Chapter One: Introduction

What is research?
Depending on who you ask, you will likely get very different answers to this seemingly innocuous question.
For instance, some people will say that they routinely research different online websites to find the best
place to buy goods or services they want. Television news channels supposedly conduct research in the
form of viewer polls on topics of public interest such as forthcoming elections or government-funded
projects. Undergraduate students research the Internet to find the information they need to complete
assigned projects or term papers. Graduate students working on research projects for a professor may see
research as collecting or analyzing data related to their project. Businesses and consultants research different
potential solutions to remedy organizational problems such as a supply chain bottleneck or to identify
customer purchase patterns. These examples imply that research is an attempt to discover something.
However, none of the above can be considered as “scientific research” and not every research is a scientific
research unless: (1) it contributes to a body of science, and (2) it follows the scientific method.
Science
What is science? Etymologically, the word “science” is derived from the Latin word “scientia” meaning
knowledge. Science refers to a systematic and organized body of knowledge in any area of inquiry that is
acquired using “the scientific method”. So, the purpose of science is to create scientific knowledge.
Science can be grouped into two broad categories: natural science and social science. Natural science is
the science of naturally occurring objects or phenomena, such as light, objects, matter, earth, celestial
bodies, or the human body. Natural sciences can be further classified into physical sciences, earth sciences,
life sciences, and others. In contrast, social science is the science of people or collections of people, such
as groups, firms, societies, or economies, and their individual or collective behaviors.
Scientific Knowledge
Scientific knowledge refers to a generalized body of laws and theories to explain a phenomenon or behavior
of interest that are acquired using the scientific method. Laws are observed patterns of phenomena or
behaviors, while theories are systematic explanations of the underlying phenomenon or behavior. For
instance, in physics, the Newtonian Laws of Motion describe what happens when an object is in a state of
rest or motion (Newton’s First Law), what force is needed to move a stationary object or stop a moving
object (Newton’s Second Law), and what happens when two objects collide (Newton’s Third Law).
Collectively, the three laws constitute the basis of classical mechanics – a theory of moving objects.
Similar theories are also available in social sciences. For instance, cognitive dissonance theory in
psychology explains how people react when their observations of an event are different from what they
expected of that event, general deterrence theory explains why some people engage in improper or
criminal behaviors, such as illegally download music or commit software piracy, and the theory of planned
behavior explains how people make conscious reasoned choices in their everyday lives.
Remark: There are many theories in social science such as the theories mentioned above. How about
scientific laws in social science? Read the following journal article:
McIntyre, L. C. (1993). Complexity and Social Scientific Laws. Synthese, 97(2), 209–227.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/20117839

1
The goal of scientific research is to discover laws and postulate theories that can explain natural or social
phenomena, or in other words, build scientific knowledge. It is important to understand that this knowledge
may be imperfect or even quite far from the truth. Sometimes, there may not be a single universal truth, but
rather an equilibrium of “multiple truths.” We must understand that the theories, upon which scientific
knowledge is based, are only explanations of a particular phenomenon, as suggested by a scientist. As such,
there may be good or poor explanations, depending on the extent to which those explanations fit well with
reality, and consequently, there may be good or poor theories. The progress of science is marked by our
progression over time from poorer theories to better theories, through better observations using more
accurate instruments and more informed logical reasoning.
It can be arrived at scientific laws or theories through a process of logic and evidence. Logic (theory) and
evidence (observations) are the two, and only two, pillars upon which scientific knowledge is based. In
science, theories and observations are interrelated and cannot exist without each other. Theories provide
meaning and significance to what we observe, and observations help validate or refine existing theory or
construct new theory.
Scientific Research
Given that theories and observations are the two pillars of science, scientific research operates at two levels:
a theoretical level and an empirical level. The theoretical level is concerned with developing abstract
concepts about a natural or social phenomenon and relationships between those concepts (i.e., build
“theories”), while the empirical level is concerned with testing the theoretical concepts and relationships to
2
see how well they reflect our observations of reality, with the goal of ultimately building better theories.
Over time, a theory becomes more and more refined (i.e., fits the observed reality better), and the science
gains maturity. Scientific research involves continually moving back and forth between theory and
observations. Both theory and observations are essential components of scientific research. For instance,
relying solely on observations for making inferences and ignoring theory is not considered valid scientific
research.
Depending on a researcher’s training and interest, scientific inquiry may take one of two possible forms:
inductive or deductive. In inductive research, the goal of a researcher is to infer theoretical concepts and
patterns from observed data. In deductive research, the goal of the researcher is to test concepts and
patterns known from theory using new empirical data. Hence, inductive research is also called theory-
building research, and deductive research is theory-testing research. Note here that the goal of theory-testing
is not just to test a theory, but possibly to refine, improve, and extend it.
Theory building and theory testing are particularly difficult in the social sciences, given the imprecise nature
of the theoretical concepts, inadequate tools to measure them, and the presence of many unaccounted factors
that can also influence the phenomenon of interest. It is also very difficult to refute theories that do not
work.
For instance, Karl Marx’s theory of communism as an effective means of economic production
withstood for decades, before it was finally discredited as being inferior to capitalism in promoting
economic growth and social welfare. Erstwhile communist economies like the Soviet Union and
China eventually moved toward more capitalistic economies characterized by profit-maximizing
private enterprises. However, the recent collapse of the mortgage and financial industries in the
United States demonstrates that capitalism also has its flaws and is not as effective in fostering
economic growth and social welfare as previously presumed.
Unlike theories in the natural sciences, social science theories are rarely perfect, which provides numerous
opportunities for researchers to improve those theories or build their own alternative theories.
Conducting scientific research, therefore, requires two sets of skills – theoretical and methodological –
needed to operate in the theoretical and empirical levels respectively. Methodological skills ("know-how")
are relatively standard, invariant across disciplines, and easily acquired through training or academic
programs. However, theoretical skills ("know-what") is considerably harder to master, requires years of
observation and reflection, and are tacit skills that cannot be “taught” but rather learned though experiences.
Methodological skills are needed to be an ordinary researcher, but theoretical skills are needed to be an
extraordinary researcher!
Scientific Method
In the preceding sections, science been described as knowledge acquired through a scientific method. So
what exactly is the “scientific method”? Scientific method refers to a standardized set of techniques for
building scientific knowledge, such as how to make valid observations, how to interpret results, and how
to generalize those results. The scientific method allows researchers to independently and impartially test
preexisting theories and prior findings, and subject them to open debate, modifications, or enhancements.
The scientific method must satisfy four key characteristics:
1. Logical: Scientific inferences must be based on logical principles of reasoning.
2. Confirmable: Inferences derived must match with observed evidence.

3
 3. Repeatable: Other scientists should be able to independently replicate or repeat a scientific
study and obtain similar, if not identical, results.
4. Scrutinizable: The procedures used and the inferences derived must withstand critical scrutiny
(peer review) by other scientists.
The scientific method, as applied to social sciences, includes a variety of research approaches, tools, and
techniques, for collecting and analyzing qualitative or quantitative data. These methods include laboratory
experiments, field surveys, case research, ethnographic research, action research, and so forth. However,
recognize that the scientific method operates primarily at the empirical level of research, i.e., how to make
observations and analyze these observations. Very little of this method is directly pertinent to the theoretical
level, which is really the more challenging part of scientific research.
Types of Scientific Research
Depending on the purpose of research, scientific research projects can be grouped into three types:
exploratory, descriptive, and explanatory.
Exploratory research is often conducted in new areas of inquiry, where the goals of the research are: (1)
to scope out the magnitude or extent of a particular phenomenon, problem, or behavior, (2) to generate
some initial ideas (or “hunches”) about that phenomenon, or (3) to test the feasibility of undertaking a more
extensive study regarding that phenomenon. For instance, if the citizens of a country are generally
dissatisfied with governmental policies regarding during an economic recession, exploratory research may
be directed at measuring the extent of citizens’ dissatisfaction, understanding how such dissatisfaction is
manifested, such as the frequency of public protests, and the presumed causes of such dissatisfaction, such
as ineffective government policies in dealing with inflation, interest rates, unemployment, or higher taxes.
Such research may include examination of publicly reported figures, such as estimates of economic
indicators, such as gross domestic product (GDP), unemployment, and consumer price index, as archived
by third-party sources, obtained through interviews of experts, eminent economists, or key government
officials, and/or derived from studying historical examples of dealing with similar problems. This research
may not lead to a very accurate understanding of the target problem, but may be worthwhile in scoping out
the nature and extent of the problem and serve as a useful precursor to more in-depth research.
Descriptive research is directed at making careful observations and detailed documentation of a
phenomenon of interest. These observations must be based on the scientific method (i.e., must be replicable,
precise, etc.), and therefore, are more reliable than casual observations by untrained people. Examples of
descriptive research are estimating employment by sector or population growth by ethnicity over multiple
employment surveys or censuses. If any changes are made to the measuring instruments, estimates are
provided with and without the changed instrumentation to allow the readers to make a fair before-and-after
comparison regarding employment trends. Other descriptive research may include chronicling ethnographic
reports of gang activities among adolescent youth in urban populations, the persistence or evolution of
religious, cultural, or ethnic practices in select communities, and the role of technologies such as Twitter
and instant messaging in the spread of democracy movements in Middle Eastern countries.
Explanatory research seeks explanations of observed phenomena, problems, or behaviors. While
descriptive research examines the what, where, and when of a phenomenon, explanatory research seeks
answers to why and how types of questions. It attempts to “connect the dots” in research, by identifying
causal factors and outcomes of the target phenomenon. Examples include understanding the reasons behind
4
adolescent crime or gang violence, with the goal of prescribing strategies to overcome such societal
ailments. Seeking explanations for observed events requires strong theoretical and interpretation skills,
along with intuition, insights, and personal experience.
History of Scientific Thought (scientific research)
It may be interesting to go back in history and see how science has evolved over time and identify the key
scientific minds in this evolution. Although instances of scientific progress have been documented over
many centuries, the terms “science,” “scientists,” and the “scientific method” were coined only in the 19th
century. Prior to this time, science was viewed as a part of philosophy, and coexisted with other branches
of philosophy such as logic, metaphysics, ethics, and aesthetics, although the boundaries between some of
these branches were blurred.
In the earliest days of human inquiry, knowledge was usually recognized in terms of theological precepts
based on faith. This was challenged by Greek philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle, and Socrates during the
3rd century BC, who suggested that the fundamental nature of being and the world can be understood more
accurately through a process of systematic logical reasoning called rationalism. In particular, Aristotle’s
classic work Metaphysics (literally meaning “beyond physical [existence]”) separated theology (the study
of Gods) from ontology (the study of being and existence) and universal science (the study of first
principles, upon which logic is based). Rationalism (not to be confused with “rationality”) views reason as
the source of knowledge or justification, and suggests that the criterion of truth is not sensory but rather
intellectual and deductive, often derived from a set of first principles or axioms (such as Aristotle’s “law of
non-contradiction”).
The next major shift in scientific thought occurred during the 16th century, when British philosopher
Francis Bacon (1561-1626) suggested that knowledge can only be derived from observations in the real
world. Based on this premise, Bacon emphasized knowledge acquisition as an empirical activity (rather
than as a reasoning activity), and developed empiricism as an influential branch of philosophy. Bacon’s
works led to the popularization of inductive methods of scientific inquiry, the development of the
“scientific method” (originally called the “Baconian method”), consisting of systematic observation,
measurement, and experimentation, and may have even sowed the seeds of atheism or the rejection of
theological precepts as “unobservable.”
Empiricism continued to clash with rationalism throughout the Middle Ages, as philosophers sought the
most effective way of gaining valid knowledge. French philosopher Rene Descartes sided with the
rationalists, while British philosophers John Locke and David Hume sided with the empiricists. Other
scientists, such as Galileo Galilei and Sir Issac Newton, attempted to fuse the two ideas into natural
philosophy (the philosophy of nature), to focus specifically on understanding nature and the physical
universe, which is considered to be the precursor of the natural sciences. Galileo (1564-1642) was perhaps
the first to state that the laws of nature are mathematical, and contributed to the field of astronomy through
an innovative combination of experimentation and mathematics.
In the 18th century, German philosopher Immanuel Kant sought to resolve the dispute between empiricism
and rationalism in his book Critique of Pure Reason, by arguing that experience is purely subjective and
processing them using pure reason without first delving into the subjective nature of experiences will lead
to theoretical illusions. Kant’s ideas led to the development of German idealism, which inspired later
development of interpretive techniques such as phenomenology, hermeneutics, and critical social theory.
5
At about the same time, French philosopher Auguste Comte (1798–1857), founder of the discipline of
sociology, attempted to blend rationalism and empiricism in a new doctrine called positivism. He suggested
that theory and observations have circular dependence on each other. While theories may be created via
reasoning, they are only authentic if they can be verified through observations. The emphasis on verification
started the separation of modern science from philosophy and metaphysics and further development of the
“scientific method” as the primary means of validating scientific claims. Comte’s ideas were expanded by
Emile Durkheim in his development of sociological positivism (positivism as a foundation for social
research) and Ludwig Wittgenstein in logical positivism.
In the early 20th century, strong accounts of positivism were rejected by interpretive sociologists
(antipositivists) belonging to the German idealism school of thought. Positivism was typically equated with
quantitative research methods such as experiments and surveys and without any explicit philosophical
commitments, while antipositivism employed qualitative methods such as unstructured interviews and
participant observation. Even practitioners of positivism, such as American sociologist Paul Lazarsfield
who pioneered large-scale survey research and statistical techniques for analyzing survey data,
acknowledged potential problems of observer bias and structural limitations in positivist inquiry. In
response, antipositivists emphasized that social actions must be studied though interpretive means based
upon an understanding the meaning and purpose that individuals attach to their personal actions, which
inspired Georg Simmel’s work on symbolic interactionism, Max Weber’s work on ideal types, and Edmund
Husserl’s work on phenomenology.
In the mid-to-late 20th century, both positivist and antipositivist schools of thought were subjected to
criticisms and modifications. British philosopher Sir Karl Popper suggested that human knowledge is based
not on unchallengeable, rock solid foundations, but rather on a set of tentative conjectures that can never be
proven conclusively, but only disproven. Empirical evidence is the basis for disproving these conjectures
or “theories.” This metatheoretical stance, called postpositivism (or postempiricism), amends positivism
by suggesting that it is impossible to verify the truth although it is possible to reject false beliefs, though it
retains the positivist notion of an objective truth and its emphasis on the scientific method.
Likewise, antipositivists have also been criticized for trying only to understand society but not critiquing
and changing society for the better. The roots of this thought lie in Das Capital, written by German
philosophers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, which critiqued capitalistic societies as being social
inequitable and inefficient, and recommended resolving this inequity through class conflict and proletarian
revolutions. Marxism inspired social revolutions in countries such as Germany, Italy, Russia, and China,
but generally failed to accomplish the social equality that it aspired. Critical research (also called critical
theory) propounded by Max Horkheimer and Jurgen Habermas in the 20th century, retains similar ideas of
critiquing and resolving social inequality, and adds that people can and should consciously act to change
their social and economic circumstances, although their ability to do so is constrained by various forms of
social, cultural and political domination. Critical research attempts to uncover and critique the restrictive
and alienating conditions of the status quo by analyzing the oppositions, conflicts and contradictions in
contemporary society, and seeks to eliminate the causes of alienation and domination (i.e., emancipate the
oppressed class).
The above philosophical arguments on research have brought to the development of scientific research.
These different research philosophies and approaches will be covered in the next chapters.