Variables: The Research Methodology
Variables: The Research Methodology
Variables: The Research Methodology
Steps of the scientific method are shaped like an hourglass - starting from general
questions, narrowing down to focus on one specific aspect and designing research where we
can observe and analyze this aspect. At last, we conclude and generalize to the real world.
VARIABLES
A variable is something that changes. It changes according to different factors. Some
variables changes easily, like the stock-exchange value, while other variables are almost
constant, like the name of someone. Researchers are often seeking to measure variables.
The variable can be a number, a name or anything where the value can change.
In research, you typically define variables according to what you're measuring. The
independent variable is the variable which the researcher would like to measure (the
cause), while the dependent variable is the effect (or assumed effect), dependent on the
independent variable. These variables are often stated in experimental research, in a
hypothesis, e.g. "what is the effect of personality on helping behavior?"
Confounding variables are variables with a significant effect on the dependent variable that
the researcher failed to control or eliminate - sometimes because the researcher is not
aware of the effect of the confounding variable. The key is to identify possible confounding
variables and somehow try to eliminate or control them.
HYPOTHESIS
In research, a hypothesis is a suggested explanation of a phenomenon.
A null hypothesis is a hypothesis which a researcher tries to disprove. Normally, the null
hypothesis represents the current view/explanation of an aspect of the world that the
researcher wants to challenge.
The researcher tests the hypothesis to disprove the null hypothesis, not because he/she
loves the research hypothesis, but because it would mean coming closer to finding an
answer to a specific problem. The research hypothesis is often based on observations that
evoke suspicion that the null hypothesis is not always correct.
In the Stanley Milgram Experiment, the a null hypothesis was that the personality
determined whether a person would hurt another person, while the research hypothesis was
that the role, instructions and orders were much more important in determining whether
people would hurt others.
OPERATIONALIZATION
Operationalization is to take a fuzzy concept, such as 'helping behavior', and try to measure
it by specific observations, e.g. how likely are people to help a stranger with problems.
See also:
Conceptual Variables
Types of validity:
External Validity
Population Validity
Ecological Validity
Internal Validity
Content Validity
Face Validity
Construct Validity
Convergent and Discriminant Validity
Test Validity
Criterion Validity
Concurrent Validity
Predictive Validity
Reliability refers to how consistent a set of measurements are. Reliability may be defined as
"Yielding the same or compatible results in different clinical experiments or statistical trials"
(the free dictionary). Research methodology lacking reliability cannot be trusted. Replication
studies are a way to test reliability.
Types of Reliability:
Test-Retest Reliability
Interrater Reliability
Internal Consistency Reliability
Instrument Reliability
Statistical Reliability
Reproducability
Both validity and reliability are important aspects of the research methodology to get better
explanations of the world.
GENERALIZATION
Generalization is to which extent the research and the conclusions of the research apply to
the real world. It is not always so that good research will reflect the real world, since we can
only measure a small portion of the population at a time.
It is also important to choose a research method which is within the limits of what the
researcher can do. Time, money, feasibility, ethics and availability to measure the
phenomenon correctly are examples of issues constraining the research.
SIGNIFICANCE TEST
To test a hypothesis, quantitative research uses significance tests to determine which
hypothesis is right.
The significance test can show whether the null hypothesis is more likely correct than the
research hypothesis. Research methodology in a number of areas like social sciences
depends heavily on significance test.
A significance test may even drive the research process in a whole new direction, based on
the findings.
The t-test (also called the Student's T-Test) is one of many statistical significance tests,
which compares two supposedly equal sets of data to see if they really are alike or not. The
t-test helps the researcher conclude whether a hypothesis is supported or not.
DRAWING CONCLUSIONS
Drawing a conclusion is based on several factors of the research process, not just because
the researcher got the expected result. It has to be based on the validity and reliability of
the measurement, how good the measurement was to reflect the real world and what more
could have affected the results.
The observations are often referred to as 'empirical evidence' and the logic/thinking leads to
the conclusions. Anyone should be able to check the observation and logic, to see if they
also reach the same conclusions.
A common logical error for beginners, is to think that correlation implies a causal
relationship. This is not necessarily true.
ERRORS IN RESEARCH
Logically, there are possible to make two types of errors when drawing conclusions in
research:
Type 1 error is when we accept the research hypothesis when the null hypothesis is in fact
correct.
Type 2 error is when we reject the research hypothesis even if the null hypothesis is wrong.
EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH
is a systematic and scientific approach to research in which the researcher manipulates one
or more variables, and controls and measures any change in other variables.
(Reference: en.wikipedia.org)
The word experimental research has a range of definitions. In the strict sense, experimental
research is what we call a true experiment.
A rule of thumb is that physical sciences, such as physics, chemistry and geology tend to
define experiments more narrowly than social sciences, such as sociology and psychology,
which conduct experiments closer to the wider definition.
The research problem is often operationalizationed, to define how to measure the research
problem. The results will depend on the exact measurements that the researcher chooses
and may be operationalized differently in another study to test the main conclusions of the
study.
Defining the research problem helps you to formulate a research hypothesis, which is tested
against the null hypothesis.
An ad hoc analysis is a hypothesis invented after testing is done, to try to explain why the
contrary evidence. A poor ad hoc analysis may be seen as the researcher's inability to
accept that his/her hypothesis is wrong, while a great ad hoc analysis may lead to more
testing and possibly a significant discovery.
CONSTRUCTING THE EXPERIMENT
There are various aspects to remember when constructing an experiment. Planning ahead
ensures that the experiment is carried out properly and that the results reflect the real
world, in the best possible way.
Deciding the sample groups can be done in using many different sampling techniques.
Population sampling may chosen by a number of methods, such as randomization, "quasi-
randomization" and pairing.
Reducing sampling errors is vital for getting valid results from experiments. Researchers
often adjust the sample size to minimize chances of random errors.
probability sampling
non-probability sampling
simple random sampling
convenience sampling
stratified sampling
systematic sampling
cluster sampling
sequential sampling
disproportonal sampling
judgmental sampling
snowball sampling
quota sampling
Experiments frequently have 2 conditions, but rarely more than 3 conditions at the
same time.
PILOT STUDY
It may be wise to first conduct a pilot-study or two before you do the real experiment. This
ensures that the experiment measures what it should, and that everything is set up right.
Minor errors, which could potentially destroy the experiment, are often found during this
process. With a pilot study, you can get information about errors and problems, and
improve the design, before putting a lot of effort into the real experiment.
If the experiments involve humans, a common strategy is to first have a pilot study with
someone involved in the research, but not too closely, and then arrange a pilot with a
person who resembles the subject(s). Those two different pilots are likely to give the
researcher good information about any problems in the experiment.
Identifying and controlling non-experimental factors which the researcher does not want to
influence the effects, is crucial to drawing a valid conclusion. This is often done by
controlling variables, if possible, or randomizing variables to minimize effects that can be
traced back to third variables. Researchers only want to measure the effect of the
independent variable(s) when conducting an experiment, allowing them to conclude that
this was the reason for the effect.
The aim of an analysis is to draw a conclusion, together with other observations. The
researcher might generalize the results to a wider phenomenon, if there is no indication of
confounding variables "polluting" the results.
If the researcher suspects that the effect stems from a different variable than the
independent variable, further investigation is needed to gauge the validity of the results. An
experiment is often conducted because the scientist wants to know if the independent
variable is having any effect upon the dependent variable. Variables correlating are not
proof that there is causation.
Experiments are more often of quantitative nature than qualitative nature, although it
happens.
EXAMPLES OF EXPERIMENTS
This website contains many examples of experiments. Some are not true experiments, but
involve some kind of manipulation to investigate a phenomenon. Others fulfil most or all
criteria of true experiments.
SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
Stanley Milgram Experiment - Will people obey orders, even if clearly dangerous?
Asch Experiment - Will people conform to group behavior?
Stanford Prison Experiment - How does people react to roles? Will you behave
differently?
Good Samaritan Experiment - Would You Help a Stranger? - Explaining Helping
Behavior
GENETICS
Law Of Segregation - The Mendel Pea Plant Experiment
Transforming Principle - Griffith's Experiment about Genetics
PHYSICS
Ben Franklin Kite Experiment - Struck by Lightening
J J Thomson Cathode Ray Experiment
RESEARCH PROCESS
Definition of Research
Definition of Science
HISTORY
The History of Scientific Method
STEPS
Steps of the Scientific Method - The scientific method has a similar structure to an hourglass
- starting from general questions, narrowing down to focus on one specific aspect, then
designing research where we can observe and analyze this aspect.
At last, the hourglass widens and the researcher concludes and generalizes the findings to
the real world.
AIMS OF RESEARCH
The general aims of research are:
ELEMENTS OF RESEARCH
Common scientific research elements are:
Prediction
Observation or Experimentation
Hypothetico-Deductive Method
Falsification
Testability
Deductive Reasoning
Inductive Reasoning and the Raven Paradox
Scientific Reasoning
Casual Reasoning
Abductive Reasoning
Post Hoc Reasoning
Defeasible Reasoning
The design is the structure of any scientific work. It gives direction and systematizes the
research.
The method you choose will affect your results and how you conclude the findings. Most
scientists are interested in getting reliable observations that can help the understanding of a
phenomenon.
Quantitative Research
Qualitative Research
What are the difference between Qualitative and Quantitative Research?
There are various designs which are used in research, all with specific advantages and
disadvantages:
These experiments are sometimes referred to as true science, and use traditional
mathematical and statistical means to measure results conclusively.
They are most commonly used by physical scientists, although social sciences, education
and economics have been known to use this type of research. It is the opposite of
qualitative research.
Quantitative experiments all use a standard format, with a few minor inter-disciplinary
differences, of generating a hypothesis to be proved or disproved. This hypothesis must be
provable by mathematical and statistical means, and is the basis around which the whole
experiment is designed.
Randomization of any study groups is essential, and a control group should be included,
wherever possible. A sound quantitative design should only manipulate one variable at a
time, or statistical analysis becomes cumbersome and open to question.
Ideally, the research should be constructed in a manner that allows others to repeat the
experiment and obtain similar results.
ADVANTAGES
Quantitative research design is an excellent way of finalizing results and proving or
disproving a hypothesis. The structure has not changed for centuries, so is standard across
many scientific fields and disciplines.
After statistical analysis of the results, a comprehensive answer is reached, and the results
can be legitimately discussed and published. Quantitative experiments also filter out
external factors, if properly designed, and so the results gained can be seen as real and
unbiased.
Quantitative experiments are useful for testing the results gained by a series of qualitative
experiments, leading to a final answer, and a narrowing down of possible directions for
follow up research to take.
DISADVANTAGES
Quantitative experiments can be difficult and expensive and require a lot of time to perform.
They must be carefully planned to ensure that there is complete randomization and correct
designation of control groups.
Quantitative studies usually require extensive statistical analysis, which can be difficult, due
to most scientists not being statisticians. The field of statistical study is a whole scientific
discipline and can be difficult for non-mathematicians
In addition, the requirements for the successful statistical confirmation of results are very
stringent, with very few experiments comprehensively proving a hypothesis; there is usually
some ambiguity, which requires retesting and refinement to the design. This means another
investment of time and resources must be committed to fine-tune the results.
Quantitative research design also tends to generate only proved or unproven results, with
there being very little room for grey areas and uncertainty. For the social sciences,
education, anthropology and psychology, human nature is a lot more complex than just a
simple yes or no response.
It is also very useful for product designers who want to make a product that will sell.
For example, a designer generating some ideas for a new product might want to study
people’s habits and preferences, to make sure that the product is commercially viable.
Quantitative research is then used to assess whether the completed design is popular or
not.
For these reasons, these qualitative methods are often closely allied with survey design
techniques and individual case studies, as a way to reinforce and evaluate findings over a
broader scale.
A study completed before the experiment was performed would reveal which of the
multitude of brands were the most popular. The quantitative experiment could then be
constructed around only these brands, saving a lot of time, money and resources.
Qualitative methods are probably the oldest of all scientific techniques, with Ancient Greek
philosophers qualitatively observing the world around them and trying to come up with
answers which explained what they saw.
DESIGN
The design of qualitative research is probably the most flexible of the various experimental
techniques, encompassing a variety of accepted methods and structures.
From an individual case study to an extensive survey, this type of study still needs to be
carefully constructed and designed, but there is no standardized structure.
Case studies and survey designs are the most commonly used methods.
ADVANTAGES
Qualitative techniques are extremely useful when a subject is too complex be answered by a
simple yes or no hypothesis. These types of designs are much easier to plan and carry out,
useful when budgetary decisions have to be taken into account.
The broader scope covered by these designs ensures that some useful data is always
generated, whereas an unproved hypothesis in a quantitative experiment can mean that a
lot of time has been wasted. Qualitative research methods are not as dependent upon
sample sizes as quantitative methods; a case study, for example, can generate meaningful
results with a small sample group.
DISADVANTAGES
Whilst not as time or resource consuming as quantitative experiments, qualitative methods
still require a lot of careful thought and planning, to ensure that the results obtained are as
accurate as possible.
Any qualitative research design is usually unique and cannot be exactly recreated, meaning
that they do lack the ability to be peer reviewed.
RESEARCH
Research can be defined as the search for knowledge or any systematic investigation to establish
facts. The primary purpose for applied research (as opposed to basic research) is discovering,
interpreting, and the development of methods and systems for the advancement of human
knowledge on a wide variety of scientific matters of our world and the universe. Research can
use the scientific method, but need not do so.
Scientific research relies on the application of the scientific method, a harnessing of curiosity.
This research provides scientific information and theories for the explanation of the nature and
the properties of the world around us. It makes practical applications possible. Scientific research
is funded by public authorities, by charitable organizations and by private groups, including
many companies. Scientific research can be subdivided into different classifications according to
their academic and application disciplines.
Artistic research, also seen as 'practice-based research', can take form when creative works are
considered both the research and the object of research itself. It is the debatable body of thought
which offers an alternative to purely scientific methods in research in its search for knowledge
and truth.
The term research is also used to describe an entire collection of information about a particular
subject.[citation needed]
Etymology
The word research derives from the French recherche, from rechercher, to search closely
where "chercher" means "to search".
Research processes
Scientific research
Generally, research is understood to follow a certain structural process. Though step order may
vary depending on the subject matter and researcher, the following steps are usually part of most
formal research, both basic and applied:
Historical method
The historical method comprises the techniques and guidelines by which historians use historical
sources and other evidence to research and then to write history. There are various history
guidelines commonly used by historians in their work, under the headings of external criticism,
internal criticism, and synthesis. This includes higher criticism and textual criticism. Though
items may vary depending on the subject matter and researcher, the following concepts are
usually part of most formal historical research:
Research methods
The goal of the research process is to produce new knowledge, which takes three main forms
(although, as previously discussed, the boundaries between them may be obscure.):
The research room at the New York Public Library, an example of secondary research in
progress.
Qualitative research (understanding of human behavior and the reasons that govern such
behavior)
Quantitative research (systematic empirical investigation of quantitative properties and
phenomena and their relationships)
Research is often conducted using the hourglass model Structure of Research[1]. The hourglass
model starts with a broad spectrum for research, focusing in on the required information through
the methodology of the project (like the neck of the hourglass), then expands the research in the
form of discussion and results.
Publishing
Academic publishing describes a system that is necessary in order for academic scholars to peer
review the work and make it available for a wider audience. The 'system', which is probably
disorganised enough not to merit the title, varies widely by field, and is also always changing, if
often slowly. Most academic work is published in journal article or book form. In publishing,
STM publishing is an abbreviation for academic publications in science, technology, and
medicine.
Most established academic fields have their own journals and other outlets for publication,
though many academic journals are somewhat interdisciplinary, and publish work from several
distinct fields or subfields. The kinds of publications that are accepted as contributions of
knowledge or research vary greatly between fields; from the print to the electronic format.
Business models are different in the electronic environment. Since about the early 1990s,
licensing of electronic resources, particularly journals, has been very common. Presently, a major
trend, particularly with respect to scholarly journals, is open access. There are two main forms of
open access: open access publishing, in which the articles or the whole journal is freely available
from the time of publication, and self-archiving, where the author makes a copy of their own
work freely available on the web.
Research funding
Most funding for scientific research comes from two major sources: Corporation's research and
development departments; and government research councils such as the National Institutes of
Health in the USA and the Medical Research Council in the UK. These are managed primarily
through universities and in some cases through military contractors. Many senior researchers
(such as group leaders) spend a significant amount of their time applying for grants for research
funds. These grants are necessary not only for researchers to carry out their research, but also as
a source of merit.
Research culture
It has been recently criticized that for developing research in a university, the first step is to
foster a research culture.[2] However, there is no clear definition for research culture.
Exploratory research provides insights into and comprehension of an issue or situation. It should
draw definitive conclusions only with extreme caution. Exploratory research is a type of
research conducted because a problem has not been clearly defined. Exploratory research helps
determine the best research design, data collection method and selection of subjects. Given its
fundamental nature, exploratory research often concludes that a perceived problem does not
actually exist.
Exploratory research often relies on secondary research such as reviewing available literature
and/or data, or qualitative approaches such as informal discussions with consumers, employees,
management or competitors, and more formal approaches through in-depth interviews, focus
groups, projective methods, case studies or pilot studies. The Internet allows for research
methods that are more interactive in nature: E.g., RSS feeds efficiently supply researchers with
up-to-date information; major search engine search results may be sent by email to researchers
by services such as Google Alerts; comprehensive search results are tracked over lengthy periods
of time by services such as Google Trends; and Web sites may be created to attract worldwide
feedback on any subject.
The results of exploratory research are not usually useful for decision-making by themselves, but
they can provide significant insight into a given situation. Although the results of qualitative
research can give some indication as to the "why", "how" and "when" something occurs, it
cannot tell us "how often" or "how many."
Social Science
In many social science circles, exploratory research "seeks to find out how people get along in
the setting under question, what meanings they give to their actions, and what issues concern
them. The goal is to learn 'what is going on here?' and to investigate social phenomena without
explicit expectations." (Russell K. Schutt, Investigating the Social World, 5th ed.. This
methodology can is also at times referred to as a 'grounded theory' approach to 'qualitative
research' or 'interpretive research', and is an attempt to 'unearth' a theory from the data itself
rather than from a pre-disposed hypothesis.
Earl Babbie identifies three purposes of social science research. The purposes are exploratory,
descriptive and explanatory. Exploratory research is used when problems are in a preliminary
stage [1] . Exploratory research is used when the topic or issue is new and when data is difficult
to collect. Exploratory research is flexible and can address research questions of all types
(what, why, how). Exploratory research is often used to generate formal hypotheses. Shields
and Tajalli link exploratory research with the conceptual framework working hypothesis [2].
Applied Research
Applied research in administration is often exploratory because there is need for flexibility in
approaching the problem. In addition there are often data limitations and a need to make a
decision within a short time period. Qualitative research methods such as case study or field
research are often used in Exploratory research.[3] .
Descriptive Research 'The objective of descriptive research is to describe things, such as the
market potential for a product or the demographics and attitudes of consumers who buy the
product.' (Kotler et al. 2006, p. 122)
Causal Research 'The objective of causal Research is to test hypotheses about (BLANCO)
(STEEN)cause-and-effect relationships.(Kotler et aAS;)
Constructive research is perhaps the most common computer science research method. This
type of approach demands a form of validation that doesn’t need to be quite as empirically based
as in other types of research like exploratory research.
Nevertheless the conclusions have to be objectively argued and defined. This may involve
evaluating the “construct” being developed analytically against some predefined criteria or
performing some benchmark tests with the prototype.
The term “construct” is often used in this context to refer to the new contribution being
developed. Construct can be a new theory, algorithm, model, software, or a framework.
The following phrases explain the above figure.
The "fuzzy info from many sources" tab refers to different info sources like training materials,
processes, literature, articles, working experience etc.
In the “solution” tab, “theoretical framework” represents a tool to be used in the problem
solving.
The “practical relevance” tab it refers to empirical knowledge creation that offers final benefits.
The “theoretical relevance” tab it gives the new theoretical knowledge that needs scientific
acceptance: the back arrow to “theoretical body of knowledge” tab.
constructive research
case research
surveys
qualitative and quantitative methods