Section A

Question 2
A colleague of yours wishes to generate a research idea in the area of accounting. He
has examined his own strengths and interests on the basis of his assignments and has
read some review articles, but has failed to find an idea about which he is excited. He
comes and asks you for advice. Suggest two techniques that your colleague could use,
and justify your choices.

Answer 2
There is a range of techniques that can be used to find and select a topic that one
would like to research. They can be thought of as those that are predominantly rational
thinking and those that involve more creative thinking. Two techniques that could
be used are:

Brainstorming
The technique of brainstorming can be used to generate and refine research ideas. It is
best undertaken with a group of people, although one can brain- storm on own.
Brainstorming involves a number of stages:

1. Defining the problem. This will focus on the sorts of ideas you are interested in as
precisely as possible.
2. Asking for suggestions. These will relate to the problem.
3. Recording suggestions. As recorded, needed to be observed by the following rules:
 No suggestion should be criticized or evaluated in any way before all ideas have
been considered.
 All suggestions, however wild, should be recorded and considered.
 As many suggestions as possible should be recorded.
4. Reviewing suggestions. You will seek to explore what is meant by each as you
review these.
5. Analyzing suggestions. Work through the list of ideas and decide which appeal to you
most as research ideas.

The Delphi technique

One approach to this, known as ‘Policy Delphi’, encourages the identification of
refinements or alternatives to an initial research idea. It involves using an informal group
of people, such as some of your classmates or colleagues who are interested in the
initial idea, to generate related ideas, evaluate these and perhaps to arrive at a
consensus around a specific research idea. To use this technique you need:
 Brief the members of the group about the initial research idea.
 At the end of the briefing, encourage group members to seek clarification and
more information as appropriate.
 Ask each member of the group, including the originator of the research idea, to
generate independently up to three alternative research ideas based on the initial
idea.

This study source was downloaded by 100000865526114 from CourseHero.com on 04-13-2023 22:37:56 GMT -05:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/62804737/research-methodologypdf/
  Collect the research ideas in an unedited and non-attributable form and to
distribute them to all members of the group to reflect on.
 Encourage group members to comment on each research idea, including giving
reasons for their opinions.
 A second cycle of steps 2 to 5 to encourage further refinements or new options in
light of what others have said during the first cycle.
 A subsequent cycle of the process until an outcome is reached. This may be a
consensus around a particular research idea.

Section B

Question 1
Why is it important to have a clear focus and a well-formulated review question? What
problems might you encounter if your focus is too broad or too narrow? Why was it
important for Emmanuel to revise his review question?

Answer 1
The review question should be defined at the beginning of your systematic review. A
well formulated review question will help determine inclusion and exclusion criteria, the
creation of search strategy, the collection of data and the presentation of findings. A
sound clinical question:
 Allow to find information quickly.
 Allow to find information that is relevant and valid.
 Provide with a checklist for the main concepts to be included in search strategy.
The question should always be:
 Clear
 Unambiguous
 Structured
It is important to formulate your research question with care so as to avoid missing
relevant studies or collecting a potentially biased result set.

This study source was downloaded by 100000865526114 from CourseHero.com on 04-13-2023 22:37:56 GMT -05:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/62804737/research-methodologypdf/
 A topic is too broad when you find that you have too many different ideas or resources
about that topic. While you want to start the writing process with as many ideas as
possible, you will want to narrow your focus at some point so that you aren't attempting
to do too much in one essay.
A topic is too narrow if you can't find any information about it. Though student writers
most often face the challenge of limiting a topic that is too broad, they occasionally have
to recognize that they have chosen a topic that is too narrow or that they have narrowed
a workable topic too much. If your topic is so narrowed and focused, it can become too
academic or pedantic. If your topic is too narrow, try making it broader by asking
yourself related questions.
If the topic is too broad, you will be overwhelmed with information. If the topic is too
narrow, you may not be able to find enough information for your research paper.

It is important for Emmanuel to revise his review question because the review question
which he formulated made him search 9563 articles which are peer-reviewed academic

This study source was downloaded by 100000865526114 from CourseHero.com on 04-13-2023 22:37:56 GMT -05:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/62804737/research-methodologypdf/
 journals which is clearly too many and when he looks for advice on LinkedIn he got the
advice to focus on industrial accidents rather than all crisis events another advice he
received is to reduce the scope further by focusing on the role of investigations and
Inquiry reports. This produced 319 potentially relevant publications. He felt that this was
manageable.
So, Emmanuel amended his review question to What is the role of investigations and/or
public inquiries in facilitating or inhibiting organisational learning and change after major
industrial accidents?

Question 2
What are the advantages and disadvantages of being systematic in your approach?
What are the advantages and disadvantages of being critical in your approach? How did
Emmanuel balance being both systematic and critical?

Answer 2

‘Systematic’ suggests that research is based on logical relationships and not just beliefs.
Which means research will involve an explanation of the methods used to collect the
data and argue why the results obtained are meaningful, and will explain any limitations
that are associated with them.

The quality of a systematic review is based on the quality of the included studies. If
there are fundamental flaws in the original study's methodology, this flaw will be
perpetuated in the pooled analysis. At times it can be difficult for reviewers to find all
relevant studies and determine which is the main study to be included in the systematic
review. significant and positive research is more likely to be published. This means that
negative or insignificant findings are less likely to be publicly available for inclusion in
the systematic review.

A critical approach was not just about identifying flaws, weaknesses and inconsistencies
in texts but also about offering alternative insights, ideas and explanations. Critical
review of the literature is necessary to help to develop a thorough understanding of, and
insight into, previous research that relates to research questions and objectives. Review
will set research in context by critically discussing and referencing work that has already
been undertaken, drawing out key points and presenting them in a logically argued way,
and highlighting those areas where you will provide fresh insights.
There is no correct structure for a critical review, although it is helpful to think of it as a
funnel in which you start at a more general level prior to narrowing down to your specific
research questions and objectives.

Emmanuel balances both systematic and critical by becoming more sensitive to his own
position and personal beliefs about the topic. He realised that reading and writing
required imagination and creativity. Just like some of the really interesting papers that
he read, Emmanuel tried to look at things in a new way, shed fresh light on texts he was
reading and reveal previously unnoticed connections between ideas by critically and
systematically examining the text. Emanuel decided to keep his original findings section
and added a discussion section that built an argument. Emmanuel also rewrote his

This study source was downloaded by 100000865526114 from CourseHero.com on 04-13-2023 22:37:56 GMT -05:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/62804737/research-methodologypdf/
 introduction section to ensure that he told the reader about his significant ideas early so
that he would capture their interest and motivate them to read the whole document.
critica
Question 3
Emmanuel has decided to produce a case study of the Deepwater Horizon accident for
his research project. How can he use the findings of his Literature Review to inform his
subsequent data collection?

Answer 3
Here Emmanuel has decided to produce a case study on the Deepwater Horizon
accidents for research project so when he studies the relevant data found on primary
sources and secondary sources and create a detailed research Literature Review
based on his findings he can define various research questions which he wants to focus
on and can also define the data collection sources to support the research.
The word data refers to a body of information. This body of information can be extracted
from many sources such as words, numbers, images, hyperlinks, audio, and video.
Therefore, the information that Emmanuel collects to inform a literature review
represents data. It stands to reason that the literature review process can be viewed as
a data collection tool that is, as a means of collecting a body of information pertinent to
a topic of interest. As a data collection tool, the literature review involves activities such
as identifying, recording, understanding, meaning-making, and transmitting information.
The literature review process is actualized through data collection. In its optimal form,
the literature review represents a formal data collection process wherein information is
gathered in a comprehensive way.
Literature review is the review of related literature that offers a solid theoretical
foundation for the research. A researcher creates the academic vacuum one's research
is intended to fill by reviewing the related literature, justifying the need of the research.
However, a researcher can extensively analyze some important documents, scholarly
articles, journal and book publications to complement the findings generated from the
use of data collecting instruments like interview, observation or questionnaire. This is
aimed at triangulating the findings or providing a different lens or perspectives to
validate the findings from the other instrument. This is known as document analysis.

This study source was downloaded by 100000865526114 from CourseHero.com on 04-13-2023 22:37:56 GMT -05:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/62804737/research-methodologypdf/
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)