RESEARCH METHODOLOGY &

GETTING PUBLISHED
SUCCESSFULLY
Workshop held at MATS School of Business,
Belgaum on October 2008
by

K. Narasimhan
Regional Advisor (India)
The Emerald Group Publishing Ltd, UK
 Aim of the First Session

• To prepare participants to undertake dissertation

or project

• To inform them of issues involved in 4-Ds of

research projects
• Define,
• Design
• Do
• Describe
 RM: Outcomes of the Session

On successful completion of this session active

participants will be able to

• demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the

process of creating and disseminating knowledge

• evaluate critically published articles and write reviews

• Evaluate project proposals

 Defining our Research

Key Challenges:

– Understanding the research process

– Taking a systematic approach

– Generating and clarifying ideas

– Using the library and internet.

 Assessing prior knowledge of
participants
• Why Conduct Research?

• What is Research?

• What are the two main approaches?

• Participants’ experience in writing research

proposals

• Are conceptual models/frameworks important?

 Why Conduct Research?
– To complete an assigned task
– To improve
– understanding of the problem
– our competence in doing research
– the ability to manage research
– on others’ research

– To increase credibility of ones work

– To discover new things/ test ideas
– To Make sense of world around us.
 What is Research? (1)

Definition of Research for RAE 2008

"...original investigation undertaken in order to gain

knowledge and understanding."

Queen's University Belfast (2007),

 What Research is Not?

It is Not

– Mere information gathering

– Mere transportation of facts from one location to

another

– Merely rummaging for information

– A catchword to get attention

Leedy and Ormrod (2005, p.2)

 A Research’s Distinct Characteristics
• Research originates with a question or problem.

• It is guided by the specific problem/hypothesis.

• It requires clear articulation of a goal/sub-goals.

• It requires a specific plan for proceeding.

• It accepts certain critical assumptions.

• It requires collection and interpretation of data.

• It is helical.
 Types of Research

Commercial Basic

Student Scholarly

Assigned Interest driven

Secondary Primary

Individual Group

Single discipline Interdisciplinary

 Key Stakeholders

• Co-researchers (if applicable)

• Supervisors

• Examiners

• Sponsors (if applicable)

• Others (?)
 Research Methodology Hierarchy

Approach

Philosophy

Perspective

Methodology

Design

Methods

Tools and Techniques

Data Collection

Data Analysis

Adopted from Maylor and Blackmon (2005), p. 155

Research Approaches

Ontology Epistemology

Positivism Derived from philosophy

of science.
Objectivist Realism

Critical realism

Interpretivism

Subjectivist Constructionism Derived from philosophy

of social science.
Subjectivism
 The SA Research Process

Identify Topic
Define

Conceptual Literature
Framework Questions Review

Data collection & analysis & report

Design

Project
Pilot study
report
Finalise Data collection and analysis

Revise Collect data

Do

Framework
Analyse data

Interpret results
Describe

Report findings
 A Qualitative Research Process
Identify Topic
Define

Conceptual Literature
Framework Questions Review
(CF)

Collect data
Design

Literature
Analyse data Review

Do
Revise Interpret data
CF
Questions answered Interim findings

Describe
or out of time

Design Report

Slides 15 and 16 adopted from Maylor and Blackmon (2005), p. 149

 The Evidence Pyramid

Systematic Review &

The most clinically relevant
Meta Analysis
Randomised
Controlled Double
Blind Studies
Cohort Studies

Case Control Studies

Case Series

Case Reports

Useful as background Ideas, Editorials and Opinions

resources Animal Research
The least clinically relevant In Vitro (‘Test Tube’) Research

Adapted from A Guide to Research Methods (No date)

http://library.downstate.edu/ebmdos/3ebm100.htm Accessed on 31/07/08
 Limitations of Methods
• Case series/report • Lack statistical validity

• Case control studies • Lack reliability

• Cohort • Affected by changes over

studies
time.

• The double blind method • Lacks high generalisability

• Randomized controlled • Could be unethical in

studies some cases (smoking)

• Systematic review and meta • Publication bias

analysis
 Managing the Research Process

Choose a topic: unanswered

Get work published. question & plan.
6 1

Form arguments, Write a critical

5 2
identify limitations and literature review
ideas for further
research. Write up the
dissertation.
3
4
Gather evidence, analyse, Develop concepts,
interpret findings, and draw framework and theories,
inferences. form research hypotheses,
& design studies
 Structure of a Research proposal
• Statement of problem
• Research questions
– Sub-objectives
• Research approach
• Methodology
– Measures
– Data analysis approach
– Samples
• Schedule and budget
 Statement of Problem

• Choose or identify Problem

• State the problem & Divide it into sub-problems

• State the hypotheses and limitations of the

research

• State assumptions & why the study is important.

• Define key terms and jargons

 Benefits of Writing Literature Review
• Answers if the field is worth studying.

• Can offer new ideas, etc and provides useful

contacts.

• Shows how others have handled similar issues

and dealt with potential difficulties.

• Can reveal sources of data, and tools

effectively used.

• Helps link our findings to those of previous

studies’.
 Conducting a Literature Search

• Write clearly the problem and sub-problems

• Identify key terms from them

• Specify topics that need to be studied further

• Identify articles, books, websites, etc for reading

• Keep track and record of searches undertaken

and all basic/important information
 Ex1: Evaluating Research Articles
• Was the article published in a refereed journal?
• Are the objectives clearly stated?
• Is it primary research or secondary research?
• Is its structure logical?
• Is the problem chosen based on previous work?
• Can the method used be repeated by others?
• Is the method of data collection sound?
• Do you agree with the inferences drawn?
• What are its strength & weaknesses?
 Writing a Critical Review (1)
Read Interactively and
for depth
Rely on
paraphrasing
Write Digest
Summarise the
article

Look for arguments &

counter arguments Establish linkages
Evaluate Understand

Adapted from Pechenik, Jan. (1993).Cited in Hillsborough Community College

(no date),
 Writing a Critical Review (2)
• Provide an overview of the chosen literature

• Use a “funnel” approach:

– Start with broad scope of the field and present an

argument for narrowing the field to specific topic

• Identify the gaps in existing research and explain

how the research to be undertaken will fill the
void.

• Provide a critical account: emphasise relatedness;

don’t just reproduce
 Writing a Critical Review (3)
• Cite
– the major experts in the filed
– the most recent and important literature
– works that take a different viewpoint
• Give credit where it is due (do not plagiarise)
• Evaluate others’ work objectively
• Explain and justify the use of the chosen theories,
concepts, frameworks, techniques, etc.
• Include a conceptual model showing all relevant
variables/constructs and their relationships
 Conceptual Frameworks (1)

• Concepts are key terms used in the research.

• Frameworks illustrate the connections and

relationships amongst the concepts.

• CFs provide a ‘map’ for the filed of study

• CFs Provide structure and coherence

 Conceptual Frameworks (2)
Types of Relationships
• Cause and effect (Expectancy Model)

• Cyclical or stages in a process (Kolb’s)

• Hierarchical (Maslow’s hierarchy of needs)

• Matrices (BCG Matrix)

• Pairs of opposites (Force-Field Analysis)

• Exchange and equilibrium (Balanced Scorecard)

• Similarity (McKinsey’s ‘7 S’ Model)

 Guidelines for Reviewing an Article
• Identify the main points and ‘inference indicators’

• Assess the context of the argument

• Identify the premises for conclusions

• Check if the premises are supported by sound

evidence (reliable citations)

• Are the conclusions strong and logically based?

• Could counter conclusions be drawn?

Adapted from Fisher (2004, p. 77)

 General Guidelines for Writing Reviews
• Be clear about the goal
• Draw a plan: moving from general to specific
• Emphasise relatedness
• Summarise what does it all mean
• Remember first draft is not the final draft
• Critically read your draft after a few days
• Seek advise and feedback

Adapted from Leedy and Ormrod (2005, pp. 79-80)

 Content analysis

Purpose : To identify patterns, themes, or biases

Focus : Any form of communication (verbal, visual or
behavioural)

Data used : material from books, newspapers, films,

videotapes of human interactions, etc.

Methods of
Analysis : Tabulation of frequency of each characteristic
Statistical analysis to answer questions
 EX2: Group Exercise – Part 1
Objective: To study the teaching style of
academics

1. Find a partner. Decide who will be the

Researcher.
2. The researcher now has 10 minutes to find
out and record information about the
interviewee’s teaching style whilst at the
institution
3. Swap roles and repeat step 2.
 Group Exercise – Part 2

• Merge with at least 2 other groups (you will

need at least 3 sets of data per group)
• Reduce your data (What categories have
you formed and why? How have you
organised your data chunks and why?)
• Analyse your data (e.g. What patterns have
been identified? What issues have been
identified?)
• Identify key discussion themes.
 The Sampling Process

• Define the target population.

• Choose the sampling frame.

• Select the sampling method.

• Determine the ample size.

• Implement the sampling plan.

Hair, Jr., J. F., et al. (2007, p. 171),

 Bias in Research

Bias is anything that distorts data, and thus attacks

the integrity of facts. (Leedy and Ormrod, 2005)

Sources of Bias:
– Sponsoring organisation
– Researcher
– Sampling
– Non-respondents to a survey
– Surveyor or interviewer
– Gathering of data
– Analysis and presentation of data
 Researchers’ Ethical Obligations

• Maintain scientific rigour

• Keep findings confidential (if required)

• Do not ‘massage’ findings

• Present findings clearly

• Admit limitations
 Questionnaire Design: points to watch
• Attractive design
• Keep it short and simple (KISS)
• Logical and sequential: easy questions first
• Clear instructions and questions
• Watch out for implicit assumptions
• Avoid leading questions
• Decide how to code responses for analysis
• Ask personal questions at the end
 Questionnaire Design:
• Closed-ended questions
– Dichotomous
– Multiple choice/Check lists
– Ranking questions
– Rating scales: verbal, numerical and (Behaviourally
anchored)
– Likert scale (measures the amount of agreement)
– Semantic differential scales
• Open-ended questions
– Unstructured
– Word association
– Sentence completion
 Rating Scales Exercise
Give a numerical value between 1 and 10 (where
10 = greatest frequency) to indicate the
frequency suggested by the following words.

– Almost always - Quite often

– Always - Rarely
– Frequently - Seldom
– Most of the time - Sometimes
– Never - Often
– Occasionally - Usually
Adapted from Fisher (1999, p. 164)
 Maximising Returns of Mailed
Questionnaires
• Timing of the mail-shot

• Ensure good first impression.

• Say why the survey should interest the respondent.

• Include self-addressed & stamped envelop.

• Offer the results/summary of the study.

• Send follow up reminders.

 Pilot Survey Purposes
• Testing questionnaire
• wording
• sequencing
• layout
• Testing
• sensitivity of respondents
• fieldwork arrangements
• analysis procedures
• Estimating
• response rates
• completion times
• Training and testing field workers
 Assessing Practicability of Projects (1)
• In what area is the problem?
• Are data easily accessible?
• What expertise does the researcher have?
• How will data be collected?
• Are special equipments or conditions required for
gathering and analysing data?
• What is the estimated time and cost?
• Will the data collected be valid and reliable?
 Common Weaknesses in Proposals (1)
Not able to demonstrate the ability to:
– Think clearly and logically

– To express concisely and cogently

– To discriminate between the significant and

inconsequential
– To display technical ability

– To handle abstract thought

– To analyse data objectively and accurately

– To interpret results confidently and conservatively

Leedy and Ormrod (2005, pp. 126-7)
 Common Weaknesses in Proposals (2)
• Related to Research Problem
– Unclear, unfocussed, unsound,

– more complex, limited relevance, unimportant

• Research Design and Methodology

– Vague and unfocussed,

– inappropriate data, equipments, methods/ controls,

– unlikely to yield accurate results.

Leedy and Ormrod (2005, p. 127)
 Common Weaknesses in Proposals (3)

• Related to the Researcher

– Insufficient training/experience,
– Unfamiliar with the relevant literature
– Insufficient time to devote to the research

• Related to Resources
– Unfavourable institutional setting
– Insufficient equipment and support staff
 Evaluating a Research Proposal
• Is the research project worth it?
– Does it contribute to knowledge?
– Has an expert’s view been obtained?
– What is good about it?
– What are the drawbacks?
• What procedure will be adopted for:
– Literature review, data collection and analysis, and
interpretation
• Are the necessary research tools available?
• What do peers think about the proposal?
 Conclusions

I would much appreciate it, if one of you or

some of you combined would summarise
what has been learnt in this session.

Thank you all for giving me this opportunity to

present my thoughts. If you want further
information do get in touch with me.
 References/Bibliography
Cambridge Theological Federation , AG430022 (A422) - Postgraduate Research Methods
(MA) http://www.theofed.cam.ac.uk/ma_modules/AG430022.html
Fisher, C. (2004), Researching and Writing Dissertation for Business Students, Harlow:
Pearson Prentice Hall
Green and Britten (1998), Qualitative research and evidence based medicine, BMJ
1998;316:1230-1232 ( 18 April )
Hair, Jr., J. F., et al. (2007), Research Methods for Business, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley
Hammersley, M. and Gomm, R.(1997) 'Bias in Social Research‘, Sociological Research
Online, vol. 2, no. 1, <http://www.socresonline.org.uk/socresonline/2/1/2.html> accessed
on 04/05/07
Leedy, P. D., and Ormrod, J. E. (2005), Practical Research Planning and Design, 8th Ed., New
Jersey: Pearson Merril Prentice Hall
Lesser, L. I., et al. (2007) Relationship between Funding Source and Conclusion among
Nutrition-Related Scientific Articles, Veterinary Medical Library News, Vol. 4 Issue 1, PLoS
Medicine, found at http://www.vetmed.lib.umn.edu/news/funding/bias, accessed on
19/05/07
Maylor, H., and Blackmon, K. (2005), Researching Business and Management, Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan
McQueen, R. A., and Knussen, C. (1999), Research Methods in Psychology: A practical
Introduction, Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall Europe
Pechenik, Jan. (1993). A Short Guide to Writing About Biology, 2nd ed. New York: Harper
Collins cited in Hillsborough Community College (no date), How to Write a Critical Review,
found at http://www.hccfl.edu/adjunct/darren_smith/bbs-gwcr.htm accessed on 5/05/07
Queens university Belfast (2007), Definition of Research for RAE 2008, found at
http://www.qub.ac.uk/home/Research/ResearchPolicyOffice/RAE2008/PUBLIC/ExternalRAEdocum
accessed on 04/05/07