SCIENCE AND
COMMON SENSE
Many a time we make
certain statements which we have not to prove chat they are true. They are
based either on common sense or on practical observations and experiences
on social life, though sometimes they may be based on wisdom too. However,
often they are based on ignorance, prejudices and mistaken interpretation.
Common sense knowledge, based on the accumulated experiences, prejudices and
beliefs of the people, is often contradictory and inconsistent. On the other
hand, scientific observations arc based on verifiable evidence or systematic
body of proof that can be cited. For example,, some common sense statmenets may
be quoted here: man is more intelligent than women married people; remain more
happy than single people; high-caste people arc more talented than low-caste people; the rural
people are more hardworking than the urban people; urban people are more
Congress-oriented than BJP-onented; and die like. Contrary to this, the
scientific research or scientific inquiry finds that woman is as intelligent
as man; there is no association between happiness and remaining married or
unmarried by a person; caste does not determine individual's efficiency; hard
work Is not related to environment alone; and urban people arc not necessarily
Congress-oriented. Thus, a statement made way of saying something, generally based
on ignorance, bias, prejudice or mistaken interpretation, though occasionally
it may be wise, true, and a useful bit of knowledge. At one time, common sense
statements might have preserved folk wisdom but today, scientific method has become a common way
of seeking truths about our social world.
Conant ("Science and
Common Sense", 1951, quoted by Fred. N. Kerlinger in Foundations of
Behavioural Research, 1964:4) has differentiated science and common sense
in the following five ways:
(i) Use of conceptual schemes
Though conceptual schemes
are used in both science and common sense but in common sense, the man in the
street uses them in a loose fashion while the scientist systematically builds
his conceptual and theoretical structures and tests them for consistency. For example, on a common
sense basis, a person's birth in a Dalit caste is described as a result of his
past karmas, the death of a corrupt person's son is thought to be a
punishment for
his
sinfulness, lack of rains is due to displeasing Indra—the rain-god—and so
forth. The scientist describes such conceptual ideas and feelings as having no
relation to reality.
(ii) Empirical tests
The scientist tests his
hypotheses and theories through a systematic empirical testing but the man in
the street tests his so-called hypotheses and theories in a selective way. He
often 'selects' evidence simply because it suits his hypotheses. For example,
in the past, a common man's belief in India was that all untouchables are
dirty, lethargic and superstitious. He 'verified' his belief by noting that all
untouchables are so and described those who were not so as 'exceptions'. The sophisticated
social scientist rejects such 'selective tendency'. Instead of giving an
armchair explanation of a relationship, he believes in 'testing' the relationship in the
field/laboratory.
(Hi) Notion of control
In scientific research, 'control'
means focusing on those variables that are hypothesised to be the 'causes and
ruling out
those that
are 'possible causes' of the effects on the phenomenon under study. The layman seldom bothers
to control any variables or extraneous sources of influence. He accepts all those factors which are
in accord with his preconceptions. For example, if a layman assumes that
Inter-community riots are initiated by anti-social elements, he will talk only of this
factor and never bother of other factors like the role of religious fanatics,
politicians with vested interests, support of 'foreign' elements through cash
and weapons, role of 'interested' businessmen, and the like. The scientist, on
the other hand,
will not
discard the role of all these factors but would rather 'control' the study of communal
riots in terms of different variables.
(iv) Relations among phenomena
The difference between
science and common sense in terms of relations among phenomena is perhaps not so
sharp because both talk of relations. However, while the scientist consciously
and systematically pursues relations, the layman does not do this. His concern
with relations is loose, unsystematic and uncontrolled. He often seizes on the
fortuitous occurrence of two phenomena and immediately links them as cause and
effect. Take, for example, the relation between crime and punishment. A layman
says that punishment controls crime while a scientist says that punishment can make a
criminal a more confirmed enemy of society and that rewards also can control
crime. Thus, while a scientist would 'test' both relations, a layman would
ignore 'reward' factor.
(v) Explanation of observed phenomena
One main difference
between common sense and scientific explanation of observed phenomena is that
the scientist carefully rules out philosophical and metaphysical explanations
in explaining relations among the observed phenomena because these cannot be
tested. For example, saying that the poverty of a person is because God wishes it so is talking
metaphysically, since this proposition cannot be tested.
All these differences
between science and common sense indicate -that a scientist gives statements
and propositions which can be empirically verified but a layman does not
believe in testing and validity. In short, the method of science is different
from the methods of intuition (accepted by the a priorist because it is agreeable
to reason if not with experience) or tenacity (fact is true because it
is known to be true and the repetition enhances its validity).
EMPIRICISM (POSITIVISM)
v/s PHILOSOPHICAL APPROACH
The study of society and social
phenomena till the middle of the nine- teenth century was made mostly on the basis of speculation,
logic, theological thinking and rational analysis. August Comte, a French
philosopher, described these methods inadequate and insufficient in the study
of social life. In 1848, he proposed positive method in the field of
social research. He maintained that social phenomena should be studied not
through logics or theological principles or metaphysical theories but rather in
society itself and in the structure of social relations. For example, he
explained poverty in terms of the social forces that dominate society. He
described this method of study as scientific. Comte considered
scientific method, called positivism, as the most appropriate tool of
social research. This new methodology rejected speculation and philosophical
approach and focused on gathering of empirical data and becamepositi-vistic
methodology, using similar methods as employed by natural sciences. By the
1930s, positivism came to flourish in the USA and gradually other countries
also followed the trend.
Comte's positivism (that
knowledge can be derived only from sensory experience) was criticised both from
within and outside the positivist domain. Within positivism, a branch called lay
ad positivism was developed in early twentieth century which claimed that
science is both logical and also based on observable facts and that the
truth of any statement lies in its verification through sensory experience. Outside
positivism developed schools of thought like symbolic interactionism,
phenomenology and ethno methodology, tic. These schools questioned the
positivist methodology and its perception of social reality.
We have thus today two
approaches to social science research: the scientific empirical method and the
naturalistic phenomenological method (Robert B. Burns, Introduction to
Research, 4th ed., 2000:3). In the former, quantitative research methods
are employed in an attempt to establish general laws or principles. This
approach, also termed as nomotbetic, -assumes that social reality is
objective and external to the individual. The latter approach to research
emphasises the importance of the subjective experience of individuals, with a
focus on qualitative analysis. It regards social reality as a creation of
individual conscious- ness, with evaluation of events seen as a personal and
subjective construction. This approach {with focus on individual case rather
than general law-making) is termed as ideographic approach.
SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH OR SCIENTIFIC METHOD IN CONDUCTING
RESEARCH
The first question is»
what is research? Research is a careful and exhaustive investigation of a
phenomenon with an objective of advancing knowledge. 'According to Theodorson
and Theodorson (1969:347), "it is a systematic and objective attempt to
study a problem for the purpose of deriving general principles". Robert
Burns (2000:3) describes it as a systematic investigation to find solutions to
a problem. The investigation is guided by previously collected informa-don.
Man's knowledge grows by studying what is already known and revising past
knowledge in the light of new findings. Activity undertaken for the purpose of
personal learning or enlightenment or any causal investigation is not research.
While talking of
research, sometimes we talk of empirical (scientific) research and sometimes
of library research, historical research, social research, and so on. Empirical
research involves observation of facts or interaction with people. Library
research is done in library situation. Historical research is the
study of history (e.g., functioning of caste system in different periods of
history) or biographical research (e.g., research into the life and times of
Mahatma Gandhi). Social research is a research that focuses on the
study of human groups or the processes of social interaction. Scientific
research is building of knowledge through collection of empirically
verifiable facts. The term 'verifiable' here means "which can be checked
by others for accuracy". KerHnger (op.cit., 1964:13) has def in ed~
scientific research as "a systematic, controlled, empirical and- critical
investigation of hypoetical propositions about the presumed relations among
phenomena". Three points that have been emphasised here are: (i) it is systematic
and controlled, i.e., the investigation is so ordered that investigators
can have confidence in research outcomes. In other words, the research
situation Js tightly disciplined; (ii) investigation is empirical, i.e.,
subjective belief is checked against objective reality; and (iii) it is critical,
i.e., the researcher is critical not only of the results of his own inquiry
but of the research results of others too. Though it is easy to err, to
exaggerate, to over- generalise when writing up one's own work, it
is not easy to escape the feeling of scientific eyes of others.
Royce A. Singleton and Bruce C.
Straits (Approaches to
Social Research, 1999:1) have said that "scientific social research
consists of the process of formulating and seeking answers to questions about
the social world". For example, why do husbands batter their wives? Why
do people take drugs? What are the consequences of population explosion? and
so on. Similarly, the issues of inquiry may be of rural poverty, urban slums,
youth crime, political corruption, exploitation / of the weak, environmental
pollution, and the like. To answer these / questions, social scientists have
devised basic guidelines, principles and techniques. Scientific social research
thus investigates any curiosity about social phenomena, utilising scientific
method. Scientific sociological research, broadly speaking, is concerned with
discovering, organising and developing systematic reliable knowledge about
soci-1ety or social life, social action, social behaviour, social
relations, social Groups (like families, castes, tribes, communities, etc.),
social organisations (like social, religious, political, business, etc.), and
social systems and social structures.
Theodorson and Theodorson
(1969:370) have maintained that scientific method is "building of a body
of scientific knowledge through observation, experimentation, generalisation
and verification". Their contention is that scientific inquiry develops
knowledge experienced through the senses, i.e., which is based on empirical evidence.
Accord-,ing to Manheim (1994:77),
scientific research involves a
method / characterised by objectivity, accuracy and systematisation.
Objectivity eliminates biases in fact-collect ion and .interpretation: Accuracy
makes sure that things are exactly as described. Systematisation aims at consistency
and comprehension.
The assumption is that
any statement pertaining to any social phenomenon made on the basis of
scientific inquiry can be accepted as true and meaningful, if it is empirically
verifiable. Thus, individual's idiosyncratic observations not shared by all
scientists are not regarded as "scientific facts'. For example, a
statement that "skilled workers arc more indisciplined than non-skilled
workers" lacks empirical validity; / hence no one will accept it as a
'scientific fact'. But, { a statement is
/ given that "the important cause of child's
delmquen behaviour is a disorganised
family", it will be taken as scientific, onsidering it a proposition which
has been found valid in a number of studies. "About whom" the facts
will be collected in a scient fie inquiry will depend
upon the 'focus of the discipline' to which the researcher belongs. If the
researcher is a sociologist, he will collect facts about social phenomena or
social world. But if he is a student of business administration (MBA), he will
collect facts pertaining to "different aspects of business like finance,
marketing, personnel, and the process that facilitates the managerial
decision-making and problem-solving". In sociology, social inquiry will
help the researcher and the people to understand the social phenomenon (say, a
social problem like / exploitation of the weak? poverty, political
corruption, etc., or the structure of political parties, or the functioning of
political elite, or social institutions in a village community, and so on), or
to understand why the behaviour of an individual in a group (crowd) is
different from the one when he is in isolation (crowd behaviour) or how the behaviour
patterns of a number of persons change when they respond to a common stimulus
(collective behaviour), or why and how ihe patterns of interaction within a
small group or of interrelationships of sion
processes (group dynamics).
In business
administration, according to Zikmund (1984:56-57), the scientific inquiry will
help managers to clarify their objectives and decisions. For example, a manager
of an organisation wants to find out why has the morale of the subordinates
decided? Is it because the overtime has been totally stopped or the employees
for higher posts are directly recruited and the serving employees have no
opportunities for seeking higher posts, or the employer has developed the
tendency of appointing persons on contract basis, or the credit facility
provided earlier by the organisation has been stopped, or the profits are not
being shared by the employer with the employees, or the employer has refused
to provide housing facilities even to senior employees, and so forth. Thus,
while the major areas of inquiry/research for a sociolo- mg,
personnel, sales and marketing (advertising, buyer's behaviour), responsibility
(legal, constraints) and general business (i.e., location, trend, import and
export, etc).
Although scientific
research method depends on the collection of empirical facts, yet facts alone
do not constitute a science. For meaningful understanding facts must be
ordered in some fashion, analysed, generalised, and related to other facts.
Thus, theory construction is a vital part of the scientific inquiry.
Since facts collected and
findings evolved through the scientific method are interrelated with the
previous findings of other scholars or earlier theories, scientific knowledge
is a cumulative process.
The scientific method
could either be an inductive method or the deductive method.
Inductive method involves establishing gencralisa-tio'ns, i.e., building
generalisations inferred from specific facis, or drawing particular principles
from general instances, while deductive method involves testing
generalisations, i.e., it is the process of reason-. ing from general
principles to particular instances.
Research and theory are not opposed to each
other. Research leads to theory and theory to research. In fact, descriptive
research leads to explanatory research which leads to theoretical research.
According to Singleton
and Straits (op. cit.: 5-9), there are four research strategies for
understanding the social world: {1} experiments (2) surveys, (3} field
research, and (4) use of available data. Experimental research offers
the best approach for investigating the causes of phenomena. In the experiment,
the researcher systematically manipulates some feature of the environment and
then observes whether a systematic change follows in the behaviour under study.
Survey research involves the administration of questionnaires or
interviewing relatively large groups of people. Field research is
engaging oneself in naturally occurring set of events in order to gain
firsthand knowledge of the situation. The available data are the data
that have been generated for purposes other than those for which the
researcher is using them, e.g., written records, newspapers, government
documents, books, diaries, etc.
CHARACTERISTICS OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
Horton and Hunt have given following nine
characteristics (1984:4-7) of scientific method:
·
Verifiable evidence, i.e., factual observations which other observers can see
and check.
·
Accuracy, i.e., describing what really exists. It means
truth or correctness of a statement or describing things exactly as they are
and avoiding jumping to unwarranted conclusions either by exaggeration or
fantasising.
·
Precision, i.e., making it as exact as necessary, or giving
exact number or measurement, Instead of saying, "I interviewed a large
number of people", one says, "I interviewed 493 persons".
Instead of saying, "most of the people were against family planning",
one -says, "seventy two per cent people were against family
planning". Instead of saying, "every moment one is born; every moment
dies a man", one says, "thirty persons are born in one minute in
In-dia". Thus, in scientific precision, one avoids colourful literature
and vngue meanings. How much precision is needed in social science will depend
upon what the situation requires.
·
Systematisation, i.e.,1 attempting to find all the
relevant data, or collecting data in a systematic and organised way so that the
conclusions drawn are reliable. Data based on casual recollections are
generally incomplete and give unreliable judgements and conclusions.
·
Objectivity, i.e., being free from all biases and vested
interests. It means, observation is unaffected by ihe observer's values,
beliefs and preferences to the extent possible and he is able to see and accept
facts as they are, not as he might wish them to be. The researcher remains
detached from his emotions, prejudices and needs, and guards his biases. A bias
is an unconscious tendency to see facts in a certain way because of one's
wishes, interests and values. For example, the protest demonstration of
students in a university may be perceived by some as a logical
effort for the welfare of the students while others may see it as a misguided
method of getting the grievances mitigated. The researcher who wants to see it
objectively will present all facts and views of students, teachers,
administrators, etc. He will neither attempt to overlook some facts
deliberately nor emphasise some other facts, as he himself will not be
emotionally involved in the situation. He will make conscious effort to be accurate
in information he collects or what he hears and sees. As an objective
researcher, he will have no vested interest in reporting and analysing facts.
The researcher is also conscious of the fact that others with a different
point of view can check and criticise his analysis. Being afraid of shoddy
exposure of his research, he will not permit his biases to affect his results
and conclusions.
·
Recording, i.e., jotting down complete details as quickly as
possible. Since human memory
is fallible, all
data collected are recorded.
Researcher wil] not depend on the recalled facts but will analyse the problem
on the basis of the recorded data. Conclusions based on recalled unrecorded
data are not trustworthy.
·
Controlling conditions, i.e., controlling all variables except one
and then attempting to examine what happens when that variable is varied. This
is the basic technique in all scientific experimentation allowing one variable
to vary while holding all other variables constant. Unless all variables except
one have been controlled, we cannot be sure which variable has produced the
results. Though a physical scientist is able to control as many variables as
he wishes in an experiment he conducts in the laboratory (say, heat, light, air
pressure, time interval, etc.) but a social scientist cannot control all
variables as he wishes. He functions under many constraints. For instance, a
researcher wants to study the behaviour of students in a classroom. Now,
students' behaviour in a classroom depends upon several factors, like
efficiency of the teacher of communicating his views, subject which
is being taught, availability of
black-board, fan, etc., in the room, quietness in the verandah outside the
classroom, and so forth. A researcher may be able to control some of these
variables but not all. Varying conditions will be responsible for varying
behaviour of the students. It is, however, possible for a researcher in social
science to work with two or more variables at a time. It is called multivariate
analysis. Since the social scientist is not always able to control all the
variables he wants, his conclusions do not permit him to predict.
·
Training investigators, i.e., imparting necessary knowledge to investigators
to make them understand what to look for, how to interpret it and avoid
inaccurate data collection. When some remarkable observations are reported,
the scientist first tries to know what is the observer's level of education,
training and sophistication? Does he really understand facts he reports? The
scientists are always impressed by authenticated reports.
All above characteristics
of scientific method point out that any generalisation based on this type of
investigation is true. A systematically collected body of scientific evidence
is rarely challenged. No wonder, Zikmund has also said that the data collected
haphazardly can not be described as scientific inquiry.
Henry Johnson has stated following four
characteristics of scientific research (see, Black and Champion, 1960: 5-6):
1. It is empirical, i.e., it is based on
observation and reasoning and not on speculation.
2. It
is theoretical, i.e.^it summarises data precisely giving logical relationship
between propositions which explain causal relationship.
3. It
is cumulative, i.e., generalisations/theories are corrected, rejected and
newly developed theories are built upon one another.
4. It is non-ethical, i.e., scientists do
not say whether particular things
/events/phenomeifc/instituiions/systems/structures are good or bad. They only
explain them.
Robert B. Burns
(2000:5-7) has discussed four characteristics of scientific approach: control,
operational definition, replication and hypothesis testing.
Control is necessary to eliminate the simultaneous
influence of many variables to isolate the cause of an effect. Control provides
unambiguous answers to why something happens, what causes some event or under
what conditions an event does occur.
Operational definition means that the terms must
be defined in terms of steps to measure them; e.g., economic class may be
defined by family income, and social class by father's occupation or both
parents' educational level.
Replication means that for repeated study, the data
obtained must be reliable. If observations are not repeatable, our descriptions
and explanations are unreliable and useless.
Hypothesis testing means that the researcher
'systematically creates a hypothesis and subjects it to empirical test.
AIMS OF SOCIAL RESEARCH
The alms of social
research coincide with the type of research, i.e., whether it is exploratory
research or explanatory research or descriptive research. In other words, it
depends upon the general goals (understanding for its own sake), the academic
goals, the theoretical goals and the pragmatic goals of research. Broadly
speaking, the important aims of social research are:
• To
understand the functioning of society.
• To
study individual behaviour and social action.
• To
evaluate social problems, their effects on society, and to find out possible
solutions.
• To
explore social reality and explain social life.
• To
develop theories.
Becker
(1989) and Sarantakos (1998:16) have referred to the following goals
of
social research:
• General
goals: Understanding for its own sake.
• Theoretical
goals: Verification, falsification, modification or discovery of a
theory.
• Pragmatic
goals: Solution of social problems.
• Political
goals: Development of social policy, evaluation of pro-
liberation.
Sometimes the aims of
social research coincide with the motives of social research but not always.
The motives can be intrinsic (i.e., related to personal interests of
the researcher) or extrinsic (i.e., related to the interests of those
contracting the research). Mahr (1995:84) has outlined the following motives
of social research:
• Educational:
to educate and inform the public. -
• Personal:
to promote the academic status of the researcher.
• Institutional:
to enhance the research quantum of the institutions for which the
Researcher
works.
• Political:
to provide support to political plans and programmes.
• Tactical:
to delay decision or action for as long as the investigation is under
Way.
STEPS IN SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
According to Theodorson
and Theodorson (1969:370-371), scientific method involves the following steps: First,
the problem is defined. Second, the problem is stated in terms of a
particular theoretical framework and related to relevant findings of previous
research. Third, a hypothesis (or hypotheses) relating to the problem is
devised, utilising previously accepted theoretical principles. Fourth, the
procedure to be used in gathering data to test the hypothesis is determined. Fifth,
the data are gathered. Sixth, the data are analysed to determine if
the hypothesis is verified or rejected. Finally, the conclusions of the
study are related to the original body of theory, which is modified in
accordance with the new findings.
Kenneth D. Bailey (Methods
of Social Research, 2nd ed., 1982:9) has delineated five stages of social
research: (l) choosing the research problem and stating the hypotheses; (2)
formulating the research design; (3) gathering the data; (4) analysing the
data; and (5) interpreting the results so as to test the hypotheses. We
concede Bailey's view that each research problem has a goal but is it necessary
that the goal be stated in terms of hypotheses? Many researches have no
hypotheses to test but the findings provide knowledge to the researchers to
throw some hypotheses to be tested and generalised, or to revise the hypotheses
propounded on the basis of some i. arlier work done by some other researcher.
A problem cannot be formulated in a vacuum. It is
either based upon past research or on relationship observed/conceived between and
polarisation of two religious communities or sects (see, V.V. Singh, Communal
Riots, 1992). The researcher has only to measure two variables of (a)
polarisation of comrmmities, and (b) hatred as a negative social effect of
polarisation. The researcher has, of course, to focus upon the nature of
polarisation, causes of polarisation, conflicts ^ arisen because of
mutual hatred on different occasions, the precipitating factor in the riot,
role of leader in instigation/suppression of hostile feelings, and so on. Of
course, the researcher has to control the extraneous factors that might
interfere with the finding, e.g., conflict which cannot be attributed to
religious hatred, etc. The hypothesis that "hatred caused by religious
polarisation causes aggression" will be supported if people show or do not
show dislike for strangers from different religions. The tool for collecting
data would depend upon the nature of relationship to be examined between two
variables and the type of people involved in the study. Data analysis may
sometimes be complicated because more variables may be involved and many
confounding factors might affect the relationship between the two given
variables, which may not have been properly controlled. Interpreting the
results many a time requires replicating the study either with a new sample or
a larger sample to make sure that the finding was not a fluke.
Henry Manheim (1980:80)
has suggested nine steps in scientific research which may be shown diagrammatically
in the following way:
Casual observation of event/phenomenon
wonder/curiosity about how, why, what, etc.
Hypotheses (about relationship between two
variables)
Preparing design of research
Data collection, processing analysis and
interpretation
determining whether
Hypothesis is true Hypothesis is false
description/ inference
prediction (using
inductive process)
Practical application
Thus, this is a never-ending aspect of science,
with the process constantly being repeated with increasing refinement.
Earl Babbie (The
Practice of Social Research, 8th ed., 1998:112) has proposed the following
six elements of a research proposal:
• Problem
or objective, i.e., stating what is to be studied, its worth and practical
significance,
and its contribution to the construction of social theories.
• Literature
review, i.e., what1 others have said about this topic, what
theories
have
been addressed to it and what are the flaws in the existing research that can
be
remedied.
• Subjects
for study, i.e., from whom is the data to be collected, how to reach
persons
who are available for study, whether selecting sample will be
appropriate,
and if yes, how to select this sample and how to insure that research
that
is being conducted will not harm the respondents.
• Measurement, i.e., determining key
variables for the study, how will these
variables
be defined and measured, how will these definitions and measurements
differ
from previous researches on the topic.
• Data, collection methods, i.e.,
determining methods to be used for collecting
data-survey
or experiment, etc ?. statistics to be used or not.
• Analysis,
i.e., spell out the logic of analysis whether variations in some quality
are to
be accounted or not, and the possible explanatory variables to be analysed.
Horton and Hunt (1984:10)
have pointed out eight steps in scientific research or scientific method of
investigation:
1. Define the problem, which is worth studying
through the methods of science.
2. Review literature, so that errors of other
research scholars may not be repeated.
3. FormHlate
the hypotheses, i.e., propositions which can be tested,
4. Plan
the research design, i.e., outlining the process as to how, what and where
the
data is to be collected, processed and analysed.
5. Collect the data, i.e., actual
collection of facts and information in accordance
With
the research design. Sometimes it may become necessary to change the
design to meet some unforeseen difficulty.
6. Analyse the data, i.e., classify,
tabulate and compare the data, making whatever
tests
are necessary to get the results.
7. Draw conclusions, i.e., whether the
original hypothesis is found true or false
and is
confirmed or rejected, or are the results inconclusive? What has the
research
added to our knowledge? What implications has it for sociological
theory?
What new questions have been posed for further research?
8. Replicate the study. Though the
above-mentioned seven steps complete a single research study but research
findings are confirmed by replication. Only after several researches can the
research conclusions be accepted as generally true.
These steps help us in summarising the so-called
scientific approach to inquiry. First, there is doubt whether an indeterminate
situation can be made determinate. The scientist experiences vague doubts and
is emotionally disturbed. He struggles to formulate the problem, even if
inadequately. He studies the literature and scans his own experience and the
experiences of others. With the problem formulated, with the basic questions
properly asked, he constructs the hypotheses mainly on experimented lines. By
collecting the required data, he tests the hypotheses which he may ultimately
accept, change, abandon, broaden or narrow down. In this process, sometimes one
phase may be expanded, other may be skimped and there may be fewer or more
steps involved. These things are not important. What is important is a
controlled rational process of reflective inquiry.
Example of a research problem indicating steps
We may take one example
to understand the steps in social research as suggested by various scholars. As
a first step, we need a research problem. Suppose our problem is
"Role Adjustment of Working Women", i.e., how do working women face
conflict between the role of a householder and that of a wage-earner and how
do they adjust themselves in family and office? In fact, this problem covers
too many aspects. We need a limited and a specific aspect for research. For
this we take the aspect of assessing: "Do working women suffer
professionally by not devoting much time to their work? The review of the
literature—the second step—may not provide us much information; yet it
is necessary to check whether this theme has been studied by other scholars and
what are their findings? One can check from books and journals, in- eluding Sociological
Abstracts. This search of literature is extremely important. The third
step is to formulate one or more hypotheses. One might be: "Married
working women get less promotions than single (unmarried, divorcee) working
women." Other might be: "The reputation of childless married women
of being dedicated and committed workers is much higher than women with two or
more children." Planning research design is the fourth step. Ali
categories must be designed and the variables to be controlled must be
decided. We must be sure that the two groups we compare are similar in all
important respects except marital status or number of children. We must select
sources of data, kinds of data sought, and procedures for collecting and
processing them. One possibility is that the research is confined to female
lecturers in a university, the other possibility is to study female clerks in
some office (say secretariat) and so forth. The fifth step is actual
collection of data and classifying and processing it. In this age of research,
the data are generally made "computer sensible" (prepared for computer
processing by assigning codes to various response cate-^ gories, etc.). The
computer gives the desired computations and comparisons including data for
statistical tests. The sixth step is to analyse data for finding out
contrast between the two groups. In this process, sometimes unexpectedly, even
some additional hypotheses may be developed. The seventh step is drawing
conclusions. Are our hypotheses true or false? What further study is suggested
by our research? Finally, other researchers will undertake replication
studies.
The basic procedure is
the same for all scientific inquiries and researches. Only techniques may vary
according to the problem under study. However, one thing that needs to be
remembered is that hypotheses are not involved in all researches. Some
researches may only collect the data and develop hypotheses from the analysis
of data. Thus, "anything involving careful objective collecting of
verifiable evidence in search for knowledge is scientific research"
(Horton and Hunt, op.cit.:12).
thank you very much for posting this material. It is very helpfull.
ReplyDeleteReally helped with my exams,thank you
ReplyDeleteVery nice content.Thank you for sharing.
ReplyDeleteCharacteristics of Scientific Research