dissertation – Page 2

News

ARTICLE 100: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: The Layout of the Thesis or Dissertation Part 4 of 9 Parts: Ethics Part 2 of 3 Parts

19th Dec 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

What does ethics in research entail?

Some post-graduate students will think that not committing plagiarism is what it is all about.

And they will not be entirely wrong.

Not committing plagiarism is an element of ethics.

However, there are many other facets to the concept.

Ethics are not only important for writing your thesis or dissertation, but also for the safety and integrity of the participants.

Especially the target group for your research.

I discuss the following issues on ethics in this article:

Axiology.
Codes of consent.
No harm to participants.

Axiology. The quality of our research will be judged according to the criteria of validity and authenticity. This brings us to the concept “axiology”. Axiology addresses the nature of ethical behaviour. In research axiology refers to what you belief to be ethical. Basic beliefs about what is ethical are embedded in research paradigms and guide the researcher’s decision making. The purpose of the research needs to be balanced with what you value as well as other ethical considerations in the conduct of research, notably validity and authenticity.

Validity and authenticity are prerequisites for understanding. It is in this that epistemology and ethics are brought together. It is also a meeting point between epistemology and ontology because what we know (ontology) is tied up with what we understand (epistemology).

Ontological and educative authenticity, on the other hand, were designated as criteria for determining a raised level of awareness; in the first instance, by individual research participants and, in the second, by individuals who share a particular value system and, therefore, maintain contact for some social or organisational purpose. That is why the validity of your epistemological approach starts with ontology. It is rather difficult and mostly unnecessary, to separate epistemology from ontology, because they form a unified system and are highly interdependent. Epistemology is the declarative extension of ontology and often includes additional ontological statements.

It is, however, important that you do not confuse ontology and epistemology. As a matter of routine, it helps to mention ontology first, and then epistemology, since it enables you to base your study on a statement of “fact” (which can include your target group, world or society) before you do any explaining and theorising.

It is, sometimes, necessary and useful to develop models of real-life situations or artefacts for research purposes. Choice of representation (i.e., the way in which models must be articulable) does, in fact, have real implications for what aspects of the research target receive the most attention – what the model handles well, and what gets minimised or left out. On the other hand, models of what there is (ontology) need to be explained by what can be known and how it can be known (epistemology). We know that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line – this is what we know, or the ontology. How we know this, that is. the evidence that the shortest route between two points is a straight line, is the epistemology.

Epistemology is not just a way of knowing. It is also a system of knowing through cognitive reasoning based on internal logic (contextualising information gathered to your research purpose) and the wider applicability of the knowledge, that is external validity (ensuring that findings are in line with the general environment and that they will be acceptable to other stakeholders).

Epistemology is intimately linked to a world-view. People from different continents, countries and even regions will often not have the same outlook or frame of reference towards the world around them. Thus, the conditions under which people live and learn, shape both their knowledge and their world-views.

Codes of consent. Codes of consent deal with if the target group for the research participates voluntarily or not. Qualitative research can be an intrusion into people’s lives, especially if it is social research. The interviewer’s knock on the door or the arrival of a questionnaire in the post or by email signals the beginning of an activity that the respondent has not requested, and one that may require a significant portion of his or her time and energy. Participation in a social experiment disrupts the subject’s personal and work schedule.

What is needed is informed consent, meaning that the research subjects need to know that they are being researched and what the nature and purpose of the research are. Participants in research should base their voluntary participation on a full understanding of the nature of the research and possible risks involved. When obtaining their consent, you need to appreciate that the participants may be under subtle pressure to co-operate, and you should take this possibility into account.

Consent is considered ‘informed’ when, in a language that the participants understand, you explain to them the nature of the research, their right to refuse to participate or withdraw from participation at any time, factors that may influence their willingness to participate, and the data collection methods to be used. The participants must have a complete understanding of the nature, aims and processes of the research, its intended outcomes, as well as any consequences that may follow from participation and publication.

Participants in research are often required to provide personal information about themselves, such as their age, weight, eating habits, drinking habits, smoking habits, etc. Such information may be unknown to their friends and associates and they might not want people close to them to know. Furthermore, research on human activities often requires that such information be revealed to strangers. Other professionals, such as physicians, and lawyers, also require such information. Their requests, however, may be justified because the information is required for them to serve the personal interests of the respondent. Social researchers can seldom make this claim. Like medical scientists, they can only argue that the research effort may ultimately help all of humanity.

No one should be forced to participate in research. This norm, however, is far easier to accept in theory than it is to apply in practice. It is unlikely that people will participate voluntarily if they do not believe that they will, somehow, benefit from participating. That is probably the most important reason why the response rate to questionnaires is often low, and you should plan on receiving only a fraction of the questionnaires back that you send out. Any response rate higher than 10% is good, unless you take special steps, like delivering and collecting the questionnaires personally.

No harm to the participants. Research should never physically, psychologically or financially injure the people involved, regardless of whether they volunteer for the study. Questions that would embarrass people or endanger their home life, friendship, career, etc. should not be asked or, if asked, be done with the consent of the participants. Sometimes subjects are asked to reveal deviant behaviour, attitudes they feel are unpopular, or demeaning personal characteristics, such as low income, the receipt of welfare payments, etc. You, as the researcher, should agree not to reveal such information and you must keep your undertaking. You must look for the subtlest dangers that information might end up in the wrong hands and guard against them.

The ethical norms of voluntary participation and no harm to participants have become formalised in the concept of informed consent, which we touched on under the sub-heading “codes of consent”.

To avoid harm to respondents, you as the researcher should have the firmest of scientific grounds for asking questions that may cause injury to others. The objective of informed consent may be rather difficult to achieve and maintain in the case of internet or other electronic research contexts. You might not even have physical contact with the participants in the research. The challenge is exacerbated if the maintenance of anonymity is also needed. With this as background, informed consent can sometimes cause harm, be counterproductive or simply impossible to achieve.

Qualitative research projects may also force participants to face aspects of themselves that they do not normally consider. The project can be a source of continuing, personal agony for the subject. If the study concerns codes of ethical conduct, for example, the subject may begin questioning his or her own morality, and that personal concern may last long after the research has been completed and reported.

Subjects can also be harmed by the analysis and reporting of data. If the respondent reads the research report it might happen that he or she may find themselves characterised in an index, table or description. Having done so, they may find themselves portrayed – though not identified by name – as bigoted, unpatriotic, irregular, etc.

An obvious and generally applicable concern in the protection of the participants’ interests and well-being is the protection of their identity, especially in survey research. Two techniques – anonymity and confidentiality – can be used in this regard.

Anonymity. A respondent may be considered anonymous when you cannot link a given response with a given respondent. This means an interview survey respondent can never be considered anonymous, since an interviewer collects the information from an identifiable respondent. Assuring anonymity makes it difficult to keep track of who has or has not returned the questionnaires.

Anonymity relates to the issue of privacy and is especially difficult to maintain on the internet. Privacy is regarded as the right to withhold information from public consumption. People often use publicly accessible information spaces, like Facebook, but maintain strong expectations of privacy. Because of this, privacy often refers to the way information is used rather than how easy or difficult it is for people to gain access to such information.

Confidentiality. Confidentiality means that you, as the researcher, should protect your participant’s identity, places of work and stay, and the location of the research. In a confidential survey, the researcher can identify a given person’s responses but essentially promises not to do so publicly.

You can use several techniques to ensure the maintenance of confidentiality. All stakeholders in the research team who might need to maintain confidentiality and who will have access to data and findings should be trained in their ethical responsibilities. All names and addresses should be removed from the questionnaires as soon as they are no longer needed and replaced by special identification numbers, not their national identification numbers. A file should be prepared linking special identification numbers or codes with real identification numbers. This file should be kept in a safe or lockable filing cabinet to which only people who need to know have access.

It is your responsibility to inform the respondent if a survey is confidential rather than anonymous. Do not use the term anonymous if you mean confidential.

Summary

Axiology addresses the nature of ethical behaviour.

Basic beliefs about what is ethical are embedded in research paradigms.

You need to achieve a balance in your research between ethics, your values, validity and authenticity.

Validity and authenticity are prerequisites for understanding.

Ethics is based on the ontology and epistemology of your research topic.

Codes of consent deal with if the target group for your research participates voluntarily or not.

Participants in research need to be informed about the purpose and nature of the research, how they will be involved and possible risks.

Participants are sometimes asked to share personal information with the researcher.

No one should be forced to participate in research.

You should keep in mind that the response rate to especially questionnaires is often low.

Research should never physically, psychologically or financially injure participants in the research.

Participants must not be harmed by the collection, analysis or reporting of data.

Questions asked to participants must be relevant and necessary for the research.

Anonymity and confidentiality should be maintained if necessary.

Anonymity is difficult to maintain.

Confidentiality means that the participant’s identity, places of work and stay and where the research took place must only be revealed on a need-to-know basis.

Close

Maintaining sound ethical standards is important for the protection of the interests of others who participate in your research.

However, most importantly, you should protect your own interests.

It is in your interest not to cause damage to other people.

And it is in your interest to submit good quality work.

Because gaining higher qualifications is supposed to prepare you for a career and quality life.

Enjoy your studies.

Thank you.

News

ARTICLE 99: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: The Layout of the Thesis or Dissertation, Part 3 of 9: Ethics in Research Part 1 of 3

18th Dec 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

Do people still care about the truth?

Did people ever care about the truth?

Are opinions more important than facts?

And what will the implications be if the truth is no longer important, and opinions are more important than facts?

I discuss the principles of ethics in research in this article.

Ethics are typically associated with morality, that is matters of right and wrong. You need to know, understand and accept the general consensus amongst academic researchers about what is acceptable and not acceptable in the conduct of scientific inquiry. The following principles are fundamental to an ethical approach to research:

Research should always respect and protect the dignity of participants in research. This requires sensitivity, empathy, and accountability towards the target group for your research. The greater the vulnerability of the participants in the research (community, author, expert, etc.), the greater the obligation of the researcher to protect the participant. To this end, you as the researcher should:
1. Ensure that you know and understand the values, cultures and protocols of your target group. It might be necessary to be academically or culturally qualified to work with some communities.
1. Consult experts on communities if you lack the qualifications, knowledge and cultural background to work with them.
1. Share your findings honestly, clearly, comprehensively and accountably with only those who are entitled to have access to the findings.
1. Report your findings, and the limitations thereof, openly and honestly so that peers and the public in general may scrutinise and evaluate them, keeping in mind that your findings may probably only be shared with certain people.
1. Acknowledge and point out the possibility of alternative interpretations.
1. Respect the right of fellow researchers to work with different paradigms and research methods and accept it if they disagree with your finding and interpretation.
1. Agree to disagree rather than to defend your point of view fanatically in an effort to sway others.
1. Honour the authority of professional codes in specific disciplines.
1. Refrain from using your position for undeserved, corrupt or otherwise dishonest personal gain.
Because ‘harm’ is defined contextually, ethical principles are more likely to be understood inductively rather than applied universally. That is, rather than a one-size-fits-all approach, ethical decision-making is best approached through the application of practical judgement related to the specific context.
When making ethical decisions, you should balance the rights of participants with the social benefits of the research and your right to conduct the research. In different contexts the rights of subjects may outweigh the benefits of research.
The importance of adhering to ethical requirements is equally important regardless of which stage of the research process is involved.
Ethical decision-making is a deliberate process, and you should consult as many people and resources as possible in the process, including fellow researchers, people participating in or familiar with the contexts or sites being studied, research review boards, ethic guidelines, published scholarships and where applicable, legal precedent.

With the above principles in mind, the ethical issues that impact the most on research are:

The notion of truth.
Axiology.
Codes of consent.
No harm to the participants.
Trust.
Deception.
Analysis and reporting.
Plagiarism.
Legality.
Professionalism.
Research ethics and society.
Copyright and intellectual property right.
The originality of your research.
Promulgation of results.

The notion of truth. Truth is largely governed by critical epistemology. Critical epistemology is an understanding of the relationship between power, cognitive reasoning and truth. This implies that the way we think about concepts, theory, philosophy and phenomena determines what we would regard as truth. You should uphold the epistemological principles that apply to all researchers, meaning that truth should be a product of logical reasoning and evidence. In terms of critical epistemology, however, we need to be careful – it is easy to twist your arguments to fit your preferences by describing them in terms of an unfounded epistemology. The need for and availability of power can erode logical truth. Sometimes writers and researchers work with a predetermined political agenda in mind, for example to gain support from a particular group or to promote a political objective, rather than to strive for scientific validity. You will only truly develop new knowledge or add to existing knowledge, that is, make a positive epistemological contribution to science, if you are objective and honest in your interpretation and analysis of information. This brings us to the epistemic imperative.

In the world of science our aim is to generate truthful (valid/plausible) descriptions and explanations of the world. This is called the epistemic intent of science. “Epistemic” is derived from episteme, the Greek word for “truthful knowledge”. We use “truthful” as a synonym for “valid” or “close approximation of the truth”. We accept knowledge to be accurate and true when we have sufficient reason to believe that it is a logical and motivated representation or explanation of a phenomenon, event or process. There needs to be enough evidence to support such claims. It mostly takes time to accumulate evidence and claims of truth must withstand repeated testing under various conditions in order to be accepted as valid or, at least, plausible.

“Instant verification” of a hypothesis or theory is largely impossible to achieve. Research takes place all the time, and scientific communities accept certain points of view, hypotheses or theories as valid and plausible, based on the best available evidence at a given point in time. However, new empirical evidence contradicting current “truth” can be revealed by new research at any time in the future. The obvious thing to do when this happens would be for scientists to revise their opinions and change their theories.

Commitment to “truth” is not the same as the search for certainty or infallible knowledge. Neither does it imply holding truth as absolute without any concern for time and space. The notions of “certainty” and “infallibility” would suggest that we can never be wrong. If we are to accept a particular point of view as “certain” or “infallible” we are in fact saying that no amount of new evidence can ever lead us to change our beliefs. This would obviously be a false stance, making a mockery of scientific enterprise. Life and the environment are dynamic concepts – not only do they change because of internal and external forces impacting on them, but we also discover flaws in our beliefs and perceptions. None of the paradigms that we discussed already go so far as to claim that truth is exact and perfectly final. Pre-modernism might be regarded as an exception by some. The commitment to true and valid knowledge is, therefore, not a search for infallible and absolute knowledge.

Even though we know that “truth” is a rather volatile concept, the “epistemic imperative” demands that researchers commit themselves to the pursuit of the most truthful claims about the world and the phenomena and events that have an impact on human beings. This has at least three implications:

The idea of an imperative implies that a type of “moral contract” has been entered into. It is neither optional nor negotiable. This “contract” is intrinsic to scientific inquiry. Every researcher and scientist should commit themselves to this contract. When you embark on a scientific project, or undertake any scientific enquiry, you tacitly agree to the epistemic imperative – to the search for truth. But the epistemic imperative is not merely an ideal or regulative principle. It has real consequences. This is evident in the way that the scientific community deals with any attempt to circumvent or violate the imperative.
The “epistemic imperative” is a commitment to an ideal. Its goal is to generate results and findings which are as valid or truthful as possible. The fact that it is first and foremost an ideal means that it might not always be attained in practice. All research, however, should represent steps closer to accuracy and truth. It seems to be unlikely, if not impossible, to achieve perfect accuracy and truth, amongst other things because of methodological problems, practical constraints (such as lack of resources) and a dynamic environment. We are often required to settle for results that are, at best, approximations to the truth.
The meaning that we attach to the concept “truth” presupposes a loose, somewhat metaphorical relationship between our scientific proposition and the world. Contrary to the classical notion that “truth” means that what we regard as reality, and what reality actually is, as being the same, we accept that this relationship is not that simple. The notion of “fit”, “articulation” or “modelling” is a more appropriate term for two reasons: Firstly, it suggests that a point of view can be relatively true. Articulation is not an absolute notion but allows for degrees of accuracy. Secondly, the term “articulation” can refer to the relationship between our points of view and the world (the traditional notions of “representation” or “correspondence”), or to the relationships between our points of view. In the latter’s case, we would use the term “coherence”. This means that “articulation”, “fit” or “modelling” is used to refer to both empirical and conceptual correspondence. When our conceptual system exhibits a high degree of internal coherence, we could also speak of the concepts as “fitting”, “being articulated” or “being modelled” well.

Summary

Ethics deal with matters of right and wrong.

The principles of an ethical approach to research are:

Respect and protect the dignity of participants in research.
1. Base ethical decision-making on the application of practical judgement in a specific context.
1. Balance the rights of participants with the social benefits of the research and your right to conduct the research.
1. Maintain and apply sound ethics throughout the research process.
1. Treat all participants and stakeholders in your research ethically.

Truth is largely governed by critical epistemology.

It should be the product of logical reasoning and evidence.

The need for and availability of power can erode logical truth.

Always keep the epistemic imperative in mind when conducting research.

The implications of the epistemic imperative are:

A moral contract is intrinsic to scientific inquiry.
All research should represent steps closer to accuracy and truth.
Truth is not always absolute or timeless.

Close

On the questions that I posed in my introduction –

All people do not care about the truth.

But, as you know, this is nothing new.

Not all people seem to have the ability to foresee the consequences of dishonesty for individuals, families, communities, cities, countries, the world.

Ironically lack of visionary thinking has this nasty way of causing great damage to the myopic in the end.

Enjoy your studies.

Thank you.

News

ARTICLE 98: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: The Layout of the Thesis or Dissertation Part 2 of 9 Parts

17th Dec 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

I discuss deconstruction and empirical generalisation in this article.

Is deconstruction just a euphemism for plagiarism?

After all, what we do when we deconstruct a concept, argument, knowledge or philosophy, is to take what somebody else said or wrote and change it to serve our own purpose.

You be the judge if deconstruction is theft or progression.

Deconstruction

Deconstruction is not an independent research method as such, but rather a way in which data that you collected for your research is ‘unpacked’ into more useful chunks that belong together and that can be articulated to the purpose of your research. To rearrange the data, you need to identify the right meanings for terminology and concepts.

Constructivism as a paradigm addresses deconstruction. Some academics are of the opinion that deconstruction belongs with post-structuralism. However, it is important to also discuss it separately as part of the process of research methodology seeing that it is necessary, regardless of your paradigmatic preference.

To clarify the difference between constructivism as a paradigm and deconstruction as a research method – constructivism deals with the way in which people perceive their research environment; deconstruction deals with the way in which you, as a researcher, will contextualise and articulate the research data that you collect to convey the ‘message’ of your investigation.

When deconstructing data that you collected, you will group them under headings and sub-headings that will enable you to offer the data in harmony with the purpose of your research, hopefully on a higher level of abstraction or at least in a more creative manner. When studying towards a doctoral degree you will need to ‘create’ new data, which will probably include some deconstruction.

When doing research for a master’s degree and even more so for a doctoral degree, you will need to group your data into a set of categories and transform the groupings into abstract types of philosophies and knowledge which you need to analyse further. Dedicated computer software enables you to code your data so that deconstruction is much easier to accomplish by just grouping pieces of information under specific codes and then analysing and recombining the information into new messages. In this manner you can reconstruct the data that you collected into a logical, accurate and authentic thesis or dissertation.

Deconstructing data is not about disclosing an already established, underlying or privileged truth, thereby committing plagiarism. Rather, it is about synthesising existing data in such a manner that the inherent truth of the data is extracted and offered as an alternative, higher level construction of reality. In the case of doctoral studies such deconstruction should lead to alternative meanings, aligned with the problem statement, problem question or hypothesis of the research.

It stands to reason that the products of a research deconstruction need to be tested by checking with readers, and by exploring with especially your study leader, the extent to which the set of deconstructed components as captured in your thesis or dissertation, is in line with the general usage and meaning of the components, while being articulated to the purpose and requirements of your research and contextualised to the scope and range of your research target group.

As is often the case with master’s and doctoral studies, the deconstructed information may apply more widely than just the target group for the study. The deconstructed data may not be limited to component meanings associated with only your abstracted categories as defined in your thesis or dissertation. How you group your data is up to you and you may test new concepts and their technical or academic definitions. The dominant logic of the process of deconstruction is abduction, although induction plays a part in testing the scope and range of the constructed concepts and their meaning in terms of a variety of related everyday meanings.

For the sake of efficiency, you will start with meaningful components that you already deconstructed previously. By linking subsets of components, according to plausible themes, which should be the problem statement or hypothesis of your research broken down into abstracted categories, you can produce a compact set of concepts and associated academic meanings articulated to the purpose of your research. These ‘sets of concepts’ are the typologies through which you communicate your arguments in a thesis or dissertation.

Typologies not only provide descriptions but also enable a clear exchange of deeper understanding about the meanings of words and concepts with which you work in your thesis or dissertation. Hence, typologies answer ‘what’ questions but not ‘why’ questions. Stated differently, your typologies reflect the ontology of your research, which you will need as the foundation for the epistemology, which would be your discussion, analysis and explanations of your arguments.

The epistemology of your thesis or dissertation proposes and tests discriminating insights about associations between elements of the regulatory and the primary ‘why’ questions. Because a theory or argument should at least hold across the same for your research, the testing should be applied to each unit of a selected sample to ensure validity with a reasonable probability of being accurate. You will not statistically calculate the probability that your sample is large enough to provide a good measure of accuracy when conducting qualitative research. However, you should take great pains in ensuring accuracy of your findings, for example by making your sample as large as possible, consulting as many different sources of information as you can reasonably obtain, asking readers for comment, arranging focus groups, etc.

Empirical generalisation

Empirical generalisation should not be confused with empiricism, which is a paradigm, as you should know by now. Empirical generalisation is studies based on the collection and presentation of evidence to prove a hypothesis or claim in the form of a problem statement or question. The evidence needs to be shown to be accurate, valid and credible. As such it represents the most basic requirements for qualitative research.

Empirical research mostly refers to evidence that can be observed and measured, which implies quantitative research. It can be directed at the ontology of a phenomenon, requiring you to focus on “what”, as well as the epistemology of phenomena, requiring answers to questions like “how many?”; “why?”; “what are the results?”; “what is the effect?”; and “what caused it?”.

Summary

Deconstruction:

Is not an independent research method.
Is used to group and articulate data to the purpose of research.
Fits in well with constructivism.
Can be rendered efficient through coding.
Synthesises existing data to identify the inherent truth in the data.
Needs to be checked by other stakeholders in the research.

On doctoral level, you will:

Create new data from existing data.
Escalate data to a higher level of abstraction.
Develop or identify alternative meanings for words and concepts aligned with the problem statement, research question or hypothesis for your research.
Mostly use induction.

On master’s degree level, you will:

Deconstruct data to make it more creative.
Mostly use deduction.

On doctoral and master’s degree level:

Data need to be grouped into a set of categories and transformed into abstract types of philosophies and knowledge.
You should aim at generalisation of your findings.
You must ensure that your findings are logical, accurate and authentic.
Typologies can be used:
1. To communicate arguments in your thesis or dissertation.
1. To describe concepts relevant to your research.
1. To enable a clear exchange and deeper understanding of the meanings of concepts and words.
1. To serve as an ontology upon which the epistemology for your research can be developed.

Empirical generalisation means providing solutions to a research problem, answers to a research question or evidence to prove or disprove a hypothesis.

Evidence must be accurate, valid and credible.

Close

So, what do you think?

Is deconstruction just a euphemism for plagiarism?

Let’s put this question on ice for the time being.

The three articles following on this one deal with ethics.

Perhaps we will be in a better position to answer the question after we have taken a closer look at ethics and what it means.

Enjoy your studies.

Thank you.

News

ARTICLE 97: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: The Layout of the Thesis or Dissertation Part 1 of 9 Parts

16th Dec 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. J.P. Nel

This article is an introduction to eight more articles on how to structure your thesis or dissertation.

I already pointed out in my initial articles that a thesis for master’s degree studies and a dissertation for doctoral studies are not the same.

Even so, there are enough similarities so that we can discuss them together.

Besides, it is a good idea to use the thesis that you write for your master’s degree as a learning opportunity for when you embark on doctoral studies.

And most universities will not object if you write and approach your thesis as you would a dissertation.

I will point out salient differences between a thesis and a dissertation.

Research without writing is of little purpose. There are, of course, other ways of communicating your research findings, most notably through oral presentation, but putting them on paper remains of paramount importance. The thesis or dissertation remains the major means by which you should communicate your findings.

It is something of a paradox, therefore, that many researchers are reluctant to commit their ideas to paper. Then again, not all people like writing and some might claim that it requires writing talent. For those who enjoy writing, this can be the most enjoyable part of the research process, because when compiling your research findings, you need to take what you wrote in the body of your document and create something new from it. Even though you have your research data to fall back on, you still need to think creatively. This takes some courage, hard work and lots of self-discipline.

It is always important to do immaculate and professional research. However, your biggest challenge is to develop an interesting and well-structured thesis or dissertation from the research data. Any research paper is based upon a four-step process. Firstly, you need to gather lots of general, though relevant, information. Secondly, you need to evaluate, analyse and condense the information into what is specifically relevant to a hypothesis, problem statement or problem question. Thirdly, you need to come to conclusions about the information that you analysed, and formulate findings based on your conclusions. Finally, your thesis or dissertation should again become more general as you try to apply your findings to the world in general or at least more widely than the target group for the research.

Different disciplines will use slightly different thesis or dissertation structures, so the structure described in the following nine articles is based on some basic principles. The steps given here are the building blocks of constructing a good thesis or dissertation.

A thesis or dissertation should clearly and thoroughly indicate what you have done to solve a problem that you identified. In addition, it should be factual, logical and readable. A good thesis or dissertation should be comprehensive and precise. Most importantly, though, it must be professionally researched.

Some of the contents of your research proposal will not have changed and should be included in your dissertation, as should some of the information that did change, but in the improved format or content. Your problem statement, question or hypothesis, for example, might have changed. The literature and other sources of information that you consulted will have changed and should include many more sources than the original list.

You should ensure that the time set aside for writing sessions is sufficient, as constant restarting and trying to find out where you left off when you last worked on the thesis wastes time and interferes with your thinking processes. If you are fully employed you should write after hours at least one hour per day, five days a week. Even then you will need to catch up by working over weekends, long weekends and holidays.

It is when writing a thesis or dissertation that you will really come to appreciate your desktop or laptop computer. When writing a thesis or dissertation, you should:

Manage your time well.
Make electronic backups of your work as often as possible.
Plan each chapter in detail and structure your thesis or dissertation before you start writing. The layout of your thesis or dissertation may change over your period of study. Even so, good preparation is still important.
First write your draft, then edit it critically and eliminate unnecessary material. Do not expect to get it right the first time around. Review is part of post graduate studies.
Motivate the necessity of the study and explain the goal clearly.
Give your study leader and anybody else who might read your thesis or dissertation a clear understanding of the research problem. The implications should be explained in such a way that everyone reading the thesis or dissertation has the same orientation towards the problem.
Provide sufficient theoretical background to base the study on.
Clearly describe the data collection methods and aids used.
Provide sufficient and accurate data and indicate exactly how the data was used to solve the research problem.
Conform to the university’s requirements for typing, printing and binding, and also meet the requirements set out formally in the learning institution’s post graduate policy and procedure.

We have come full circle from discussing the research process, all the concepts that you should apply and the tools that are available, to unpacking the research in the form of a thesis or dissertation. The following nine articles, therefore, return to the beginning of the research process and deal with the entire process, the only difference being that now we focus on putting the thesis or dissertation on paper.

Summary

The thesis or dissertation is the major means by which to communicate research findings.

Writing a thesis or dissertation requires creative thinking, some courage, hard work and lots of self-discipline.

You must find out in advance what the university’s requirements, rules, regulations and procedures for master’s or doctoral studies are and abide by them.

And you must manage time well.

Conducting research and writing a thesis or dissertation mostly consist of four main steps:

Gather information.
Evaluate, analyse and condense the information.
Come to conclusions and findings.
Apply your findings in practise.

The requirements for a thesis or dissertation are:

It must clearly and thoroughly indicate what you have done to solve a problem.
It must be comprehensive and precise.
You must research the topic of your research professionally.
In the case of doctoral studies your dissertation must align with your initial study proposal.
You should continually make electronic backups of your work.
You must plan and structure your thesis or dissertation before you start writing.
You should review your work regularly.
You should do enough literature study.
You must clearly motivate the importance and value of your research.
You must explain the research problem.
You must clearly describe how you will collect and analyse data.
You must show how you use the data that you collect in your thesis or dissertation.

Close

The eight articles following on this one are critically important for your further studies.

You can use them to guide your research process.

You can also use them to do a self-evaluation of your work before you submit the final manuscript for your thesis or dissertation.

Enjoy our studies.

Thank you.

News

ARTICLE 57: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: Phenomenology

3rd Oct 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. J.P. Nel

Do you think personal perceptions can be a true reflection of the nature of events or phenomena?

Can opinions based on nothing more than experience be accepted as valid and accurate data for research?

Can you come to logical findings if you do not use cognitive thinking and reflection when conducting research?

Here we have a paradigm that does all of those things.

I discuss phenomenology in this video.

Phenomenology is a philosophy that believes that individual behaviour is the product of a person’s experience through direct interaction with phenomena. An objective external reality is believed not to have any effect on behaviour.

Social reality is believed to have meaning; therefore it should be taken into consideration when developing knowledge. Social reality is important for the way in which people behave as well as the factors that determine behaviour. This implies that research falls back on the common-sense thinking of individuals. Actual experience is the essence of data used in phenomenology. Opinions, point of view, beliefs, superstitions, etc. are not taken into consideration.

Phenomenology deals with how people make sense of the world around them and how this can be used to understand phenomena and human behaviour. Phenomenologists realise that they should take their own perceptions into consideration when investigating those of other people. Their perceptions, however, should be based on experiences.

The data, research approaches and methods used in the natural sciences differ markedly from the data, research approaches and methods used in the social sciences, notably phenomenology. Data is analysed by reflecting on how we experienced events and phenomena, and gathering meaning from our reflections and consciousness.

Research falls back on the common-sense thinking of individuals because of the importance of social reality. The objective of phenomenology is to investigate and describe an event or phenomenon as consciously experienced, without theories about their causal explanations or objective reality. The description needs to describe as accurately as possible the phenomenon, without judging, in order to remain true to the facts. Phenomenological research, thus, studies people’s perceptions, perspectives and understanding of a particular situation, event or phenomenon to construct meaning.

Human beings interpret interaction with phenomena and attach meanings to different actions and/or ideas to construct new experiences. You, as the researcher, need to develop empathic understanding of phenomena to know how individuals interpret what they observe or experience, to understand the feelings, motives and thoughts that determine the behaviour of others.

Research based on a phenomenological paradigm strongly focuses on capturing the uniqueness of events or phenomena. For example, as part of research in human behaviour you may immerse yourself in the lives of convicted criminals. In carrying out such an inquiry, you might observe convicts in a correctional facility, share their particular struggles, conflicts and fears in an attempt to derive a deeper understanding of what it is like for them to serve time in the facility.

Phenomenological studies attend not only to the events being studied but also their political, historical, and sociocultural contexts. The studies strive to be as faithful as possible to the actual experiences, especially as it might be described in the participants’ own words. In the example of research in a correctional facility, you would, for example, ask convicts to describe situations where they felt that their lives were threatened.

In such inquiries, phenomenological studies resist the use of concepts, categories, taxonomies, or reflections about the experiences. This implies that generalisations should be avoided because they may distort the desired focus on the uniqueness of the events. You would also avoid any research methods having a tendency to construct a predetermined set of fixed procedures and techniques that would govern the research project.

An alternative to seeking assertions of enduring value or considering all human experiences as unique, can be to aim for a limited form of generalisability. Such a limited form recognises the uniqueness of local situations but accepts that, depending on the degree of similarity of the sending and receiving contexts, some transferability of findings is possible.

Phenomenological research embraces participants as stakeholders and participants in the research process. Even if limited, you and the participants can make some generalisations of what a phenomenon is like as an experience from the ‘insider’s’ perspective by analysing multiple perspectives of the same situation. This is yet another example of ‘emic’, the insider’s point of view, as opposed to ‘etic’ which would be the outsider’s point of view.

Phenomenologists are reluctant to follow a structured step-by-step research procedure. They argue that this would erode the integrity of the observed phenomenon. Research guidelines might be necessary just as long as it does not become a rigid procedure.

Almost any qualitative research method can be used, including interviews, questionnaires, focus groups, etc. The only precondition is that the data should be a full description of actual experiences.

The data collection method used will largely decide how the data will be analysed. Keep in mind that data can be gathered as and when an event takes place, which would mean that the data can change in unexpected ways and directions. You should focus on deep understanding of the data through analysis. The data and its analysis should contribute to the achievement of the purpose of your research. Reflection is needed to extract meaning from data, and you will need to carefully analyse the data to achieve this.

Phenomenological studies emphasise hermeneutic or interpretive analysis of actual experiences. It is also associated with symbolic interactionism, which argues that the individual is continually interpreting and analysing the symbolic meaning of his or her environment, with symbolism often being the spoken or written word. Phenomenology tries to interpret and describe experiences in a way that others will also be able to understand.

Phenomenology is opposed to the positivist paradigm and most other technicist paradigms. The reason for this is that phenomenology requires collecting and reflecting on actual experiences which will seldom include quantitative analysis. Data gathered phenomenologically would mostly be subjective whereas the positivist paradigm requires objective data.

Researchers criticise phenomenology for many different reasons. The paradigm is interpreted and used in a variety of ways by different researchers, with the result that the meaning of the philosophy has been eroded. Secondly, there is little, if any consistency in the examples given in many different fields of research, all claiming to be case studies of phenomenology. Thirdly, phenomenological observations are not always useful for research purposes because of the lack of cognitive thinking and reflection. Fourthly, the limited provision for the development of generalizable knowledge is contrary to the purpose of especially doctoral studies.

Summary

Phenomenology studies experience through direct interaction.

Social reality rather than the external reality is investigated.

The researcher’s and target group’s perceptions are used to understand phenomena and human behaviour.

Research attends to political, historical and socio-cultural contexts.

The uniqueness of events and phenomena can be the focus of the research.

The researcher can analyse data by falling back on common sense thinking.

Accurate descriptions of events and phenomena are related.

Events and phenomena are not judged.

Conscious experiences are described without theory and causal explanations.

The use of concepts, categories, procedures, reflections, taxonomies and techniques are resisted.

Phenomenology is associated with ethnomethodology, symbolic interactionism, hermeneutics and interpretivism.

The paradigm is opposed to scientism, positivism and modernism.

Criticism against the paradigm are:

That cognitive thinking and reflection are neglected
It is difficult to find valid examples of the use of phenomenology.
It is seldom possible to generalise research findings.
Researchers are confused about the meaning of the paradigm.

News

ARTICLE 37: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s degree Studies: Sampling Part 5 of 6

4th Sep 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

Introduction

On face value sampling seems like a simple job.

And so it mostly is.

However, if you choose the wrong sample or you choose the sample incorrectly, you can destroy the validity and accuracy of your research project.

And you might have wasted a good number of years on fruitless research.

Think carefully about the examples that I offer in this post, especially the ones on systematic sampling.

I will discuss:

Stratified sampling.
Systematic sampling.
Theoretical sampling.
Time sampling.

In this post.

Stratified sampling

Stratified sampling is used to ensure that the sample is representative of a population with multiple characteristics that are evenly distributed amongst the population.

The research population is divided into homogeneous groups, with each group containing subjects with similar characteristics.

Such homogeneous groups are often called ‘sub-units’ or ‘strata’.

Samples are selected by making use of random selection procedures such as systematic sampling or simple random sampling.

For example, students at a specific university, which are the population on which the research will be conducted, can be grouped into a male and a female group.

Or they can be grouped per faculty.

Or per leisure time interests, etc.

If, for example, you wish to do research on the impact of leisure time interest on academic performance, you will need to investigate a representative sample from each leisure time interest group.

Representivity is achieved by identifying the parameters of the wider population and taking them into consideration when composing samples.

So, in this example leisure time utility will be the independent variable.

Factors such as gender, age, occupation, academic year, etc. can be the dependent variables.

For the sake of coming to valid conclusions and findings, the process of organizing a stratified sample requires ensuring that the characteristics typical of the wider community are present in the sample.

If you draw more than one sample, you must also ensure that the samples are homogeneous in terms of at least one characteristic, which would be your independent variable.

In qualitative research, you will probably not calculate the size of the sample in terms of a statistical level of accuracy.

Therefore, representivity will depend on your own judgement.

You do need to take certain factors into consideration, though.

For example, the size of the population, time and cost constraints, access to data, the need for simplicity and the purpose of the reach.

Systematic sampling

Although some simple calculations need to be done with systematic sampling, it is not enough to be called quantitative research.

Systematic sampling is a modified form of random sampling.

For example, in a population of 10,000 individuals, you might feel that you should have a sample of, say, 200 people.

This will mean that you should select every first person from each sub-unit of 50 for your sample.

Fifty is, thus, your sample interval, i.e. the distance between each element selected for the sample.

You can choose numbers 1, 51, 101, 151, etc. for your sample.

If, for example, the first 57 people on the list that you use are the only females, you will have only two females in your sample.

This will probably distort your findings.

Another example of a skewed list would be if you work on a number of name lists for different faculties and the faculty lists are ordered normatively with the best performing student as the first name on the list and the poorest performing student as the last name on the list.

To use an extreme example, if there are fifty names on each list, your sample will include only the poorest performing students.

Periodicity can be a problem with systematic sampling if the list is not a fully random one.

For example, if you start by selecting the first name on the list, then names numbered 1 to 49, 50 to 99, 100 to 149, etc. do not have any chance of being selected for the sample.

You can eliminate this problem by ‘randomizing’ the list first by ‘shuffling’ the names like you would a deck of playing cards, and then selecting the sample.

You can also deviate somewhat from a systematic selection. A sampling procedure is not cast in concrete and you can adapt it to your research needs.

Just as long as it improves the randomness of your sample.

You can, for example, use systematic sampling coupled with the condition that both genders are fairly represented in the sample.

This can be achieved by splitting the name lists for males and females and then selecting a number of males and females from each list randomly.

Theoretical sampling

Theoretical sampling is the process of investigating incidents, events, occurrences or people over a period based on their potential to represent or demonstrate important theoretical constructs.

Researchers who follow an approach where deductions can be made from data with which theory can be developed or extended would be interested in finding individuals with the right makeup, or cases that embody theoretical constructs.

Theoretical sampling, therefore, is a special type of criterion sampling.

As the name implies, theoretical sampling is best used when the research focuses on theory and concept development.

Your goal would be to develop theory and concepts that are connected to, are grounded in, or emergent from real life events and circumstances.

To generate new theory will often require substantial research and is, therefore, a time-consuming process.

You will need to analyze and probably reconstruct and deconstruct existing theory until you manage to develop new theoretical ideas.

As opposed to purposeful sampling, you cannot know in advance precisely what to sample for and where it will lead you when you use theoretical sampling.

That is why theoretical sampling fits in well with grounded theory and why you will probably work towards solving a problem statement or question rather than hypothesis testing.

Time sampling

Time sampling is where observations of occurrences or events need to be taken and recorded at certain times.

You can use it if it is important to know the chronology of events.

Time sampling can be instantaneous, at specific intervals or measured in terms of how long it takes, i.e. duration.

Instantaneous sampling is achieved by observing an event or occurrence at standard intervals, for example every minute, hour, etc. on the dot.

You will need to take observations at a specific time and intervals that you planned on, or that are prescribed or necessary for whatever reason and you will take notes of your observations.

In the case of interval recording, you will observe and record events or occurrences during each interval.

This means that you will record observations during each interval for the entire time of the interval and not just at the moment each interval starts.

For example, you might wish to conduct research on the emotional state of a patient over a period and at set intervals, say every fifteen minutes for a day.

You can then count the number of times that the patient is happy, sad, angry, etc. and how the patient expressed the emotions.

The patient might have smiled, cried, laughed, etc.

You might also need to take note of what possibly might have triggered the emotion.

Duration sampling is where you will measure how long it takes for an individual or group to complete a certain task.

With duration sampling, you might, for example, need to record how long it takes the patient to overcome an anger attack or any other emotional state.

Or you might need to record how often the individual switches between different emotions, and many more.

The format of your notes will depend on the type of data that you wish to collect.

Time sampling will often require a quantitative research approach or at least some calculations.

This, however, does not mean that it cannot be used in qualitative research.

It might also be necessary to use a mixed approach, i.e. quantitative and qualitative research.

Summary

Stratified sampling is where you will select a representative sample from a diverse community. You will use random sampling to select the sample or samples.

In systematic sampling you will select individuals or items from a population at structured intervals.

In theoretical sampling you will select the sample based on certain criteria that will enable you to develop new theories and concepts.

Time sampling is where you will take samples at certain times. It can be instantaneous, at specific intervals or measured in terms of duration.

News

ARTICLE 32: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: Literature Study

27th Aug 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

Introduction

People who do not like reading will probably shy away from making use of literature study for a Ph. D. or master’s degree.

I can understand such an attitude, especially if you don’t have any specific questions that you need answers to.

Or an academic problem to solve.

For some, there are many more exciting things to do rather than to read a book.

I guess studying late at night, over weekends, public holidays and university holidays is not something to look forward to.

Perhaps it takes a special kind of person, or some alien external force to motivate “normal” people to spend what they regard as leisure time engrossed in books.

However, if you embark on Ph. D. or master’s degree studies you will need to sacrifice some of your social freedom.

That does not mean that you will need to live like a recluse.

It only means that you will need to read a lot.

The point is this – as an adult, you are the captain of your ship.

Only you can decide what you should do with your life.

You need to be absolutely motivated to study for a Ph. D. or master’s degree.

So, let’s discuss literature study.

Literature study

Literature study will form part of most research work, regardless of what main research methods are used.

With the expansion of online data sources, it is becoming progressively more possible to undertake research without leaving your study or office.

You can even do research while having something to eat and drink in a restaurant or a bar.

Texts and records can be researched in four distinct ways:

The study of content.
The social construction of documents and records.
Documents ‘in the field’
Documents in action and documents in networks.

However, doing all your research by studying documents is deskwork rather than fieldwork.

When documents are included in the dataset, they tend to serve as ‘background material’ for many research projects.

Literature is often used to crosscheck oral accounts.

The empirical opportunities to analyze documents are endless: newspaper articles, advertisements, policy documents, government reports, blogs and web sites, schedules, letters, posters, pamphlets, brochures, campaign material, etc.

Everyday life offers a range of situations that involve forms and documents.

Particularly regarding interpersonal encounters within various institutions.

Even so, researchers interested in identifying practical examples may find it hard to recognize relevant events in a pile of documents.

The majority view of documentary data in qualitative research is that documents are detached from social action.

In contrast to an interview, the document appears more stable and fixed, whereas the content of an interview seems more dynamic and alive.

Documents can be quite lively agents in their own right rather than merely containers of text.

They can tell people what to do.

They can stir up conflicts.

They can evoke emotions such as anger, relief, envy, pride and despair.

Additionally, people do things with documents.

They can use them for various purposes, both intended or unintended.

They exchange documents.

They hide documents.

They write books and make movies about documents.

To recognize the aspects of documentary data, fieldwork rather than deskwork is required.

Summary

All researchers must do some literature study, regardless of which research approach or method they mainly use.

Texts and records are studied for the content, social construction, corroboration of other research methods and to support action research.

Literature study mostly means reading and analyzing books and other documents.

It can also include doing research on the internet.

Documents often trigger chains of interaction far beyond the original piece of paper.

Literature is often used to confirm research through other research methods.

Some researchers would rather do without literature study.

They prefer practical fieldwork or research in a laboratory that is not contaminated by old data.

News

ARTICLE 31: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: Historical Research

27th Aug 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

Introduction

Historical research can be conducted with the aim of answering a wide range of social research questions.

It is a systematic process of describing; analyzing and interpreting; and comparing the past.

The past can, of course, also be compared to the present.

It is based on information from selected sources as they relate to the topic under study.

Descriptive research

When conducted with a description in mind, historical research attempts to construct a map of the past.

It can also describe a developmental trajectory of events, for example, an educational system, political developments, community growth or deterioration, etc.

It involves locating events in time and place and requires sensitivity towards understanding the context within which an event took place or developed over time. Trajectories of development are plotted, and it may or may not try to explain how or why events occurred.

Historical research used for descriptive purposes also establishes background information about events.

Analytical and critical research

In analytical research, relationships between factors or events are critically interrogated within the context in which they occurred with the aim of exploring the possible causes and impact of the factors or events.

It requires critical, analytical scrutiny of documents and a process of cross-checking records and reports about incidents.

It aims to impact decision-making and policy formulation.

When conducting historical research, you might need to search for successes or mistakes from the past in order for a society or even an individual to avoid repeating mistakes made by others and to capitalize on the successes of the more fortunate or wiser.

The process of analytical research is complicated by the fact that there is seldom just one cause of an event.

You can never be certain if you did not omit the consideration of other important factors or events.

All sources of information should, therefore, be subjected to evaluation through processes known as external and internal criticism.

External criticism refers to the authenticity of the information.

For example, is the document that you are evaluating real or fake?

Internal criticism refers to whether the information is credible.

You need to determine if the information is consistent and accurate.

Rigour and sound analytical critique of sources lend considerable validity and reliability to the findings and conclusions reached.

Inferences about intent, motive and character are common, with the understanding of appropriateness to the context of the period.

Comparative research

Comparative historical research is much wider in scope than other historical research designs because the units of analysis are often whole societies or systems within societies.

It implies systematic research for similarities and differences between the cases under consideration.

Comparative researchers usually base their research on secondary sources, such as policy papers, historical documents, official statistics, etc.

Some degree of interviewing and observation can also be involved.

Historical comparative researchers generally prefer first-hand accounts, written by people who witnessed something personally, rather than documents derived from other secondary sources.

These researchers need to verify two important aspects regarding documents:

The validity of the documents’ content and its authenticity.

The content of a document is valid when it is not distorted, exaggerated or false.

Validity can be checked by making use of triangulation or any other form of corroboration.

Additional sources of information can be other, similar books, alternative documents, certification, living witnesses, demonstrations by the individual who claims authenticity, traces of validating substances, etc.

Authenticity refers to whether a document is a forgery.

Historical research can adopt paradigmatic approaches such as constructivism, critical race theory, empiricism and post-colonialism.

Sources of data

Broadly speaking there are four types of historical evidence that you can use – primary sources, secondary sources, running records and recollections.

Customarily, researchers rely on primary sources.

That is, the original source texts also called archival data.

Archival data are mostly kept in museums, archives, libraries or private collections.

Emphasis is given to the written word on paper, although modern histiography can involve any medium.

Substantial historical data is already captured electronically.

The internet is already a popular source of information, even though authenticity and accuracy are difficult to confirm.

Secondary sources are the work of other researchers writing about the issue being studied.

In its widest sense, a document simply means anything that contains text.

Official reports, records from schools, hospitals and courts of law, films, photographs, reports from journals, magazines, newspapers, letters, diaries, emails, and even graffiti scrawled on a wall are all examples of documents.

Running records are documentaries maintained by organizations.

For example, minutes of meetings, records of events, commentaries about events, war diaries, etc.

Recollections include autobiographies, memoirs, and oral relay of historical information.

Summary

Historical research answers a wide range of social questions.

It can be used to describe, analyse or interpret the past.

People can learn from historical events if it is accurately and objectively communicated.

Both mistakes and successes from the past can provide lessons to learn.

Analytical research attempts to provide the basis for understanding the past by exploring past events and trends and applying these to current events and trends.

Analytical research is complicated by the fact that successes and mistakes are mostly attributable to many variables.

Accuracy, authenticity and validity of data can be achieved through external and internal criticism.

Historical research makes use of four types of evidence – primary sources, secondary sources, running records and recollections.

News

ARTICLE 28: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: Experimental Methods

25th Aug 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr Hannes Nel

Introduction

Can lessons from events be gained in a laboratory?

Lessons that will apply to every place and all people?

You be the judge of that after reading this article.

Quantitative experimental methods

The essential feature or experimental methods is that you deliberately control and manipulate the conditions which determine the results in which you are interested.

To achieve this, you will need to introduce an intervention and measure the difference that it makes.

It is mostly used by people doing quantitative research and in natural sciences.

The precondition for research to be experimental is that it should meet the requirements for scientific research.

The requirements for scientific research are that the researcher must have control over the variables, careful measurement, and establishing cause and effect relationships.

An experiment involves making a change in the value of one variable – called the independent variable – and observing the effect of that change on another variable – called the dependent variable.

Using a fixed design, experimental methods can be confirmatory, seeking to prove or disprove a hypothesis, or explanatory, which would be discovering the effect of certain variables.

The variability and validity of experimental methods often depend on the ability to replicate the results from an experiment in similar situations and generalizing the findings to other similar situations.

You can, for example, test the psychological effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on people by asking them relevant questions during an interview.

You can also ask people to complete a questionnaire.

Responses to the questions can be measured in different ways, depending on the type and context of the experiment.

In the experimental methodology, generalization is referred to as “external validity”.

External validity means that the same results will be obtained with different groups and in different places.

You can imagine that external validity will not be easy to achieve.

This is mostly because of the number of different external variables that can influence your experiment.

The less external variables there are, the better will the chances be that you will achieve external validity.

Experiments can be experiments in a laboratory, field experiments or natural experiments.

Regardless of where the experiments are done, they require quite some planning and preparation.

Most, if not all, tests that are done in a laboratory are examples of experimental research.

Experiments in a laboratory

A laboratory experiment would be an experiment that is conducted under highly controlled conditions where accurate measurements are possible.

Laboratory experiments are mostly easy to replicate.

That is because standardized procedures and measurements of variables are used.

There are not many external variables over which you have no or little control.

Laboratory tests, however, do not always replicate real life, with the result that findings will probably not be generalizable outside the laboratory.

Field experiments

Field experiments are done in real-life environments.

The researcher still manipulates the independent variable but in a real-life setting.

Findings in field experiments should be generalizable to real-life settings.

A limitation of field experiments is that there will probably be many external variables that might bias the results.

Consequently, it would be difficult for other researchers to replicate the results.

Natural experiments

Natural experiments are also conducted in real-life environments.

They differ from field experiments in that the researcher cannot manipulate the independent variables – events occur as they would in real life.

Behavior in a natural experiment is more likely to reflect real life because of its natural setting.

It might be necessary for covert observation.

That is, the target group for the research does not know that they are being observed.

The reason for this is that people often behave differently when they know that they are being watched than they would normally behave.

This is even worse if they know that video footage is being taken of them.

Covert research can have ethical consequences which you should consider and remove in advance.

The researcher has no control over external variables that might bias the results.

Experiments in qualitative research

The parallel in qualitative research is when a part or the whole qualitative research study is the subject of attempted replication of a phenomenon or event.

For example, within a single qualitative research study, replication can sometimes be achieved by conducting more than one of the same or at least similar case studies.

The more similar the findings from the cases, the more a replication might be claimed.

However, replication is not always possible because of the dynamic nature of human phenomena.

Paradigmatic approaches that fit well with experimental methods include behaviourism, empiricism, modernism, phenomenology, scientism and symbolic interactionism.

Summary

In experimental research:

You, as the researcher, manipulate the conditions for the research.
You must have control over the variables.
Careful measurement of phenomena or behavior will be necessary.
You will need to establish a cause and effect relationship.
External validity will not be easy to achieve.

Experimental methods can be confirmatory or explanatory.

An independent variable is the input variable, whereas the dependent variable is the outcome variable – the result.

It is not easy to achieve external validity with any of the experimental research types.

That is because of differences in variables between the place where the experiment is done and real-life conditions.

Experiments can be experiments in a laboratory, field experiments or natural experiments.

The conclusions of experimental methods can be achieved through qualitative research.

Close

In closing,

I used one additional source of information for this article. That is McLeod, S.A. (2012, Jan 14) Experimental method. Simply psychology: https://www.simplypsychology/org/experimental-method.html. I accessed the source on 10 March 2020.

The main source of information that I use for all my articles and videos on Ph. D. and master’s degree research is my book entitled Preparing Qualitative Research Reports.

News

ARTICLE 27: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: Ethnography

24th Aug 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr Hannes Nel

Introduction

Why would academics do research about people that they probably regard as inferior?

In a positive vein, probably because they want to help those who are less fortunate than them.

Did the researchers ask the people if they needed or wanted help?

I would think yes, at least most of the time. But not always.

And if the researchers try to help, will they do the right thing?

Unfortunately, not always.

I think it can be humiliating and frustrating to have outsiders dissect your value system and the way you have lived for centuries.

And then they tell you how you should live and what you should do.

Remember, these people know their culture and way of life and they are watching you while you observe them.

Sometimes it can be funny, but it can also be embarrassing and lead to serious damage and harm to both the people being researched and the researcher.

It is not easy for an outsider to understand the culture and being of another population group.

People with a populist orientation will probably feel that such differences are not important and that it should be eliminated.

That, however, is not the reality for many nations.

For an outsider ethnography as a research method is much more difficult than we think. That is also why many researchers embarrassed themselves when they tried to tell the world how people from other cultures think, live and do things.

What is ethnography?

Some may regard ethnography and ethnomethodology as the same thing.

They are not entirely wrong.

Ethnomethodology is the philosophy behind ethnic research.

Ethnomethodology claims that research deals with everyday life amongst people in a social setting; where currently observed behavior and interaction provides the most accurate and valid data.

For the purposes of this post, ethnomethodology is regarded as a paradigm that can be used with ethnography, which is a research method.

Ethnography, therefore, is the method by which ethnic research is conducted.

I will discuss ethnomethodology as a paradigm in a future post.

How did ethnography begin?

Ethnography mostly has colonialism as its foundation.

It relates to distant cultures that were occupied by the seafaring nations, largely between the fifteenth and seventeenth centuries.

Colonialism came to an end in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

The influence of colonization can still be seen in what used to be colonies and is popular as a topic of research.

Unfortunately, some researchers call any kind of quantitative research ethnography.

Ethnography has traditionally been associated with social and cultural anthropology.

Sources consulted in ethnography

Ethnographic research sometimes needs to be done through semi-structured interviews or literature study that will include official documents.

This can include historical data and not just current observations.

The process of ethnographic study

Ethnography encompasses forms of research that are extremely diverse from a methodological point of view.

Ethnography can have a contemporary or historical focus.

It is the aim of ethnography to establish the hidden inferences that distinguish, for example, different eating habits.

Such a phenomenon is then placed in its social and cultural context.

Ethnography, therefore, is oriented toward studying shared meanings and practices, or culture.

As a researcher, you might need to study a community for a long period, perhaps years to gain some understanding of their culture and value system.

Although ethnography is traditionally associated with long-term fieldwork, some aspects are employed in applied settings.

Applied, or current settings require a naturalistic research approach.

Observing individual and group behavior in its natural context and participating in that context can generate insights that might otherwise have eluded you.

Ethnography follows a holistic perspective, based on the premise that human behavior and culture are complicated phenomena and are composed of, and influenced by, a multitude of factors.

These might include historical precedents, the physical context in which people live and work, the social structures in which individuals are embedded and the symbolic environment in which they act.

Ethnography assumes that all human behavior is intentional and observable.

Research should, therefore, be oriented towards understanding the reasoning behind people’s actions.

This means that you, as the researcher, and often not a member of the community, will probably spend time living in the community observing and doing in-depth interviews, reading and researching primary source material and observing the lives of the people that you wish to study.

Eventually, you will compile all this data and analysis to create a full picture of the group you are studying.

The picture includes not only reporting what people do or say but also some analysis that tells us about the social structure and worldview of the community.

You should not disrupt the environment or routine of the target for your research.

This means that you, as the researcher, might need to be “invisible” and involve yourself in unobtrusive observation.

In this instance, an etic approach will probably be more effective than an emic approach.

You will need to establish trust and rapport between you and those whom you do research on.

Also, you should guard against becoming emotionally involved with the target group for your research because it might cloud your judgement.

Research reports are in the form of a narrative, with key evidence, such as detailed descriptions of episodes, being reproduced to illustrate your findings and recommendations.

Paradigmatic approaches that fit well with ethnography include relativism, behaviorism, constructivism, critical race theory, critical theory, ethnomethodology and post-colonialism.

Summary

Ethnography literary means “to write about a group of people”.

Research topics and problem statements or questions require the study of social and cultural processes and shared meanings within a group of people.

Participant observation is the method most used in ethnographic research.

Normally ethnographers will spend lots of time in the field to study the lives of people from within their naturalistic setting.

The “thick” detail of the data that you can obtain through participant observation usually fulfils the key criterion of validity far better than data obtained by other methods.

Ethnographic research can also consult data sources such as interviews and literature studies.

It also offers flexibility and can provide the basis for inductively generating new theoretical explanations.

Ethnographic research can:

follow a qualitative or quantitative approach,
will probably follow an etic approach, although an emic approach would also be possible, and
can be done by one or a group of researchers.

« Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »