04 dissertation development 060411 pad lec 2

7/31/2019 04 Dissertation Development 060411 Pad Lec 2

1/41

Research Development

and Systematic Literature Review

[email protected]

5J3160_1112_9
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/41

Albert Einstein

It is, in fact, nothing short of a miraclethat the modern methods of instruction

have not yet entirely strangled the holy

curiosity of inquiry; for this delicate littleplant, aside from stimulation, stands

mainly in need of freedom; without this

it goes to wrack and ruin without fail.

Cited in Carl Rogers, (1969), Freedom to

Learn


3/41

Writing your Research Proposal

You need a clear and explicit purpose Is the research worthwhile? Why? To whom?

Show a grasp of the literature (Classical and

Modern) Demonstrate a scheme of work to complete

the work.

Is there enough in your proposal for yoursupervisor to assess your ideas?


4/41

Nave Inquiry (NI) Day to day thinking

Information, data, impressions and interpretations.

Conformity, bias, error and lack of insight.

We all know that human inquiry is imperfect, butwhat can we do about it?

Evidence based research

Is all data of equal value?

How (What) was it gathered (for)? How will it be

used and interpreted?

We like NI because it seems real and relevant.


5/41

Disjointed, but with Purpose

There are many textbooks and academic paperswhich critique orthodox research methods.

We can read about experimental method,

statistical significance, dependent andindependent variables, SPSS, Operational

definitions etc, but if we sterilise the real

world, we can never truly understand it.

Our plan is to use both NI (subjective) and

Scientific (objective) methods, and to blend and

interpret our findings.


6/41

Identify Gap;

Set Context andBegin Annotated

Bibliography

State your

ProvisionalResearch Question

Research Design

including EthicalConsiderations

Methodology

(Explain Thinking

Behind your

Choice (s))

Key Definitions,

Scientific

Justification

and Rationale

Resource

Implications

Scope and

Limitations of

Inquiry

Review and

Evaluation;

Rigour in

Explanation

Leads to Ongoing

Development of

Systematic

Literature Review

Preparing the Research Proposal [email protected]


7/41

Typical Structure of the Proposal ITitle Concise and Descriptive. Not just keywords e.g. Marketing

Rationale Why are you doing this? What have you read? Why is

the research needed? Look at notes on writing an Abstract.

Research Questions At the Proposal stage, I am flexible about

these, and you may have more than one question in minduntil your reading progresses further. Explain the ideas

behind your questions e.g. Testing a Hypothesis, providing a

Focus, Designing an experiment

Literature Review Key articles and texts, writers and ideas,debate


8/41

Typical Structure of the Proposal II

Framework and Methodology This is the mainweakness of most Proposals (see Saunders

onion)

Methods Link to Objectives,Data, Analysis,Synthesis, Skills, Resources, Practicalities

Ethical Considerations

Dissemination of Results How can your work beapplied? What needs to be done next?

You are going to be writing a 3,500 word Journal

article on your research findings.


9/41

Theoretical Framework / Methodology

What theoretical resources are you drawingupon, and why?

Demonstrate your knowledge of the problem

Demonstrate your appreciation of TheoreticalFrameworks e.g what is Positivism? Critical

Realism? Pragmatism? Ethnographic Research?

Philosophy is what takes your writing beyondOpinion.

What are the larger issues?

Acknowledge pioneers in the field.


10/41

Getting started

Outline and Identify;

1. Underpinning theory of your topic

2. Research Methodology for investigations

3. Reflective dimension of writing about

practice

4. Contribution to knowledge and to debates

about knowledge


11/41

1) Background Theory Amazingly enough, this begins by doing some

reading. Go to the library.

It is expensive to practice Business without any level

of understanding, and so most established

businesses work according to theoreticalframeworks.

These may be drawn from a number of disciplines

e.g. Strategy, Operations, Marketing, HRM,Statistics, Finance, Quality etc

Show the examiner which principles (cite key writers

/ papers) which have set the Context of your Inquiry


12/41

2) Research Methodology for

Investigations

Aristotle said that there is a body of knowledge,

and that this should be passed on to the next

generation.

But what of new knowledge and discovery?

Thomas Kuhn (the Structure of Scientific

Revolutions, 1996) described Paradigms (ways of

looking at things)

In 2007, Saunders et al, gave us the Research

Onion


13/41


14/41

Deriving Order from Chaos

Looking at the Onion, many students begin withthe Data collection and Data analysis

You cant eat an onion from the inside-out.

1. Philosophy (Positivism, Realism, Interpretivismetc) Explain why and say what they mean to you.

2. Approach (Inductive-Deductive)

3. Strategy (Case Study, Action Research,Experiment etc)

4. Choices (Mixed Method, Quants, Qualitative)

5. Then Timescale, then Data collection, geddit???


15/41


16/41

Give your writing some depth /

weight/ gravitas

Clearly Outline the Rationale behind your

choices e.g.

Approaches to study

Concepts and Themes

Experiential learning

Social constructivism Meta-cognition

Critical realism (you can pick anything from the

Onion)


17/41

Our Traditional view of scientists is of people wearing

white coats and measuring things in laboratories. Empirical approaches of observation, experiment

and the subsequent derivation of laws and theories,

follow some kind of logical procedure.

And yet, Galileo, Newton, Darwin and Einstein did

not devise their theories using these techniques.

(How many apples did Newton watch falling from

trees in his garden?; What did Einstein measure andobserve before arriving at e=mc ?)

Scientific Method


18/41

Nave Inductivism starts with observation and

comment e.g. I know that my 12 ruler is

straight, but when I dip it into the water, it

appears bent.

The straight ruler, standing in the beaker of

water, appears bent is a singular statement.

All observation statements are singular

statements.

Inductivism and Inductive Reasoning


19/41

When light passes

from a less dense toa more dense

substance, (for

example passingfrom air into water),

the light is refracted

(or bent) towardsthe normal.

Lets add some Physics;

The normal is a line perpendicular(forming a 90 degree angle) to theboundary between the twosubstances. The bending occurs

because light travels more slowly in adenser medium.

http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/opt/mch/refr/less.rxmlUniversity of Illinois

The green statement above is called a UNIVERSAL Statement, and doesNot refer to a singular observation on a single day.
http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/opt/mch/refr/less.rxmlhttp://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/opt/mch/refr/less.rxmlhttp://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/opt/mch/refr/less.rxmlhttp://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/opt/mch/refr/less.rxmlhttp://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/opt/mch/refr/less.rxml


20/41

So, the Inductivists believe that if certain

conditions are satisfied, it is legitimate to

generalise a finite number of observations as

the basis of a universal law.

The ruler dipped in water appears bent, andwill always appear bent if air and water, or oil,

or soup etc are of different densities.

Inductivism Continued


21/41

1. The number of observations is large2. The observations are repeated under a wide

variety of conditions

3. No observation statement conflicts with thederived universal law.

The purpose of this scientific approach is to

explain or predict.For an Inductivist, the source of truth is not

logic, but experience.

Inductive Generalisation is allowed if;


22/41

Bertrand Russell and the Inductive Turkey;

1. A Turkey is fed daily at 9.00 (repeatedobservations), whatever the weather (range of

circumstances), and after 100 measurements the

turkey predicted a guaranteed feed on Christmasday.

2. We need lots of measurements to make

predictions, which may or may not be valid.

3. Is One measurement enough, or must we repeat

experiments many times? (Hiroshima, Nagasaki,

both 1945)

(See Chalmers, A.F. What is this thing called Science, OU Press)

Limitations of Inductivism I


23/41

1. We assume that science starts with

observation.2. We assume that observation yields a secure

basis from which knowledge can be derived.

Both of the above statements are questionable.

Limitations of Inductivism II

What you see(young girl orold lady) can

depend on yourpoint of view

Or your levelof expertise


24/41

People see what they expect to see.

In a playing card experiment with a red ace ofspades (people remembered seeing the ace of

hearts or ace of diamonds).

Education or training (more knowledge) canshape perception. (people forewarned of the

red ace of spades were not deceived).

But, if we go down this path, Theory isinforming our observations whereas the

inductivists suggest that observations inform

theory.

Improving Observations


25/41

Observation statements are always made in

the language of accepted theory, and will be

as precise as the theoretical framework or the

conceptual framework is precise. (Chalmers,

1994)

Observation Statements

http://stephensteach-wiki.wikispaces.com/CALS+Physics+Wikipedia


26/41

Deduction is concerned with the derivation of

statements from other given statements.

Deductivistsdont need experience, as they

can use Logic.

1. Tesco sells alcohol

2. Alcoholics drink alcohol

3. All Tesco customers are alcoholics

Sometimes, our logic can be flawed.

Deductive Reasoning I


27/41

So, the process starts off with;

1. Laws and Theories

2. Initial Conditions

Which then lead to

3. Predictions and Explanations

In Euclidian geometry, we have laws and theories about

the properties of a right angled triangle.

If we know that, in addition to the right angle, another

angle is 30 (initial conditions), and the longest side

is 10 centimetres, then we can deduce the missing

information (angles and sides) on the triangle.

Deductive Reasoning II


28/41

Induction and Deduction

We acquire facts

through observation

We predict and

explain outcomes

We derive Laws and

Theories

Then, Through Induction

Then, Through Deduction


29/41

Deductive Theory

(Bryman and Bell, 2009)

Theory is used

to give a framework

for the generation of

new tests and ideas

on the topic.

Hypothesis

Confirmed or

Rejected

Revision of Theory.

Initial Findings

Review of Methodology

Further Investigation

Data Collection

Quantitative vs

Qualitative

Representative

Samples

"a scientific

hypothesis that

survives experimental

testing becomes a

scientific theory";

A Hypothesis offers a

tentative insight into

the natural world; aconcept that is not yet

verified but that if true

would explain certain

facts or phenomena;

What is the Nature of the Relationship between Theory and Research?


30/41

Grounded Theory GT Glaser and Strauss, (1967), and Glaser (1978) are the

research papers to consult first.

Constant comparison method. Look, see what you

get, how does it compare with previous results, look

again. They talk about a systematic approach and

theoretical sampling, followed by saturation, at

which point further observation offers no new results

to add significance to existing categories and theirproperties.

GT has been Critiqued by Rowan (1981) as Efficiency

Questions


31/41

Data Collection

Content Analysis is an approach to the analysisof documents and texts that seeks to quantify

content in terms of predetermined categories,

and in a systematic and replicable mannerBryman and Bell, 2003

A Research Method is simply a technique for

collecting data (questionnaires, focus groups,participation, observation, secondary data

(meta) analysis.) Alan Bryman, Emma Bell, 2007


32/41

Objective vs Subjective

The Objective Positivist Approach uses

Quantitative data to facilitate interpretation

and inquiry.

The Subjective Interpretive Approach uses

Qualitative data to facilitate interpretation and

inquiry. (Darlington and Scott, 2002)

Applied Research may require a MixedMethods approach (see Cresswell et al, 2007)


33/41

More on Mixed Methods

To the extent that we believe that socialphenomena studied within the fields of Business

and Education are complex, the existence of a

plurality or mixture of perspectives allows the

exploration of, observed or measured,phenomena from diverse frames of reference.

Please do not focus solely on the Quals vs Quants

argument; Study your problems or researchquestion from more than one research

perspective.


34/41

Case Study Research

The student should determine and outline;1. A study's questions

2. Its propositions, if any

3. Its unit(s) of analysis

4. The logic linking the data to the propositions

5. The criteria for interpreting the findings (Yin,

1994, p. 20).

Additional reading can be found here;

http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-2/tellis1.html#king
http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-2/tellis1.htmlhttp://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-2/tellis1.htmlhttp://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-2/tellis1.htmlhttp://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-2/tellis1.htmlhttp://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-2/tellis1.htmlhttp://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-2/tellis1.html


35/41

The Right Way to do things

Chua (1986, 602) suggests that a community ofscientists share "a constellation of beliefs, values,and techniques" and these beliefs circumscribedefinitions of 'worthwhile problems and

'acceptable scientific evidence. You are not tied to any single approach to research.

Indeed, the Grounded Theory approach, and theCritical Realist approach, specifically preach against

any idea of one best way. Homo Ludens (Johan Huizinga), emphasises that we

Learn while we Play. In the next 6 months, I wantyou to Play with research methodology.


36/41

The value of analysis in the Literature

Review

Culnan (1987), employing bibliographic citation

analysis, identified five intellectual subfields

within current information systems research,

suggesting that a few dominant journals canregulate research in a given field of study.

Studying Information Technology in Organizations

can only progress, if one accepts the argumentthat MIS, like all social sciences, is a multiple

paradigm discipline" (1987, p. 347).


37/41

The example ofCulnans Categories Culnans topic categories include;

1. research foundations,2. organizational approaches to information systems,

3. individual approaches to information systems,

4. information systems management,

5. information systems curriculum. So what she demonstrated, was that there does not appear to be

one dominant theoretical topic area, but rather several different

and distinct streams of research.

We can apply this idea to your own provisional literature review.

Download a dozen journal articles (all related to your research proposal), and

see if you can categorise them into subject areas or approaches.

What questions come to mind? (e.g. have ideas changed since 1970? 2000?

Etc) Why? To what extent? Who are the seminal writers?


38/41

Research Design

The three primary research designs whichemerged from meta analysis (Orlikowski &Baroudi, 1991), are

case studies (13.5%), laboratory experiments

(27.1%) and surveys (49.1%). These three designs account for almost 90% of the

studies.

Surveys, however, were clearly the dominantresearch method in this sample.

The Social Science equivalent of Laboratoryexperiments is Hypothesis Testing.


39/41

Miles and Huberman (1984)Some researchers have suggested that if the Case Study were made

conducive to statistical analysis, the process would be easier and

more acceptable. This quantitative approach would be appealing

to some of the critics of the case study methodology. However

not all case studies lend themselves to this type of analysis. Miles

and Huberman (1984) suggested analytic techniques such asrearranging the arrays, placing the evidence in a matrix of

categories, creating flowcharts or data displays, tabulating the

frequency of different events, using means, variances and cross

tabulations to examine the relationships between variables, andother such techniques to facilitate analysis.

Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A

source book for new methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publications


40/41

Easy Marks I Theoretical basis (who, when, why, where?)

Methodology (quants, quals, identify and

address suppositions, dialogue, synthesis,

analysis, correct use of language)

Stakeholders (who is it for and can anyone

contribute or get involved?)

Remember Ethics (and Bias, and include the

theories).

Reflection and Persistence (review and

improve, think Deming Plan, Do, Check, Act)


41/41

Easy Marks II

How have you engaged with the process? Have you focussed on a range of aspects of

the problem or situation?

Which academic sources have you used toreach a realistic conclusion?

Answer the question; Could this research be

done differently? Identify your contribution to knowledge in the

field.

04 dissertation development 060411 pad lec 2

Documents