RESEARCH METHODOLOGY & INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

RIGHTS
Course Code: 21RMI56

Module-1
Text book referred: Dipankar Deb, Rajeeb Dey, Valentina E. Balas “Engineering
Research Methodology”, ISSN 1868-4394 ISSN 1868-4408 (electronic), Intelligent
Systems Reference Library, ISBN 978-981-13-2946-3 ISBN 978-981-13-2947-0 (eBook),
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2947-0

Introduction: Meaning of Research, Objectives of Engineering Research, and

Motivation in Engineering Research, Types of Engineering Research, Finding and
Solving a Worthwhile Problem. Ethics in Engineering Research, Ethics in Engineering
Research Practice, Types of Research Misconduct, Ethical Issues Related to
Authorship
Meaning of Research
Definition of research:
Research refers to a careful, well-defined (or redefined), objective, and systematic
method of search for knowledge, or formulation of a theory that is driven by
inquisitiveness for that which is unknown and useful on a particular aspect so as to
make an original contribution to expand the existing knowledge base.
What is involved in research work?
Research involves formulation of hypothesis or proposition of solutions, data analysis,
and deductions; and ascertaining whether the conclusions fit the hypothesis. Research
is a process of creating, or formulating knowledge that does not yet exist.
Example:
1. Problem: A bridge engineer is tasked with designing a new bridge that can
withstand earthquakes.
2. Hypothesis: The engineer hypothesizes that a new type of bridge design that
uses a combination of steel and concrete will be more earthquake-resistant than
traditional bridge designs.
3. Data collection: The engineer collects data on the performance of different
bridge designs in earthquakes. The engineer also conducts experiments to test
the strength and durability of the new bridge design.
4. Data analysis: The engineer analyzes the data to see if it supports the
hypothesis. The engineer also uses the data to identify any potential flaws in the
design.
5. Deductions: The engineer makes deductions based on the data and the
hypothesis. The engineer may deduce that the new bridge design is more
earthquake-resistant than traditional bridge designs, but the engineer may also
deduce that there are some potential flaws in the design that need to be
addressed.
 6. Conclusion: The engineer concludes that the new bridge design is a promising
solution to the problem of earthquake-resistant bridges. However, the engineer
also concludes that more research is needed to fully test and validate the design.
Research cycle
Research cycle starts with basically a practical problem: one must be clear what the
problem being attempted to solve is and why it is important. This problem motivates
a research question without which one can tend to get lost in a giant swamp of
information. The question helps one zero in onto manageable volume of information,
and in turn defines a research project which is an activity or set of activities that
ultimately leads to result or answer, which in turn helps to solve the practical problem
that one started with in the first place as shown in Fig. 1.1.

Figure 1.1: The research flow diagram

Note: Research question ?- A research question is a question that a researcher
seeks to answer through research. It is important to formulate a clear and concise
research question before conducting any research, as this will help to guide the
research process and ensure that the research is relevant and focused.
Example: How does the addition of graphene nanoplatelets to a polymer matrix affect
the mechanical properties of the composite?
This research question is specific because it focuses on the effect of graphene
nanoplatelets on the mechanical properties of a polymer matrix. It is also focused
because it asks about a single variable, the addition of graphene nanoplatelets. The
question is also answerable because it is possible to conduct experiments to measure
the mechanical properties of the composite with and without graphene nanoplatelets.

What is the Importance of research and how to conduct it effectively?

Research is about making an original contribution to the existing body of knowledge.
Research questions should be relevant to the world we live in and should be
answerable with a reasonable amount of time and resources. Research should be
systematic and should have a finite endpoint. The objective of research is to gain
insight into something or to solve a problem. Good research questions can develop
throughout the project and can be modified as needed. Research should be used to
create new knowledge that can be written down or recorded in some way. Research is
not just about following a set of steps. It is about being able to ask new questions, to
see things in a new light, and to come up with new solutions to problems. Critical
thinking and creativity are important aspects of a research work. Through research,
one would like to make, or develop, new knowledge about the world around us which
can be written down or recorded in some way, and that knowledge can be accessed
through that writing or recording
What are the ways of developing and accessing knowledge?
(i) Observation is the most fundamental way of obtaining information from a source,
and it could be significant in itself if the thing that we are trying to observe is really
strange or exciting, or is difficult to observe. Observation takes different forms from
something like measurements in a laboratory to a survey among a group of subjects to
the time it takes for a firmware routine to run. The observational data often needs to
be processed in some form and this leads to the second category of knowledge, the
model. Example: 1. A mechanical engineer might observe the behavior of a new type
of material under different loading conditions. This observation could lead to the
development of a new model for the material's strength. 2. Observe the wear patterns
on a bearing to determine the cause of the failure.3. Observe the performance of a new
type of engine to determine its fuel efficiency.
(ii) Models are approximated, often simplified ways of describing sometimes very
complex interactions in the form of a statistical relationship, a figure, or a set of
mathematical equations. For instance, the modeling equation captures the
relationship between different attributes or the behavior of the device in an abstract
form and enables us to understand the observed phenomena. Example: 1. A
mechanical engineer might develop a mathematical model of the airflow around an
aircraft wing. This model could be used to predict the wing's lift and drag
characteristics. 2. Develop a model of the stress distribution in a beam under load.
This model could be used to predict the beam's deflection and failure load.3. Develop
a model of the fluid flow in a pump. This model could be used to predict the pump's
efficiency and head.
(iii) The final category is a way of arranging or doing things through processes,
algorithms, procedures, arrangements, or reference designs, to get a certain desired
result. Example: 1. A mechanical engineer might develop a process for
manufacturing a new type of turbine blade. This process could be used to produce
blades that are more efficient and durable.2. Develop a process for casting metal parts.
This process could be used to produce parts with a high degree of accuracy and
repeatability. 3. Develop a process for welding steel plates. This process could be used
to produce strong and durable joints.
These 3 ways are illustrated in the Fig. 1.2
 Fig. 1.2 The categories of knowledge in research

What are the different stages of engineering research?

Engineering research typically starts with a research area, which is a broad area of
study such as control systems. The research area is then narrowed down to a topic,
which is a more specific area of study such as the control of microbial fuel cells. Finally,
the topic is narrowed down to a problem, which is a specific question that the research
is trying to answer such as the adaptive control of single chamber microbial fuel cells.
This may be reversed sometimes. Also, it is concerned with getting a good problem to
solve is more than half the work done. This is because a good problem is one that is
challenging but achievable, and that has the potential to make a significant
contribution to the field.
Definition of engineering research: Engineering research is the process of developing
the perspectives and seeking improvements in knowledge and skills to enable the
recognition, planning, design, and execution of research in a wide range of forms
relevant for engineering and technology investigations and developments.
Meaning of select terms:
1. Inquisitive- interested in finding out about many different things.
2. Critical thinking- is self-guided, self-disciplined thinking which attempts to
reason at the highest level of quality in a fair-minded way
Objectives of Engineering Research
Objectives of Engineering Research/ challenges of engineering research?
The objective of engineering research is to solve new and important problems, and
since the conclusion at the end of one’s research outcome has to be new, but when one
starts, the conclusion is unknown. So, the start itself is tricky, one may say. The answer
is, based on “circumstantial evidence”, intuition, and imagination, one guesses what
may be a possible conclusion. A guess gives a target to work toward, and after initial
attempts, it may turn out that the guess is incorrect. But, the work may suggest new
worthy avenues or targets which may be based on some modifications of the initial
target, or may need new techniques, or one may obtain negative results which may
render the initial target or some other targets as not realizable, or may lead to fortunate
discoveries while looking for something else
Aim of the research
The main aim of the research is to apply scientific approaches to seek answers to open
questions, and although each research study is particularly suited for a certain
approach.
What are different types of research studies? Give example
Exploratory or formulative, descriptive, diagnostic, and hypothesis-testing.
Exploratory or formulative research: This type of research is typically used to gain a
better understanding of a problem or issue. For example, an engineer might conduct
exploratory research to better understand the causes of a machine failure.
Descriptive research: This type of research is used to describe the current state of
affairs. For example, an engineer might conduct descriptive research to determine the
average lifespan of a certain type of bearing.
Diagnostic research: This type of research is used to identify the causes of a problem.
For example, an engineer might conduct diagnostic research to determine why a
certain type of engine is not performing as expected.
Hypothesis-testing research: This type of research is used to test a hypothesis. For
example, an engineer might conduct hypothesis-testing research to determine if a new
design for a wind turbine blade will increase its efficiency.
Motivation in Engineering Research
Intrinsic motivation: This is the desire to do something for its own sake, without any
external rewards. Engineers who are intrinsically motivated are driven by a passion
for learning, solving problems, and making a difference in the world.
Extrinsic motivation: This is the desire to do something for the sake of rewards or
recognition. Engineers who are extrinsically motivated may be motivated by money,
fame, awards, or the opportunity to advance their careers.
Social motivation: This is the desire to do something in order to meet the expectations
of others or to fit in with a group. Engineers who are socially motivated may be
motivated by the desire to impress their peers, to please their mentors, or to fulfill the
expectations of their parents or teachers.
In addition to these three main motivations, engineers may also be motivated by a
desire to:
Solve unsolved problems: Engineers are often driven by a desire to find solutions to
the world's most pressing problems.
Improve the state of the art: Engineers are constantly seeking to improve the existing
technologies and develop new ones.
Contribute to the improvement of society: Engineers want to use their skills and
knowledge to make the world a better place.
Ultimately, the motivations for engineering research are as varied as the engineers
themselves. However, all engineers are driven by a desire to make a difference in the
world.
Types of Engineering Research
There are three main types of research: descriptive, applied, and fundamental.
Descriptive research describes the current state of something. It does not try to
explain why things are the way they are, but it can be used to identify trends and
patterns. Ex: A descriptive study might look at the average lifespan of a certain type of
light bulb.
Applied research is conducted to solve a specific problem. It is often used to develop
new products or services, or to improve existing ones. Ex: an applied study might look
at how to improve the efficiency of a manufacturing process.
Fundamental research is conducted to gain a better understanding of the world. It is
not focused on solving specific problems, but it can lead to the development of new
technologies and theories. Ex: a fundamental study might look at the origins of the
universe.
Research can also be classified as quantitative or qualitative.
Quantitative research uses numerical data to answer questions. It is often used in
applied research, where the goal is to measure the impact of a particular intervention.
Ex: how many people click on an advertisement after seeing it.
Qualitative research uses non-numerical data, such as text, images, and videos, to
answer questions. It is often used in fundamental research, where the goal is to
understand the underlying causes of a phenomenon. Ex: ow people perceive a new
product or service.
Finding and Solving a Worthwhile Problem
A worthwhile research problem would have one or more attributes. It could be
nonintuitive/counterintuitive even to someone who knows the area, something that
the research community had been expecting for sometime, a major simplification of a
central part of the theory, a new result which would start off a new subject or an area,
provides a new method or improves upon known methods of doing something which
has practical applications, or a result which stops further work in an area. The
researcher has to be convinced that the problem is worthwhile before beginning to
tackle it because best efforts come when the work is worth doing, and the problem
and/or solution has a better chance of being accepted by the research community.
Research problems stated by the Supervisor or posed by others that are yet to be
solved. it may involve rethinking of a basic theory, or need to be formulated or put
together from the information provided in a group of papers suggested by the
Supervisor. Research scholars are faced with the task of finding an appropriate
problem on which to begin their research. Skills needed to accomplish such a task at
the outset. Once the problem is vaguely identified, the process of literature survey and
technical reading would take place for more certainty of the worthiness of the intended
problem.

George Pólya (1887–1985) suggested a 4-step procedure for mathematical problem-

solving. The recommended steps to solve a research problem are
(i) Understand the problem, restate it as if its your own, visualize the problem by
drawing figures, and determine if something more is needed.
(ii) One must start somewhere and systematically explore possible strategies to solve
the problem or a simpler version of it while looking for patterns.
(iii) Execute the plan to see if it works, and if it does not then start over with another
approach. Having delved into the problem and returned to it multiple times, one might
have a flash of insight or a new idea to solve the problem.
(iv) Looking back and reflecting helps in understanding and assimilating the strategy,
and is a sort of investment into the future.

Ethics in Engineering Research

Ethics generally refers to a set of rules distinguishing acceptable and unacceptable
conduct, distinguishing right from wrong, or wise aphorisms. Everyone recognizes
some common ethical norms, but there is difference in interpretation and application.
Moral development continues through different stages of growth. Ethical principles
can be used for evaluation, proposition or interpretation of laws. Ethics are not laws,
but laws often follow ethics because ethics are our shared values.
International norms for the ethical conduct of research have been there since the
adoption of the Nuremberg Code in 1947. The issues related to research credit dates
back to the establishment of the British Royal Society (BRS) in the seventeenth century
to refine the methods and practices of modern science. BRS gave priority to whoever
first submitted findings for publication, rather than trying to find out who had first
discovered.
Whitbeck [4] raised two simple but significant questions to address the tricky issue of
authorship in research: (1) who should be included as an author and (2) the
appropriate order of listing of authors.
Government bodies, and universities worldwide have adopted certain codes for
research ethics. Research ethics and the responsible conduct of research are often
erroneously used interchangeably. Research ethics examines the appropriate
application of research outcomes, while responsible conduct of research deals with the
way the work is undertaken.
Ethics in Engineering Research Practice
Engineering researchers need to make ethical decisions and are answerable for the
repercussions borne out of their research as outcomes. The reason that ethics matter
in data used in engineering research is usually because there is impact on humans.
Certain practices may be acceptable to certain people in certain situations, and the
reasons for unacceptability may be perfectly valid. We have unprecedented access to
data today, and unprecedented options for analysis of these data and consequences in
engineering research related to such data. Engineering ethics gives us the rule book;
tells us, how to decide what is okay to do and what is not. Researchers make many
choices that matter from an ethical perspective and influence the effects of technology
in many different ways:
(i) By setting the ethically right requirements at the very outset, engineering
researchers can ultimately influence the effects of the developed technology.
(ii) Influence may also be applied by researchers through design (a process that
translates the requirements into a blueprint to fulfill those requirements). During the
design process, decision is to be made about the priority in importance of the
requirements taking ethical aspects into consideration.
(iii) Thirdly, engineering researchers have to choose between different alternatives
fulfilling similar functions.
Research outcomes often have unintended and undesirable side effects. It is a vital
ethical responsibility of researchers to ensure that hazards/risks associated with the
technologies that they develop, are minimized and alternative safer mechanisms are
considered. If possible, the designs should be made inherently safe such that they
avoid dangers, or come with safety factors, and multiple independent safety barriers,
or if possible, a supervisory mechanism to take control if the primary process fails.
Types of Research Misconduct
Research integrity encompasses dealing fairly with others, honesty about the methods
and results, replicating the results wherever possible so as to avoid errors, protecting
the welfare of research subjects, ensuring laboratory safety, and so forth. In order to
prevent mistakes, peer reviews should take place before the research output is
published.
There may be different types of research misconduct as described in research articles
such as:
(i) Fabrication (Illegitimate creation of data): Fabrication is the act of conjuring data
or experiments with a belief of knowledge about what the conclusion of the analysis or
experiments would be, but cannot wait for the results possibly due to timeline
pressures from supervisor or customers.
(ii) Falsification (Inappropriate alteration of data): Falsification is the
misrepresentation or misinterpretation, or illegitimate alteration of data or
experiments, even if partly, to support a desired hypothesis even when the actual data
received from experiments suggest otherwise. Falsification and fabrication of data and
results, hamper engineering research, cause false empirical data to percolate in the
literature, wreck trustworthiness of individuals involved, incur additional costs,
impede research progress, and cause actual and avoidable delays in technical
advancement. Misleading data can also crop up due to poor design of experiments or
incorrect measurement practices The image of engineering researchers as objective
truth seekers is often jeopardized by the discovery of data related frauds. Such
misconduct can be thwarted by researchers by always trying to reproduce the results
independently whenever they are interested to do further work in a published material
which is likely to be part of their literature survey.
(iii) Plagiarism (Taking other’s work sans attribution): Plagiarism takes place when
someone uses or reuses the work (including portions) of others (text, data, tables,
figures, illustrations or concepts) as if it were his/her own without explicit
acknowledgement. Verbatim copying or reusing one’s own published work is termed
as self-plagiarism and is also an unacceptable practice in scientific literature. The
increasing availability of scientific content on the internet seems to encourage
plagiarism in certain cases, but also enables detection of such practices through
automated software packages.
(iv) Other Aspects of Research Misconduct: Serious deviations from accepted conduct
could be construed as research misconduct. When there is both deception and damage,
a fraud is deemed to have taken place. Sooner or later ethical violations get exposed.
Simultaneous submission of the same article to two different journals also violates
publication policies. Another issue is that when mistakes are found in an article or any
published content, they are generally not reported for public access unless a researcher
is driven enough to build on that mistake and provide a correct version of the same
which is not always the primary objective of the researcher.

How are supervisors, reviewers or editors alerted to plagiarism?

(i) Original author comes to know and informs everyone concerned.
(ii) Sometimes a reviewer finds out about it during the review process.
(iii) Or, readers who come across the article or book, while doing research.
Although there are many free tools and also paid tools available that one can procure
institutional license of, one cannot conclusively identify plagiarism, but can only get a
similarity score which is a metric that provides a score of the amount of similarity
between already published content and the unpublished content under scrutiny.
However, a low similarity score does not guarantee that the document is plagiarism
free. It takes a human eye to ascertain whether the content has been plagiarized or not.
It is important to see the individual scores of the sources, not just the overall similarity
index. Setting a standard of a maximum allowable similarity index is inadequate usage
of the tool. Patchwork plagiarism is more difficult to evaluate.
There are simple and ethical ways to avoid a high similarity count on an about to be
submitted manuscript. Sometimes, certain published content is perfect for one’s
research paper, perhaps in making a connection or fortifying the argument presented.
The published material is available for the purpose of being used fairly. One is not
expected to churn out research outcomes in thin air. However, whatever is relevant
can be reported by paraphrasing in one’s own words, that is, without verbatim copy.
One can also summarize the relevant content and naturally, the summary invariably
would use one’s own words. In all these cases, citing the original source is important.
However, merely because one has cited a source, it does not mean that one can copy
sentences (or paragraphs) of the original content verbatim. A researcher should
practise writing in such a way that the reader can recognize the difference between the
ideas or results of the authors and those that are from other sources. Such a practice
enables one to judge whether one is disproportionately using or relying on content
from existing literature.
Ethical Issues Related to Authorship
Academic authorship involves communicating scholarly work, establishing priority for
their discoveries, and building peer-reputation, and comes with intrinsic burden of
acceptance of the responsibility for the contents of the work. It is the primary basis of
evaluation for employment, promotion, and other honours.
Some of the important research conduct and ethics related issues connected to
authorship of research papers are summarised below:
Credit for research contributions is attributed in three major ways in research
publications: by authorship, citation, and through a written acknowledgment.
Authorship establishes both accountability and gives due credit. A person is expected
to be listed as an author only when associated as a significant contributor in research
design, data interpretation, or writing of the paper.
Including “guest” or “gift” (coauthorship bestowed on someone with little or no
contribution to the work) authors dilutes the contribution of those who actually did
the work, inappropriately inflates credentials of the listed authors, and is ethically a
red flag highlighting research misconduct. Sometimes, the primary author dubiously
bestows coauthorship on a junior faculty or a student to boost their chances of
employment or promotion, which can be termed as Career-boost authorship.
There is also an unfortunate malpractice of coauthorship that can be described as
“Career-preservation authorship” wherein a head of the department, a dean, a provost,
or other administrators are added as Coauthors because of quid pro quo arrangement
wherein the principal author benefits from a “good relation” with the superiors and
the administrator benefits from authorship without doing the required work for it.
Sometimes, an actual contributor abstains from the list of authors due to nondisclosed
conflict of interest within the organization. Such coauthorships can be termed as ghost
coauthorship. Full disclosure of all those involved in the research is important so that
evaluation can happen both on the basis of findings, and also whether there was
influence from the conflicts. In another type of questionable authorship, some
researchers list one another as coauthors as a reciprocal gesture with no real
collaboration except minimal reading and editing, without truly reviewing the work
threadbare.
Some authors, in trying to acquire a sole-authored work, despite relying on significant
contribution to the research work from others, recognize that effort only by an
acknowledgment, thereby misrepresenting the contributions of the listed authors. The
unrecognized “author” is as a consequence, unavailable to readers for elaboration.
All listed authors have the full obligation of all contents of a research article, and so
naturally, they should also be made aware of a journal submission by the
corresponding author. It is imperative that their consent is sought with respect to the
content and that they be agreeable to the submission. In case of misconduct like
inappropriate authorship, while the perpetrator is easier to find, the degree of
appropriate accountability of the coauthors is not always obvious. Being able to
quantify the contributions so as to appropriately recognize and ascertain the degree of
associated accountability of each coauthor, is appealing.
Double submission is an important ethical issue related to authorship, which involves
submission of a paper to two forums simultaneously. The motivation is to increase
publication possibility and possibly decrease time to publication. Reputed journals
want to publish original papers, i.e., papers which have not appeared elsewhere, and
strongly discourage double submission.