1.1 You Have to Learn to Do Research
When you use your own frame of reference to draw your conclusions it is an informal observation.
However, researchers use systematic observation. A thing that sets researchers apart is their
attitude. It should be objective and open (for comments from your peers).
Knowledge of methods is also an important part of doing research, it is consistent: you always need
to know what research methods exist, what criteria they use and what the pros and cons are of
applying a particular method.
When doing research you polish the skills you need by actively going out and doing it. The methods
you use for this don’t only give you the background information you need, they also contain a whole
lot of ‘recipes' that you can use when it comes to stats, software and so on.
1.2 Research Approaches
There are two main types of research: fundamental (empirical) research and applied research. The
questions raised in fundamental research are generally not concerned with practical application;
theoretical question → tests scientific theory. Applied research is about solving problems that have a
practical application; practical question → social relevance.
Quantitative research is based on numerical information, figures that represent objects,
organizations and people. Statistics are then used to describe the results and to test the assumptions
that the figures represent. Statistical techniques are the tools used in quantitative methods. The
researcher takes a step back from the aspects of the objects or units (people) that are being
researched by assigning figures to these various aspects and then ordering them. This method is
about little information about a large group of people. The emphasis is more on generalization and
making phenomena measurable.
When qualitative methods are used, the researcher carries our research in the ‘field’. The main
interest lies in the meaning that a person attaches to a situation or experience. The research subjects
are studied in their environment as a whole → holism. This means that the experience is seen as a
part of the person’s perception of their lives, and not as a separate, independent entity. When
gathering information for qualitative research, methods you use are open and flexible, and you can
intervene when the unexpected happens. The information is not recorded in numbers, but in
everyday language. This method is about collecting a lot of information about a few people. The
emphasis is about attributing meaning and context.
Various kinds of qualitative and quantitative methods are often combined to answer one central
question → triangulation. The central question is discussed from several points of view as it
enhances the validity of the research results.
When doing inductive research, the topics or theories are not known in advance, it is about
developing a theory. The researcher’s objective is to develop the theory as he or she goes along →
the researcher is looking for ‘empirical regularities’. Researcher who use inductive methods often use
qualitative research in which they work from the ‘specific’ (information collected) to the ‘general’
(theory to be developed). Iteration is a guiding principle in this because it leads to a higher standard
of results (because of the repetition). The researcher gathers and analyses the information and draws
his fists conclusions. This establishes the kind of additional information that is required. He then
goes on to gather and analyse new information, so that an iterative process is followed. Each time
the results are linked to the results obtained previously, and so a theory is formed.
,In deductive research, the researcher formulates expectations based on theories and models, it is
theory-testing. He gathers and analyses information to assess whether the theories are valid. This
principal is often used in quantitative research where the process goes from ‘general’ (theory) to
‘specific’ (the information).
Inductive and deductive research complement each other: you develop a theory in an inductive way,
to then use deduction to test whether your theory is true.
On the basis of their knowledge and expertise, researchers have certain expectations about their
research findings, but the expectations are not based on a model or theory → explorative hypothesis.
These hypotheses are tested qualitatively.
1.3 Schools of Thought in Research
Fundamental approaches to research → paradigms (‘schools of thoughts’). Within each paradigm,
certain research methods are preferred and the researchers belonging to that group share the same
basic assumptions used in scientific research. Three paradigms:
Empirical-analytical
Empirical means that the research is conducted using systems to assess what takes place in a certain
setting (reality); using ‘experience as the source of knowledge’. It is ‘analytical’ because they view
their results with a critical and rational eye: research findings remain ‘valid’ until they are refuted
(rejected). This is why the results of earlier research are not inferior in quality. It is a matter of new
information becoming available that leads to different results → scientific progress. These
researchers leave nothing to chance; their research, by its design, can be replicated and verified. This
means that if the study is conducted again, using the same design, it will produce similar results. They
view all the processes in their research rationally and logically; it is well deliberated. Before they
start, they predict the results of their research questions on the basis of existing hypotheses. They
then test whether the answers correspond to their data. They do so by studying the reality (of
everyday life). The more frequently you observe certain behaviour among a group of people, the
more likely it is that your assertions are correct. Their preferred methods of gathering information
are experiments and surveys, i.e., quantitative and deductive.
Interpretative
It means that you are looking for an interpretation, the way people perceive situations and
circumstances, to add more details to the numbers. This kind of research is mainly qualitative and
inductive in nature. A type of research that is often done within this research paradigm are the case
study and ‘field research’ (‘participatory observation’).
Critical-emancipatory (action research)
It is neither particularly quantitative nor qualitative. Any information gathering method can be used,
except for experiments. ‘Critical’ describes this movement’s approach: concerned with society, i.e.,
applied research. They study both society and their own research findings with a critical eye. These
researchers strive to contribute to those social processes that lead to greater emancipation among
certain groups → ‘emancipatory’. The emphasis of their research lies in observation and intervention.
The researcher, together with those commissioning the project, attempt to get processes of change
along the way. It mostly takes the form of a case study. The researcher and organization work
together to implement, evaluate and, where necessary, to adjust a specific kind of change.
,1.4 Assessing the Quality of Research (The rules of research/research objectives)
Independence
Research is first and foremost independent: unbiased as far as the preferences and opinions of those
involved are concerned. Independent research can throw light on the real issues, ensure that good
solutions are developed to address them and that these solutions are effective. Objectivity also
includes being free from the influence of the researcher. Particularly in qualitative research
objectivity may be a problem because these researchers are often involved with the people or
groups they are researching. This is why intersubjectivity is often used as a criterion: researchers
agree with one another as far as the results are concerned → if the research is conducted again, by
another researcher using the same methods, it should lead to the same results. It can be replicated
as it were, and the researcher are in agreement about the results.
Falsifiability of statements
Applies to quantitative research in particular. A subject, question or assertion must be falsifiable →
you can only make assertions that can be proven or verified through testing. All research needs to be
refutable → an idea or expectation should be able to be confirmed or refuted (rejected). There can be
no confusion about the people or objects under discussion, about the time and place that are
relevant to the research or about the terms and concepts that you use to describe them. The subject
must be unambiguous and also public. A statement cannot be confirmed or refuted if you keep it to
yourself and don’t want feedback on the subject. Making assertions in public means that they can be
tested, that research based on the same design can be repeated in another situation → the research
can be replicated.
Reliability
Research is generally judged by the reliability of its results. Random errors in the design and
execution of research can affect the reliability. The reliability of research has to do with the extent to
which it is free of random errors. If you carry out the research under different circumstances, at some
other point in time, it should lead to the same results. This replicability of research is therefore
crucial when it comes to assessing the reliability of research.
Informativity
The information content of your statements must be optimal. To be able to verify a statement, it
needs to be accurately formulated, you need to know what it is you are about to research, when and
with whom. This is why it is important that you describe your subject accurately. Carefully indicate:
• the situation that you are referring to;
• the boundaries within which your research applies;
• the groups involved;
• the period that is relevant to your research;
• the ‘domain’ of your research: i.e., the whole ‘area’ that is relevant to your research, and all the
h elements that it involves. The larger the domain, the more informative your statements will be.
Generalizability
Based on their results, researchers want to be able to make assertions about as many people or
situations as they can. They analyse a specific part of ‘reality’ and make their statements based on
that. If these statements have been verified accurately, and according to all the criteria for this, then
they can be considered valid for a larger group or other situations: they are generalizable.
,By statistical generalization, we mean that statistical tests (quantitative) are used to assess whether
results are generalizable or not. When statistical generalization is not relevant, i.e., in qualitative
research, researchers will try to get results that are comparable to results from similar situations, i.e.,
theoretical generalization.
Validity
It has to do with the accuracy of the research results → we need to be sure that we are ‘measuring
what we intend to measure’ and that the research doesn’t have any systematic errors. If your
research is internally valid, then you will be able to draw the correct conclusions from your results. If
you can apply your research to a large group of people, then you results will be generalizable. That
has to do with the external validity or the statistical generalization.
Practical criteria
Research must be efficient → costs should be in proportion with the results, and the schedule should
be feasible, and also usable.
1.5 Research Cycles
Research has a fixed structure made up of a number of ‘research phases’. At the end of each cycle (of
phases) it often happens that not only the initial question has been answered, but that a whole lot of
new research questions have emerged.
Empirical cycle
In fundamental research, theories are tested or developed without necessarily being prompted by a
social or practical problem: this is when theoretical questions are asked. The researcher answers
these theoretical questions with a model or a theory. They use research to test whether theories
actually produce the answer they are looking for. They draw conclusions based on the results of their
research: either the theory does provide an answer, or it doesn’t. More research follows, with new
questions, and so it goes on → empirical cycle. Its spiral shape indicates that most research leads to
new questions because you keep repeating the same series over and over, but you don’t start at
exactly the same place each time. In the more interpretive paradigms, this is called iteration.
Answers to theoretical questions prompt new questions, then you formulate a new theoretical
answer and new research questions, and so on → PTA outline (Problem, Theory, Analysis).
Applied research uses an adapted type of empirical cycle → regulative, as it focuses more on
decisions and/or changes. The aim of an applied research cycle is to offer a framework that supports
the search for solutions to practical problems.
1.6 Research Phases in Research
Applied research may well consist of the following phases:
1. Problem analysis
The most important objective during this phase is that you define your objective and central question
well. If you don’t, you risk that you won’t be able to draw clear and usable conclusions. Often it is
necessary to narrow the problem down, and make it workable, so that you can come up with a
workable objective and question.
, 2. Research design
The next step is to design your research, showing how you intend to address the question, which
data collection methods you will use to do so, how much time, what you’ll need, and who will be
involved in your research. You also specify which research instruments you’ll be using. Finally you are
going to analyse the information, and which method you will be using for this.
3. Fieldwork
After you finalized the design, you go on to conduct the research. This is when you go about
collecting the information that you need to answer the research question(s). There are many
strategies for this, depending on the number of subjects that you will be researching, the nature of
the question (qualitative/quantitative), and the time and budget available.
4. Analysis
You then go on to process and analyse the data that you have gathered. There are several methods
to choose from, both qualitative and quantitative, depending on the kind of data collected.
5. Assessment and evaluation
At the reporting stage, you look all the way back to the beginning. Although looking back on your
research is an important final step, it is also crucial to stop along the way and check on its progress.
Sometimes you have to stop in your tracks, reconsider your whole research project, talk to your
client or go back to the drawing board. Generally research is completed once you’ve written the
report and presented your findings. But these findings may also lead to follow-up research.
These phases can be translated in a cycle (spiral). This spiral is then also known as the research work
cycle because it give the broad outline of the research set up and the sequence of research activities
that will take place. The cycle can vary considerable but the sequence of events stay the same. It
could be that your research design is not completely fixed.
2.1 Choosing your topic
Options
1. Free choice: you yourself specify a subject provided it meets some conditions for your study.
2. Practical assignment: a client may request applied research into a specific problem area.
3. Training program: you are not free for to find a topic yourself, instead you must choose one from
what your course offers you.
Reason
The researcher may want to test a theory and use the research to expand existing knowledge of a
certain area or solve a practical question.
