RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Dr.roy
FOUNDATION OF RESEARCH
 KNOWLEDGE
• By Plato:
Knowledge is justified true belief
Belief must be both true and supported by
strong evidence to qualify as a knowledge.

Knowledge is true belief supported by credible

justification.
 STRENGTH OF JUSTIFICATION

• I hear water drops hitting the window, and see

them trickling down the glass.
• My friend enters shaking a wet umbrella and
leaving wet footprints across the floor while
complaining about the rain.
• I looked outside and found it is raining
everywhere (wet buildings, trees, water on
the roads)
Are senses trustable to gain knowledge?
KNOWLEDGE REALITY
THE WORLD (OBJECTIVE)

VS. (CONSTRUCTIONIST)

MY WORLD (SUBJECTIVE)
 RESEARCH PROCESS
EPISTEMOLO THEORETICAL METHODOLOGY METHODS
GY PERSPECTIVE
Objectivism Positivism (and post- Experimental Research Sampling
positivism) Survey research Measurement and scaling
Questionnaire

Constructioni Interpretivism Ethnography Observation

sm • Symbolic Phenomenological • Participant
Subjectivism Interactionism research • Non – participant
• Phenomenology Grounded Theory Interview
• Hermeneutics Heuristic theory Focus group
Critical Inquiry Action research Case Study
Feminism Discourse Analysis Life History
Postmodernism Feminist standpoint Narrative
Etc. research Visual ethnographic methods
Etc. Statistical Analysis
Data reduction
Theme identification
Comparative Analysis
Cognitive mapping
Interpretative methods
Document Analysis
Content Analysis
Conversation analysis
Etc.
• First, what methodologies , and methods will
we be employing in the research we propose
to do?

• Second, how do we justify this choice and use

of methodologies and methods ?
 EXPANSION OF ELEMENTS
• What methods do we propose to use?
• What methodology governs our choice and
use of methods ?
• What theoretical perspective lies behind the
methodology in question ?
• What epistemology informs this theoretical
perspective ?
 RESEARCH PROCESS
EPISTEMOLO THEORETICAL METHODOLOGY METHODS
GY PERSPECTIVE
Objectivism Positivism (and post- Experimental Research Sampling
positivism) Survey research Measurement and scaling
Questionnaire

Constructioni Interpretivism Ethnography Observation

sm • Symbolic Phenomenological • Participant
Subjectivism Interactionism research • Non – participant
• Phenomenology Grounded Theory Interview
• Hermeneutics Heuristic theory Focus group
Critical Inquiry Action research Case Study
Feminism Discourse Analysis Life History
Postmodernism Feminist standpoint Narrative
Etc. research Visual ethnographic methods
Etc. Statistical Analysis
Data reduction
Theme identification
Comparative Analysis
Cognitive mapping
Interpretative methods
Document Analysis
Content Analysis
Conversation analysis
Etc.
 RESEARCH METHODS
The techniques or procedures used to gather and
analyze data related to some research question or
hypothesis.

It incudes all those activities which are involved in

gathering and analyzing data.
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The strategy, plan of action, process or design lying

behind the choice and use of particular methods and
linking the choice and use of methods to the desired
outcomes.
 THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE

The philosophical stance informing the

methodology and thus providing a context for
the process and grounding its logic and criteria.
 EPISTEMOLOGY

The theory of knowledge embedded in the

theoretical perspective and thereby in the
methodology.
KNOWLEDGE REALITY

THEORY
SIMPIFIED REPRESENTATION OF A LIMITED PART
OF THE REALITY
• Theory is a human effort to provide
representation of reality.

• The representation is used to provide an

orderly depiction of some phenomena.

• Theory has its own scope and boundary

conditions.
 Induction Process
• Induction is whereby a general law is
established by accumulating particular
instances – Verification
• We try to regard truth as known from the
experience.
• Context is important.
 Deduction Process : Falsification
• Scientific theories are never fully justifiable
or verifiable but nevertheless testable .
• The purpose is not to prove a theory but to
prove it wrong.
• If theory survives every attempt of
refutation the theory can be provisionally
accepted as true.
• Every scientific statement is tentative
forever.
• Content is important.
Once Inductive Theory building has occurred,
one is in a position to make deductions from the
theory and apply them to new situations.

Theory Building and Theory testing go hand in

hand.
 INDUCTION vs DEDUCTION
RESEARCH PLANNING DEDUCTIVE INDUCTIVE
Theory- research Structured; logically Open, interactive
Relationship sequential phases Induction (theory
Deduction (theory emerges from
precedes observation)
observation)

Function of the Fundamental Auxiliary

literature

Researcher-Subject Neutral, detached, Empathetic

Interaction scientific observation identification with
the perspective of
the subject studied
 INDUCTION vs DEDUCTION
DATA COLLECTION DEDUCTIVE INDUCTIVE
(Passive) (Active)

Research Design Structured: closed Unstructured, open,

constructed in the
course of research

Representativeness Statistically Limited cases not

representative statistically
sample representative

Nature of Data “Hard”, Objective “Soft”, rich and deep

and standardized
 INDUCTION vs DEDUCTION
DATA ANALYSIS DEDUCTIVE INDUCTIVE
Object of the analysis The variables The individual

Aim of the Explain Understand the

Analysis variation subject

Mathematical Used Not used

and statistical
technique
Theory Building vs Theory Testing
EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
 CONSIDER THESE COURSES OF ACTION
1. An elementary school principal establishes a set of difficult teacher goals to
improve students' academic performance.
2. A medical director has staff members make suggestions anonymously to
encourage participation.
3. A company president joins an alliance with other firms in the industry to
improve returns from research and development expenditures.
4. Parents take their children to a concert to stimulate an interest in music.
5. A union leader calls for a strike vote to increase members' solidarity.
6. A basketball coach has team members take dancing lessons to improve
agility.
7. A director of marketing recommends that a product be renamed,
repackaged, and increased in price to attract more affluent customers.
8. A captain in the Salvation Army posts names of the bell ringers who obtain
the greatest contributions each day to encourage bell ringer solicitations.
9. A human resource manager proposes a flexible benefit plan to reduce
employee turnover.
Things in common :
• Organizational context
• Courses of action that are undertaken as a
result of expected relationships between two
or more factors.
• Each of the expected relationships is causal. In
causal relationships one factor influences
another.
CAUSAL RELATIOSHIP OF ILLUSTRATIVE
ACTIONS
 EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
It addresses expected relationships through the
systematic study of relationships between scores
obtained from cases on measures.
EMPIRICAL RESEARCH COMPONENTS
RESEARCH ACTIVITIES
 DEFINITIONS
• Causal Relationship : When variation in one factor is responsible for
variation in another.
• Empirical research : Systematic study of relationships between
scores obtained from cases on measures.
• Cases: Entities investigated in research
• Measures : Instruments used to obtain scores from participants.
• Scores: Numerical information about cases obtained on measures.
• Measurement : Instruments used to obtain scores from participants.
• Research design : Overall plan of study, establishes procedures to
obtain cases for study and to determine how scores are obtained on
measures of cases.
• Analyses: Used to describe scores on single measures and to
identify relationships that may exist between scores across different
measures; typically involve the use of statistics.
 RESEARCH VARIABLES
• Variables : They are characteristics of objects or
events that can take on two or more values.
• Eg: Age, Height and Weight are variables used
to describe people.
• No. of employees, No. of accounts outstanding,
gross receipts and total assets are variables
used to describe organization.
Is there a relationship between education and
financial success ?

Is it a BELIEF or KNOWLEDGE ?
CONCEPTUAL & OPERATIONAL VARIABLES
CONCEPTUAL VARIABLES / CONSTRUCTS

“I know that education leads to financial

success. “

It’s a BELIEF

They are mental definitions of objects or

events that can vary.
 OPERATIONAL VARIABLES

• Empirical research obtains scores from cases on

measures , known as Operational variables.

• Variables are made operational by the measures

used to obtain scores from the cases studied.

• No. of years they have attended the school

DEPENDENT & INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
 DEPENDENT VARIABLES

• Outcomes or Consequences
• Researchers seek to understand/predict
 INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
• Cause
• Predictor variables
• Influence dependent variables
Why some athletic team succeed
more than others ?
 CAUSALITY or PREDICTION ?

Birds often begin to sing shortly before

sunrise
EMPIRICAL RESEARCH MODEL
EMPIRICAL RESEARCH MODEL
Causal
Conceptual
relationship
Its lighten to
show
tentativeness
EMPIRICAL RESEARCH MODEL

Refers to the correspondence between scores on

measures of X and Y. It is solid to signal that this
relationship can actually be observed using statistical
procedure.
EMPIRICAL RESEARCH MODEL

It signals a causal
relationship
between X and Y.
Is it reasonable to think that the relationship
is causal ?
 INTERNAL VALIDITY

When variation in scores on a measure of an

independent variable is responsible for variation
in scores on a measure of a dependent variable.
 INTERNAL CAUSAL CRITERIA
• Independent and dependent variables are
meaningfully related.
• Variation in the independent variable is
contemporaneous with, or precedes variation
in dependent variable.
• There is a reasonable causal explanation for
the observed relationship and there are no
plausible alternative explanations for it.
RESEARCH EXAMPLE USING THE MODEL
• Work Experience (X’) has a positive impact on work
attitudes (Y’).
• This expectation is studied on a group of managerial
employees in a public – sector organizations.
• Work experience is measured by the number of
years participants have worked for this organization
(X) and work attitudes (Y) are measured with a
questionnaire that managers complete.
 HYPOTHESIS IS OBTAINED, IF THREE
CONDITIONS ARE MET
• Participants who have worked for the organization
longer provide more favorable work attitude scores,
on average, than those who have worked less time.
• Evidence is obtained to suggest that the relationship
is internally valid. It must be reasonable to suppose
the relationship observed results because experience
scores cause work attitude scores among the
participants.
• There is evidence that the measures X and Y validly
represent their respective constructs X’ and Y’.
 Is it reasonable to suppose that scores on
measures represent their respective constructs ?
 CONSTRUCT VALIDITY
When there is high correspondence between
the scores obtained on a measure and the
mental definition of the construct it is designed
to represent.
EMPIRICAL RESEARCH MODEL

Lines b1 and b2 are

lighten to show that
construct validity is also
tentative
CONSTRUCT VALIDATION
GENERALIZING FROM THE MODEL
STATISTICAL GENEALIZATIONS
EXTERNAL GENERALIZATIONS
 CONSTRUCT DEFINITIONS
• Construct valid measures yield numerical
values that accurately represent the
characteristics. Eg. 5 means extremely
satisfied
• Construct valid measurement results in a close
correspondence between the construct of
interest and the scores provided by the
measure.
 CONSTRUCT DOMAIN
• Identify the nature of the construct by
specifying its meaning.
• It speaks to what is included in the construct.
• It also speaks what is not included in the
definition.
 NOMOLOGICAL NETWORKS
• It specifies how values of the construct should
differ across cases and conditions.
• How the construct of interest relates to other
constructs in a broader web of relationships
called a nomological network.
CONSTRUCT DEFINITION ILLUSTRATION
• Suppose a researcher seeks to measure
satisfaction that owners experience with
personal laptop or desktop computers.

IV or DV ?
The researcher defines construct as :
HYPOTHETICAL COMPUTER SATISFACTION QUESTIONNAIRE
MEASUREMENT ERRORS
Observed Score = True Score + Error

Random Error Systematic Error

(average-out) (contamination /
deficiency)
CONSTRUCT VALIDITY CHALLENGES
 SOURCES OF CONSTRUCT INVALIDITY
• Scores on a measure may be less than construct
valid because of deficiency.

• Scores may be less than construct valid because

of systematic contamination.

• Scores on a measure are less than construct valid

to the extent that they include random errors.
 ERRORS IN MEASUREMENT

Random Errors Systematic Errors

Reliability Validity
 CONSTRUCT VALIDITY
• It is conceived within a theoretical context.

• Construct validity is concerned with the extent

to which a particular measure relates to other
measures consistent with theoretically derived
hypotheses concerning the concept
 CONTENT / FACE VALIDITY

• A measure is content valid when its items are

judged to accurately reflect the domain of the
construct as defined conceptually.
 RELIABILITY
• It refers to the systematic or consistent
variance of a measure.
• It indicates the degree to which measurement
scores are free of random errors.
• Internal consistency
• Inter rater reliability
• Stability reliability
Is only Reliability sufficient for
construct validity ?
 CONVERGENT VALIDITY
• High correspondence between scores from
two or more different measures of the same
construct.
 DISCRIMINANT VALIDITY
• When scores from measures of different
constructs do not converge.
• Measure of uniqueness of the measure.
 CRITERION – RELATED VALIDITY

• It is present when scores on a measure are

related to scores on another measure that
better reflects the construct of interest.
RESEARCH DESIGN FOUNDATIONS
 CAUSAL CHALLENGES

• Internal validity is present when variation in

an independent variable is responsible for
variation in a dependent variable.
 INTERNAL CAUSAL CRITERIA
• Independent and dependent variables are
meaningfully related.
• Variation in the independent variable is
contemporaneous with, or precedes variation
in dependent variable.
• There is a reasonable causal explanation for
the observed relationship and there are no
plausible alternative explanations for it.
 CAUSAL DIRECTION

Reverse – Causal direction

Independent (X) Dependent (Y)

Leader Behavior Subordinate Behavior

 CAUSAL DIRECTION

Joint Causation : Simultaenity

Independent (X) Dependent (Y)

Leader Behavior Subordinate Behavior

SPURIOUS RELATIONSHIPS
 MEDIATOR
• Mediator or Intervening variable come
between an independent and a dependent
variable.

• If a mediator is present , then some or all the

influence of the independent variable
operates indirectly on the dependent variable
through the mediator.
MEDIATORS
MEDIATORS
 MODERATOR
• Moderator or Interaction variables defines the
strength and/or direction of relationships
between independent and dependent
variables .
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
RESEARCH DESIGNS
 SETS OF DECISION FOR RSEARCH DESIGN

• Restrict the range

• Comparison of groups
• Causal direction
• Random assignment
THANK YOU