a research project’s results.
  • 29. Importance of the Study
    • Many research problems have a kind of theoretical feel about them. Such projects often need to be justified:
      • What is the research project’s practical value?
    • Without this justification, it will prove difficult to convince others that the problem in question is worth study.
  • 30. Research Proposals
    • Research proposals are documents that describe the intended research including:
      • Problem and subproblems.
      • Hypotheses.
      • Delimitations.
      • Definitions.
      • Assumptions.
      • Importance.
      • Literature review.
  • 31. Literature Review
    • A literature review is a necessity.
      • Without this step, you won’t know if your problem has been solved or what related research is already underway.
    • When performing the review:
      • Start searching professional journals.
      • Begin with the most recent articles you can find.
      • Keep track of relevant articles in a bibliography.
      • Don’t be discouraged if work on the topic is already underway.
  • 32. Literature Review Pitfalls (1 of 2)
    • Be very careful to check your sources when doing your literature review.
    • Many trade magazines are not peer reviewed.
      • Professional conferences and journals often have each article reviewed by multiple people before it is even recommended for publication.
      • The IEEE and ACM digital libraries are good places to start looking for legitimate research.
  • 33. Literature Review Pitfalls (2 of 2)
    • The Internet can be a good source of information. It is also full of pseudo-science and poor research.
    • Make sure you verify the claims of any documentation that has not been peer reviewed by other professionals in the computing industry.
  • 34. Processes & Methodologies
    • Research Process.
    • Common Methodologies.
    • Methodology Comparison.
  • 35. Research Process
    • Research is an extremely cyclic process.
      • Later stages might necessitate a review of earlier work.
    • This isn’t a weakness of the process but is part of the built-in error correction machinery.
    • Because of the cyclic nature of research, it can be difficult to determine where to start and when to stop.
  • 36. Step 1: A Question Is Raised
    • A question occurs to or is posed to the researcher for which that researcher has no answer.
      • This doesn’t mean that someone else doesn’t already have an answer.
    • The question needs to be converted to an appropriate problem statement like that documented in a research proposal.
  • 37. Step 2: Suggest Hypotheses
    • The researcher generates intermediate hypotheses to describe a solution to the problem.
      • This is at best a temporary solution since there is as yet no evidence to support either the acceptance or rejection of these hypotheses.
  • 38. Step 3: Literature Review
    • The available literature is reviewed to determine if there is already a solution to the problem.
      • Existing solutions do not always explain new observations.
      • The existing solution might require some revision or even be discarded.
  • 39. Step 4: Literature Evaluation
    • It’s possible that the literature review has yielded a solution to the proposed problem.
      • This means that you haven’t really done research.
    • On the other hand, if the literature review turns up nothing, then additional research activities are justified.
  • 40. Step 5: Acquire Data
    • The researcher now begins to gather data relating to the research problem.
      • The means of data acquisition will often change based on the type of the research problem.
      • This might entail only data gathering, but it could also require the creation of new measurement instruments.
  • 41. Step 6: Data Analysis
    • The data that were gathered in the previous step are analyzed as a first step in ascertaining their meaning.
    • As before, the analysis of the data does not constitute research.
      • This is basic number crunching.
  • 42. Step 7: Data Interpretation
    • The researcher interprets the newly analyzed data and suggests a conclusion.
      • This can be difficult.
      • Keep in mind that data analysis that suggests a correlation between two variables can’t automatically be interpreted as suggesting causality between those variables.
  • 43. Step 8: Hypothesis Support
    • The data will either support the hypotheses or they won’t.
      • This may lead the researcher to cycle back to an earlier step in the process and begin again with a new hypothesis.
      • This is one of the self-correcting mechanisms associated with the scientific method.
  • 44. Common Methodologies
    • Methodologies are high-level approaches to conducting research.
      • The individual steps within the methodology might vary based on the research being performed.
    • Two commonly used research methodologies:
      • Quantitative.
      • Qualitative.
  • 45. Methodology Comparison
    • Quantitative
    • Explanation, prediction
    • Test theories
    • Known variables
    • Large sample
    • Standardized instruments
    • Deductive
    • Qualitative
    • Explanation, description
    • Build theories
    • Unknown variables
    • Small sample
    • Observations, interviews
    • Inductive
  • 46. An Overview of Empirical Research Methods
    • Descriptive (Qualitative)
    • Ethnography
    • Case Study
    • Suvey/Sampling
    • Focus Groups
    • Discourse/Text Analysis
    • Quantitative Description
    • Prediction/Classification
    • Experimental (Quantitative)
    • True Experiment
    • Quasi-Experiment
    • Meta-Analysis
  • 47. Assessing Methods
    • Research Question(s) is/are key
    • Methods must answer the research question(s)
    • Methodology guides application
    • Epistemology guides analysis
  • 48. Ethnographies
    • Observational field work done in the actual context being studied
    • Focus on how individuals interrelate in their own environment (and the influence of this environment)
    • Difficult to interpret/analyze
    • Time consuming/expensive
    • Can influence subject behavior
  • 49. Case Studies
    • Focus is on individual or small group
    • Able to conduct a comprehensive analysis from a comparison of cases
    • Allows for identification of variables or phenomenon to be studied
    • Time consuming
    • Depth rather than breadth
    • Not necessarily representative
  • 50. Survey Research
    • An efficient means of gathering large amounts of data
    • Can be anonymous and inexpensive
    • Feedback often incomplete
    • Wording of instrument can bias feedback
    • Details often left out
  • 51. Focus Groups
    • Aid in understanding audience, group, users
    • Small group interaction more than individual response
    • Helps identify and fill gaps in current knowledge re: perceptions, attitudes, feelings, etc.
    • Does not give statistics
    • Marketing tools seen as “suspect”
    • Analysis subjective
  • 52. Discourse/Text Analysis
    • Examines actual discourse produced for a particular purpose (job, school)
    • Helps in understanding of context, production, audience, and text
    • Schedule for analysis not demanding
    • Labor intensive
    • Categories often fluid, making analysis difficult
  • 53. Quantitative Descriptive Studies
    • Isolates systematically the most important variables (often from case studies) and to quantify and interrelate them (often via survey or questionnaire)
    • Possible to collect large amounts of data
    • Not as disruptive
    • Biases not as likely
    • Data restricted to information available
  • 54. Discourse/Text Analysis
    • Examines actual discourse produced for a particular purpose (job, school)
    • Helps in understanding of context, production, audience, and text
    • Schedule for analysis not demanding
    • Labor intensive
    • Categories often fluid, making analysis difficult
  • 55. Quantitative Descriptive Studies
    • Isolates systematically the most important variables (often from case studies) and to quantify and interrelate them (often via survey or questionnaire)
    • Possible to collect large amounts of data
    • Not as disruptive
    • Biases not as likely
    • Data restricted to information available
  • 56. Prediction and Classification Studies
    • Goal is to predict behaviors:
    • Prediction forecasts and interval variable (Diagnostic/TAAS scores)
    • Classification forecasts a nominal variable (Major selection after taking 2311)
    • Important in industry, education to predict behaviors
    • Need substantial population
    • Restricted range of variables can cause misinterpretation
    • Variables cannot be added together; must be weighted and looked at in context of other variables
  • 57. Positive Aspects of Descriptive/Qualitative Research
    • Naturalistic; allows for subjects to interact with environment
    • Can use statistical analysis
    • Seeks to further develop theory (not to influence action); Prescientific
    • Coding schemes often arise from interplay between data and researcher’s knowledge of theory
  • 58. Problems with Descriptive/Qualitative Research
    • Impossible to overlay structure
    • Impossible to impose control
    • Subject pool often limited, not representative
    • Seen as more “subjective,” less rigorous
    • Beneficial only in terms of initial investigation to form hypothesis
  • 59. Experimental Research: True Experiment
    • Random sampling, or selection, of subjects (which are also stratified)
    • Introduction of a treatment
    • Use of a control group for comparing subjects who don’t receive treatment with those who do
    • Adherence to scientific method (seen as positive, too)
    • Must have both internal and external validity
    • Treatment and control might seem artificial
  • 60. Experimental Research: Quasi-Experiment
    • Similar to Experiment, except that the subjects are not randomized. Intact groups are often used (for example, students in a classroom).
    • To draw more fully on the power of the experimental method, a pretest may be employed.
    • Employ treatment, control, and scientific method
    • Act of control and treatment makes situation artificial
    • Small subject pools
  • 61. Meta-Analysis
    • Takes the results of true and quasi-experiments and identifies interrelationships of conclusions
    • Systematic
    • Replicable
    • Summarizes overall results
    • C/C apples and oranges?
    • Quality of studies used?
  • 62. Positive Aspects of Experimental Research
    • Tests the validity of generalizations
    • Seen as rigorous
    • Identifies a cause-and-effect relationship
    • Seen as more objective, less subjective
    • Can be predictive
  • 63. Problems with Experimental Research
    • Generalizations need to be qualified according to limitation of research methods employed
    • Controlled settings don’t mirror actual conditions; unnatural
    • Difficult to isolate a single variable
    • Doesn’t allow for self-reflection (built-in)
  • 64. Testing the Waters
    • How do you come up with a good research question?
    • How do you determine if the method you plan to use will answer your question?
    • What epistemology should you use to analyze data?
  • 65. Quantitative Methods
    • Samplingst
    • Testing of Hypothesis
    • Chi Square Test
    • ANOVA
    • Multivariate Analysis
  • 66.
    • Thanks