MODULE 1: INTRODUCTION

Syllabus: 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

 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.
 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. Thus
research is an art of scientific investigation
DEFINING RESEARCH PROBLEM

Research in common parlance refers to a search for knowledge.

 The Dictionary meaning of research is “a careful investigation or inquiry especially
through search for new facts in any branch of knowledge.”
 Research can also be defined as a scientific and systematic search for pertinent
information on a specific topic. In fact, research is an art of scientific investigation.
 The research is defined as a “systematized effort to gain new knowledge-Redman
and Mory.
 Some people consider research as a movement, a movement from the known to the
unknown. It is actually a voyage of discovery.
 The research comprises defining and redefining problems, formulating the hypothesis
or suggested solutions; collecting, organising and evaluating data; making deductions
and reaching conclusions; and at last carefully testing the conclusions to determine
whether they fit the formulating hypothesis-Clifford Woody.
 The research is defined as “the manipulation of things, concepts or symbols for the
 purpose of generalising to extend, correct or verify knowledge, whether that knowledge aids
in construction of theory or in the practice of an art.”- D. Slesinger
and M. Stephenson
 Research is not confined to science and technology only. There are vast areas of
research in other disciplines such as languages, literature, history and sociology.
OBJECTIVES OF ENGINEERING RESEARCH
The purpose of research is to discover answers to questions through the application of scientific
procedures. The main aim of research is to find out the truth which is hidden and which has not
been discovered as yet. Though each research study has its own specific purpose, we may think
of research objectives as falling into a number of following broad groupings:
1. Exploratory or Formulative research studies: To gain familiarity with a phenomenon or to
achieve new insights into it
2. Descriptive research studies: To portray accurately the characteristics of a particular
individual, situation or a group
3. Diagnostic research studies: To determine the frequency with which something occurs or
with which it is associated with something else
4. Hypothesis-testing research studies: To test a hypothesis of a causal relationship between
variables
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.
 Research objectives can sometimes be convoluted and difficult to follow. Knowing where
and how to find different types of information helps one solve engineering problems, in
both academic and professional career.
 Lack of investigation into engineering guidelines, standards, and best practices result in
failures with severe repercussions. As an engineer, the ability to conduct thorough and
accurate research while clearly communicating the results is extremely important in
decision making.
 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
 The objectives of engineering research should be to develop new theoretical or applied
knowledge and not necessarily limited to obtaining abilities to obtain the desired result.
 The objectives should be framed such that in the event of not being able to achieve the desired result
that is being sought, one can fall back to understanding why it is not possible, because that is also a
contribution toward ongoing research in solving that problem.

MOTIVATION IN ENGINEERING RESEARCH

The possible motives may be the result of one or more of the following desires:
• Studies have shown that intrinsic motivations like interest, challenge, learning, meaning,
purpose, are linked to strong creative performance;
 • Extrinsic motivating factors like rewards for good work include money, fame, awards,
praise, and status are very strong motivators, but may block creativity. For example:
Research outcome may enable obtaining a patent which is a good way to become rich and
famous.
• Influences from others like competition, collaboration, commitment, and encouragement
are also motivating factors in research. For example: my friends are all doing research and
so should I, or, a person that I dislike is doing well and I want to do better.
• Personal motivation in solving unsolved problems, intellectual joy, service to community,
and respectability are all driving factors.
The following factors would be a mix of extrinsic and intrinsic aspects:
• Wanting to do better than what has been achieved in the world
• Improve the state of the art in technology
• Contribute to the improvement of society
• Fulfillment of the historical legacy in the immediate socio-cultural context.
Several other factors like government directives, funding opportunities in certain areas,
and terms of employment, can motivate people to get involved in engineering research.

TYPES OF ENGINEERING RESEARCH

Descriptive versus Analytical:
• Descriptive research includes comparative and co relational methods, and fact-finding
inquiries, to effectively describe the present state of art. The researcher holds no control over
the variables; rather only reports as it is.
• Descriptive research also includes attempts to determine causes even though the variables
cannot be controlled.
• On the contrary, in analytical research, already available facts for analysis and critical
evaluation are utilized. Some research studies can be both descriptive and analytical
Applied versus Fundamental:
• Research can either be applied research or fundamental (basic or pure) research.
• Applied research seeks to solve an immediate problem facing the organization, whereas
fundamental research is concerned with generalizations and formulation of a theory.
• Research concerning natural phenomena or relating to pure mathematics are examples of
fundamental research.
• Research to identify social or economic trends, or those that find out whether certain
communications will be read and understood are examples of applied research.
• The primary objective of applied research is to determine a solution for compelling
problems in actual practice, while basic research is aimed at seeking information which could
have a broad base of applications in the medium to long term.
Quantitative versus Qualitative:
• Quantitative research uses statistical observations of a sufficiently large number of
representative cases to draw any conclusions
• While qualitative researchers rely on a few non representative cases or verbal narrative in
behavioral studies such as clustering effect in intersections in Transportation engineering to
make a proposition.
Conceptual vs. Empirical
• Conceptual research is that related to some abstract idea(s) or theory.
• It is generally used by philosophers and thinkers to develop new concepts or to reinterpret
existing ones.
• On the other hand, empirical research relies on experience or observation alone, often
without due regard for system and theory.
• It is data-based research, coming up with conclusions which are capable of being verified
by observation or experiment. We can also call it as experimental type of research.
• In such research it is necessary to get at facts firsthand, at their source, and actively to go
about doing certain things to stimulate the production of desired information.
• In such research, the researcher must first provide himself with a working hypothesis or
guess as to the probable results. He then works to get enough facts (data) to prove or disprove
his hypothesis.
• He then sets up experimental designs which he thinks will manipulate the persons or the
materials concerned so as to bring forth the desired information.
• Such research is thus characterized by the experimenter ‘s control over the variables under
study and his deliberate manipulation of one of them to study its effects.
• Empirical research is appropriate when proof is sought that certain variables affect other
variables in some way. Evidence gathered through experiments or empirical studies is today
considered to be the most powerful support possible for a given hypothesis.
ENGINEERING RESEARCH PROCESS
Research process consists of series of actions or steps necessary to effectively carry out
research and the desired sequencing of these steps.
The chart indicates that the research process consists of a number of closely related activities,
as shown through I to VII. But such activities overlap continuously rather than following a
strictly prescribed sequence
1. Formulating the research problem: There are two types of research problems, viz., those
which relate to states of nature and those which relate to relationships between
variables. At the very outset the researcher must single out the problem he wants to study, i.e.,
he must decide the general area of interest or aspect of a subject-matter that he would like to
inquire into.
2. Extensive literature survey: Once the problem is formulated, a brief summary of it should
be written down. It is compulsory for a research worker writing a thesis for a Ph.D. degree to
write a synopsis of the topic and submit it to the necessary Committee or the Research Board
for approval. At this juncture the researcher should undertake extensive literature survey
connected with the problem.
3. Development of working hypotheses: After extensive literature survey, researcher should
state in clear terms the working hypothesis or hypotheses. Working hypothesis is tentative
assumption made in order to draw out and test its logical or empirical consequences.
Hypothesis should be very specific and limited to the piece of research in hand because it has to
be tested. The role of the hypothesis is to guide the researcher by delimiting the area of research
and to keep him on the right track. It sharpens his thinking and focuses attention on the more
important facets of the problem.
4. Preparing the research design: The research problem having been formulated in clear cut
terms, the researcher will be required to prepare a research design, i.e., he will have to state the
conceptual structure within which research would be conducted. The preparation of such a
design facilitates research to be as efficient as possible yielding maximal information. In other
words, the function of research design is to provide for the collection of relevant evidence with
minimal expenditure of effort, time and money.
5. Determining sample design: The researcher must decide the way of selecting a sample or
what is popularly known as the sample design. In other words, a sample design is a definite
plan determined before any data are actually collected for obtaining a sample from a given
population. Sampling can be done choosing a particular unit, random unit selection, systematic
pattern, homogenous group (stratified sampling), quota, cluster or area, multi stages and
sequential.
6. Collecting the data: In dealing with any real life problem it is often found that data at hand
are inadequate, and hence, it becomes necessary to collect data that are appropriate. There are
several ways of collecting the appropriate data which differ considerably in
context of money costs, time and other resources at the disposal of the researcher. Primary data
can be collected either through experiment or through survey. If the researcher conducts an
experiment, he observes some quantitative measurements, or the data, with the help of which he
examines the truth contained in his hypothesis. But in the case of a survey, data can be collected
by any one or more of the following ways by observation, through personal interview, through
telephonic interview, by mailing the questionnaire etc
7. Execution of the project: It is a very important step in the research process. If the
execution of the project proceeds on correct lines, the data to be collected would be adequate
and dependable. The researcher should see that the project is executed in a systematic manner
and in time. A careful watch should be kept for unanticipated factors in order to keep the survey
as much realistic as possible.
8. Analysis of data: After the data have been collected, the researcher turns to the task of
analyzing them. The analysis of data requires a number of closely related operations such as
establishment of categories, the application of these categories to raw data through coding,
tabulation and then drawing statistical inferences. The unwieldy data should necessarily be
condensed into a few manageable groups and tables for further analysis. Thus, researcher
should classify the raw data into some purposeful and usable categories.
9. Hypothesis-testing: After analyzing the data as stated above, the researcher is in a position
to test the hypotheses, if any, he had formulated earlier. Do the facts support the hypotheses or
they happen to be contrary? This is the usual question which should be answered while testing
hypotheses. Various tests, such as Chi square test, t-test, F-test, have been developed by
statisticians for the purpose. The hypotheses may be tested through the use of one or more of
such tests, depending upon the nature and object of research inquiry. Hypothesis-testing will
result in either accepting the hypothesis or in rejecting it.
10. Generalizations and interpretation: If a hypothesis is tested and upheld several times, it
may be possible for the researcher to arrive at generalization, i.e., to build a theory. As a matter
of fact, the real value of research lies in its ability to arrive at certain generalizations
11. Preparation of the report or the thesis: Finally, the researcher has to prepare the report of
what has been done by him. Writing of report must be done with great care keeping in view the
following:
12.The layout of the report should be as follows: (i) the preliminary pages; (ii) the main text,
and (iii) the end matter.
13. In its preliminary pages the report should carry title and date followed by
acknowledgements and foreword. Then there should be a table of contents followed by a list of
tables and list of graphs and charts, if any, given in the report.
The main text of the report should have the following parts:
(a) Introduction: It should contain a clear statement of the objective of the research and an
explanation of the methodology adopted in accomplishing the research. The scope of the study
along with various limitations should as well be stated in this part.
(b) Summary of findings: After introduction there would appear a statement of findings and
recommendations in non-technical language. If the findings are extensive, they should be
summarized.
(c) Main report: The main body of the report should be presented in logical sequence and
broken-down into readily identifiable sections.
(d) Conclusion: Towards the end of the main text, researcher should again put down the
results of his research clearly and precisely. In fact, it is the final summing up.
• At the end of the report, appendices should be enlisted in respect of all technical data.
Bibliography, i.e., list of books, journals, reports, etc., consulted, should also be given in the
end. Index should also be given specially in a published research report.
FINDING AND SOLVING A WORTHWHILE PROBLEM:
ETHICS IN ENGINEERING RESEARCH
• Ethics generally refers to a set of rules distinguishing acceptable and unacceptable
conduct, distinguishing right from wrong as such
• Most people learn such norms in their formative years, but moral development continues
through different stages of growth. Although everyone recognizes some common ethical norms,
but there is difference in interpretation and application.
• Ethical principles can be used for evaluation, proposition or interpretation of laws.
Although 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.
• According to Whitbeck, 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. This event altered the timing and credit issues on the
release of research results since BRS gave priority to whoever first submitted findings for
publication, rather than trying to find out who had first discovered.
• Whitbeck raised two simple but significant questions to address the tricky issue of
authorship in research:
 Who should be included as an author and
 The appropriate order of listing of authors.
• In an increasingly interconnected world, the issue of co-authorship is very relevant to all
researchers. There are issues around individuals who may be deeply involved during the
conduct of the research work, but may not contribute in the drafting phase
• 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
• Technological developments raise a whole range of ethical concerns such as privacy
issues and data related to surveillance systems, and so 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. Are there things that
are possible to do with this data, that we agree we should not do?
• Engineering ethics gives us the rule book; tells us, how to decide what is okay to do and
what is not. Engineering research is not work in isolation to the technological development
taking place.
• Researchers make many choices that matter from an ethical perspective and influence the
effects of technology in many different ways:
o By setting the ethically right requirements at the very outset, engineering researchers can
ultimately influence the effects of the developed technology.
o 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.
o 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
Engineering research should be conducted to improve the state-of-the-art of technologies.
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, which can be
summarized as follows:
• 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.
• 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 and 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.
• 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. 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 practice 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.
• 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.
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 honors.
 There is several important research conduct and ethics related issues connected to
authorship of research papers and are summarized herewith in the context of
engineering research.
 Credit for research contributions is attributed in three major ways in research
publications: by authorship (of the intended publication), citation (of previously
published or formally presented work), and through a written acknowledgment (of some inputs
to the present research).
 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‖ (co-
authorship 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 co-authorship 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 co-authorship 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 no disclosed conflict of interest within the
organization. Such co-authorships can be termed as ghost co-authorship. 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.
CHARACTERSTICS OF RESEARCH:
General Characteristics of Research
The following characteristics may be gathered from the definitions of ‘Research’
 It gathers new knowledge or data from primary or first-hand sources.
 It places emphasis upon the discovery of general principles.
 It is an exact systematic and accurate investigation.
 It uses certain valid data gathering devices.
  It is logical and objective.
 The researcher resists the temptation to seek only the data that support his hypotheses.
 The researcher eliminates personal feelings and preferences.
 It endeavors to organize data in quantitative terms.
Specific Characteristics of Research
 A sound philosophy of social studies as the basis of research
 Research is based on insight and imagination
 Research requires an inter-disciplinary approach
 Research usually employs deductive reasoning process
 Research should come out of a desire to do things better
 Research is not as exact as research in physical science
 Research is not the field of the specialist only
 Research generally requires inexpensive material
 Research is based on the subjectivity and intangibility of social phenomena
 Research is perhaps incapable of being dealt through empirical method
 Research is based on inter dependence of causes and effect
 Research cannot be a mechanical process
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH
The significance of research is understood keeping in view the following points:
(a) To those students who are to write a master’s or Ph.D. thesis, research may mean
careerism or a any to attain a high position in the social structure.
(b) To professionals in research methodology, research may mean a source of livelihood.
(c) To philosophers and thinkers, research may mean the outlet for new ideas and insights.
(d) To literary men and women, research may mean the development of new styles and
creative work.
(e) To analysts and intellectuals, research may mean the generalizations of new theories.
Distinctions between Aims & Objectives of Engineering Research