Research Methodology 101

            Research methodology is a process of discovery in relation to a phenomenon from a social science perspective. Whereas, such discovery can take one of three paths, which are qualitative, quantitative, or a mixed methods approach o uncovering information or data about a something, a phenomena, or theory. For example and from a criminal justice view, Hagan (2006) argued that a methodology “involves the collection of accurate facts and or data regarding the nature of crime and criminal justice policy” (p. 10) based on a theoretical assertion.  Bachman and Schutt (2001) posited that a theory is defined as “a logically interrelated set of propositions about empirical reality” (p. 39) that is clearly and deliberately observed.

In most instances, selected research approaches help to guide a research process that supports replication and rigorous peer review. Bachman et al. (2001) argued that “social science research methods can reduce the likelihood of overgeneralization by using systematic procedures for selecting individuals or groups to study that are representative of the individuals or groups which we wish to generalize” (p. 11) or to assert a theory or hypothesis. Bachman et al. (2001) pointed out that a hypothesis is “a tentative statement about empirical reality, involving a relationship between two or more variable” ( p. 45) for which a method of discovery is needed.  Hagan (2006) asserted that “a research hypothesis states an expected relationship between variables in positive terms” (p. 20) that must be empirically observed for understanding in relation to an individual, group, or organization.

Hagan (2006) asserted that “sampling is a procedure used in research by which a select subunit of a population is studied in order to analyze the entire population” (p. 140) in order to make an assumption based on the methods used for a given study. For example, Copper and Schindler (2003) asserted that a qualitative method is a “fundamental approach of exploration, including in-depth interviews, participant observation, videotaping of subjects, projective techniques, psychological testing, case studies, street ethnography, elite interviewing, document analysis, proxemics, kinesics, content analysis” (p. 61). Thus, a research methodology provides a blueprint for conducting valid and reliable research.

Reference

Bachman, Ronet and Russell K. Schutt. 2001. The Practice of Research in Criminology and

            Criminal Justice. Pine Forge Press.

Cooper, D. R. & Schindler, P. S. (2003). Business research methods (8th ed). McGraw Hill

            Irwin. Boston.

Hagan, Frank E. (2006). Research Methods in Criminal Justice and Criminology. (7^th ed.). Allyn

            and Bacon.

Value of Current References

Current scholarly references will be central to the rigor, scope, quality, and depth of scholarship in a research study. References provide a foundation to support, build, or challenge a theory or position. Traditionally, recent references, fall within a five year range of the publication of any new research that leverage the references being used. Current references provide a view of the level and quality of research and data is available or in-progress on a given phenomena. References will provide a view on issues such as ethics, new research, challenges to established research or theories, and methodologies. An observation of current references reveal what a given field finds important, what phenomena is worth researching, and what references sources have been peer reviewed. Zeichard and Schulte (2001) asserted that all referenced research “has not under gone review” (p. 267).

Current references provide a focus on the scope of topical issues that have been studied in a given area. References provide a view of new techniques, survey instruments, experiments, and the depth of current literature that exist. A review of current references reveals limitations in research, processes, procedures, and methods. Current references reveal what soft and hard data is being explored within a given area. Current references reveal the topical information that has been evaluated by scholars in a given field. Bence and Oppenheim (2004) asserted that “peers typically review” (p. 348) research that appears in quality journals, which strengthens the quality of the journal when used as a reference.

Reference

Bence, V. & Oppenheim, C. (2004). The Influence of Peer Review on the Research 
            Assessment Exercise. Journal of Information Science, 30, 347-368.

Zeichner, K. M. & Schulte, A. K. (2001). What We Know and Don’t Know from Peer-
           Reviewed Research about Alternative Teacher Certification Programs. Journal of 
        Teacher Education 2001; 52; 266-282.

Your Vantage Point Should Be Clear

Looking to conduct an empirical research project? Where should you start in order ensure a quality project in the end. I posit that one should start with a clear and deliberate understanding of their respective vantage point in relation to a selected phenomenon. Look to answer the following questions: is the problem internal and external or rather how close or far are you in relation to the problem or phenomenon; what is the time frame of the problem or is the problem new or something that has existed over a long period of time; what is the unit of analysis or are you studying individuals, groups, organizations, social artifacts, or systems; what is the expected scope of the study or are you taking a broad or narrow view in relation to the phenomenon; and what method or methods would be the best approach to better understand the connections between the problem, research question, design, analysis, and outcomes? Are you able to observe and articulate the relationship among the core concepts or variables in the study process from your vantage point? The answer to these and many other questions will subsequently reveal the overall validity and reliability of your study.

Thus, a clear and deliberate vantage point, reflects what the researcher observes and or believes they observe in relation to a given phenomenon. From a selected vantage point, the view should be articulated that a correlation, association, or relationship exists based on selected observations and study design (i.e. qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods). The observation should be clear and deliberate. The observation should be opinion based in empirical research not general opinion. Thus a vantage point should be viewed from a selected position that is based on measurable evidence,

Theory, Data Collection, and Data Analysis

What is your true objective when undertaking any empirical research project? What have you observed that peaked your interest and or motivated you to pursue a given course of study?

The answer to these questions lay both in logic and in a deliberate observation from a scientific perspective. "The two pillars of science are logic and observation. A scientific understanding of the world must (1) make sense and (2) correspond with what we observe. Both elements are essential to science and related to three major aspects of the overall scientific enterprise: theory, data collection, and data analysis" (Babbie, 2014, p. 7). Is your theory sound and based in empirical evidence or is your theory in reality a disguised personal opinion without any empirical support? Logic dictates clarity of thought, while the observation should be detailed and focused; not a general glance.

Purpose of Empirical Research

Why undertake an empirical research project? In most instances, the purpose of research is to fill some gap or gaps in knowledge. How do we know what we know within a social construct? The process of epistemology and methodology are the blue prints of empirical research. According to Babbie (2014) "epistemology is the science of knowing. Methodology (a subfield of epistemology) might be called the science of finding out" (p. 4). As such, the purpose empirical research is generate new knowledge and or better explain a selected aspect of a phenomenon; investigate interests, issues, and or societal problems, in response to a Request For a Proposal (RFP), or to analyze, explore, and or describe a social phenomenon.

As one engages in any level of empirical research, the type of research must be clear and deliberate in both approach and design. The four core types of research approaches are: analytical, descriptive, exploratory, or predictive. The purpose of any study will dictate the approach. In brief, an analytical approach will allow the researcher to seek answers to the why and or how questions in relation to a phenomenon. At the heart of any analytical study are the cause and affect in relation to the core variables. Descriptive research allows the researcher to focus on selected characteristics of a phenomenon. A descriptive approach is most often leveraged via a quantitative design where data can be secured and analyzed to determine whether or not a statistical signifigance exist. An exploratory research approach design is used to really fill those gaps in knowledge where few study already exists. Whereas, the predictive research design allows the researcher to make assertions about the relationship between and or among selected variables.

Socratic Methods: A Linear View

According to Tucker (2007), “The Socratic methods, or elenchus, is defined as a prolonged series of questions and answers which refutes a moral assertion by leading an opponent to draw a conclusion that contradicts his own viewpoint, during this dialogue, students are forced to critically examine other viewpoints and question their own assumptions and assertions” (p. 80).  According to the Socratic methods it is not necessary to look for truth on a specific topic, it is discovering truth for ourselves. Tucker (2007), stated “education emphasizes critical thinking, original thought, and judgment. Socrates stated that he is not a teacher in the sense that “teaching” is simply transferring knowledge from instructor to student. He does, however, engage students in a dialogue designed to enable the discovery of truth for themselves” (p. 81-82).  Socratic methods create critical thinking more or less helps students think critically, I believe the two go hand and hand.  Socratic methods have emphasis on critical thinking and professional dialogue.  Socratic methods are used in professional environments.  According to Tucker (2007):

Use of the Socratic method serves to produce a strong professional in fields that are mainly self-governing. The largely successful efforts of law and medicine to maintain high professional standards (and remarkably little legislative oversight) have their foundation in the emphasis on critical thinking and professional dialogue (p. 81).

Observations from many view points: A Triangulation Concept

Observing a phenomena from many angles and or approaches is often value added from an empirical research perspective. Consider triangulation. Triangulation is a method of conducting research that potentially increases the validity of the overall research process. Cox and Hassard (2005) asserted that triangulation is “the use of multiple methods and measures of an empirical phenomenon in order to overcome problems of bias and validity” (p. 110). Whereas, information and or data are collected and analyzed from at least three separate research methods approaches and or information sources to strengthen the validity of the entire research study, validity, and reliability of the methods and instruments used during a given research project. Furthermore, Cox and Hassard et al. (2005) put-forth that “the implicit assumption in much of the social science literature on triangulation therefore is of developing a more effective method for the capturing and fixing of social phenomena in order to realize a more accurate analysis and explanation” (p. 111).

In most instances, triangulation can be viewed as a mix methods process within either a qualitative or quantitative frame or both. Moran-Ellis, Alexander, Cronin, Dickinson, Fielding, Sleney et al. (2006) asserted that “the potential for knowing more about a phenomenon through the use of different research methods in one empirical investigation is often discussed under the rubric of  triangulation” (p. 46). Moreover, Moran-Ellis et al, put-forth that “different approaches to mixed methods reflect epistemological debates about the status of the data produced by different methods, and these have implications for the way researchers see the relationships among findings generated by methods situated within distinct theoretical perspectives” (p. 46). Subsequently, a mixed-methods approach offer researchers the ability to have more confidence in the validity and results of a given research study.