Pure or Applied Research

 To Acquire or Not to Acquire: That is the Question

Companies are very interested in acquiring other firms even

when the latter operate in totally unrelated realms of
business. For example, Gencore Industries manufacturing
asphalt plants for road construction acquired Ingersoll-Rand
in 1996, and later acquired yet another company engaged
in the business of food processing. Such acquisitions are
claimed to “work miracles”. However, given the volatility
of the stock market and the slowing down of business,
many companies are not sure whether such acquisitions
involve too much risk. At the same time, they also wonder
if they are missing out on a great business opportunity if
they fail to take such risk. Some research is needed here!
Pure or Applied Research
Reasons for Absenteeism

A university professor wanted to

analyze in depth the reasons for
absenteeism of employees in
organizations. Fortunately, a
company within 20 miles of the
campus employed her as a
consultant to study that very issue.
Pure or Applied Research
Effects of Nasal Spray on Flu

A research scientist surveys 1,000

employees in different
organizational settings to study the
efficacy of several types of nasal
sprays in controlling the flu virus.
He subsequently publishes his
findings in a highly respected
medical journal.
Pure or Applied Research
 "Researchers from Spain have created a ‘smart’ car belt
which continuously monitors the driver’s heart and breath
rate and produces sound alerts when it “understands”
that the driver is going to fall asleep at the wheel. The
system called “HARKEN” can save lives if the driver is
tired.

 HARKEN is based on “smart” fabrics with incorporated

electronic sensors, which are placed both in the belt and
in the driver’s seat. These materials are made of fibers
and filaments with electrical properties and are mixed
with the ordinary materials that are used for belts and
seat covers. The “smart” system adds to the long list of
systems and technologies which are being developed
every day and are aimed to turn cars into advanced
‘living’ organisms..."
 Formulating Research
Problem
• First and most important step
• Quality and relevance of the research
relies on it
• Key to formulating the idea of what
needs to be investigated
• Determines the methodology and design
of the project:
– Descriptive and qualitative
– Correlational and quantitative
• The clearer the research question, the
easier the next steps
Sources of research
problems
Look closely in your academic
field or discipline
Use four Ps:
◦ People
◦ Problems
◦ Programmes
◦ Phenomena
Apply to qualitative and
quantitative research
Steps in formulating a research
problem
Step 1: Identify the main subject
area
Step 2: Dissect into sub-areas
Step 3: Select sub-areas of most
interest
Step 4: Raise research questions
Step 5: Formulate objectives
Step 6: Assess objectives
Step 7: Double-check
How to formulate research
objectives
Goals that inform what will be
achieved
Main objective – overall statement
◦ Describing the main focus
Sub-objectives – specific aspects
◦ Clear and unambiguous wording
◦ Numerically listed
◦ Each contains one aspect
◦ Starts with action word: ‘to find out’, ‘to
explore’
Characteristics of
objectives
Steps in formulating a research problem -
Alcoholism
The study population
Second important aspect to the
research
Who constitutes the study
population?
Select appropriate participants
from the study population
Definition may need to be
narrowed down
Be as specific as possible
Establishing operational
definitions
Explain working definitions
specific to study
Define specific terms, meanings
to concepts used
These may differ to dictionary or
legal definitions
Avoids ambiguity and confusion
Develops a framework for the
study
Formulating a research
problem in qualitative
research
Different to quantitative research which
is specific, narrow and the framework
confines the research (tests
hypotheses)
Qualitative research is flexible, open,
freedom to include new ideas at a later
stage:
Research problem can be reformulated
Inductive reasoning
Flexible conceptual framework to
increase depth and richness of data
Development of
Research Methodology
Sound Reasoning
Argument
 An argument is an effort to justify a
particular conclusion. The justification
should be strong enough to persuade
others that your conclusion is the correct
one.

 Everyargument consists of premises and

a conclusion. The premises are particular
statements that provide the reasons or
evidence supporting your conclusion. The
conclusion is, of course, the position that
you are arguing for.
Inferences and Arguments
Reasoning is a special mental activity
called inferring, what can also be
called making (or performing)
inferences.

To infer is to draw conclusions from

premises.
 You see smoke and infer that there is a fire.
 You count 19 persons in a group that originally
had 20, and you infer that someone is missing.
Inferences and Arguments
 The reasoning process may be thought
of as beginning with input (premises,
data, etc.) and producing output
(conclusions).
 Inferences are made on the basis of
various sorts of things – data, facts,
information, states of affairs.
 An argument is a collection of
statements, one of which is designated
as the conclusion, and the remainder of
which are designated as the premises.
Statement
A statement is a declarative
sentence, which is to say a sentence
that is capable of being true or false.
 it is raining
 I am hungry
 2+2 = 4
 God exists
On the other hand the following are
examples of sentences that are not
statements.
 are you hungry?
 shut the door, please
Sound Reasoning
Inductive/Deductive
Process
Deductive logic versus
Inductive logic
there is smoke;
therefore, there is fire.

there were 20 people originally;

there are 19 persons currently;
therefore, someone is missing
Induction and Deduction
Deductive
 Deductive Logic
 All squares are rectangles. All rectangles have
four sides. Logic, therefore, tells you that all
squares have four sides.
 It is dangerous to drive when it is snowing. It is
snowing now. Logic tells you that it would be
dangerous to drive right now.
 All dogs have a good sense of smell. Bailey is a
dog. Therefore, deductive reasoning logic tells
you that Bailey has a good sense of smell.
 All seniors are bad drivers. Mr. Jones is 70 years
old and you won't let him drive your car
because you think he is an unsafe driver.
 When it rains the trees get wet. The trees are
wet this morning, so it rained last night.
Inductive
Inductive Logic
 An umbrella prevents you from getting wet in the rain. Ashley
took her umbrella and she did not get wet. In this case, you
could use inductive reasoning to offer an opinion that it was
probably raining. Your conclusion, however, would not
necessarily be accurate because Ashley would have remained
dry whether it rained and she had an umbrella, or whether it
did not rain at all.

 Every three year old you see at the park every afternoon
spends most of their time crying and screaming. Your
conclusion is that all three year olds spend their afternoon
screaming.

 Every house that burned down on the block was caused by

faulty wiring. You conclusion is that all homes on the block
have faulty wiring.
Combining Induction and
Deduction
 You promote a product but sales don’t increase. (Fact1)

 You ask the question “Why didn’t sales increase?”

(Induction)

 You infer a conclusion (hypothesis) to answer the

question: The promotion was poorly executed.
(Hypothesis)

 You use this hypothesis to conclude (deduce) that sales

will not increase during a poorly executed promotion. You
know from experience that ineffective promotion will not
increase sales. (Deduction1)

 We deduce that a well-executed promotion will result in

increased sales. (Deduction2)

 We run an effective promotion, and sales increase.

(Fact2)
Combining Induction and
Deduction
Induction and deduction are used
together in research reasoning.
Induction occurs when we observe a
fact and ask, “Why is this?” In answer
to this question, we advance a
tentative explanation (hypothesis).
The hypothesis is plausible if it
explains the event or condition (fact)
that prompted the question.
Deduction is the process by which we
test whether the hypothesis is capable
of explaining the fact.
Concepts to Practice
Research studies show that
heavy smokers have a higher
rate of lung cancer than do
nonsmokers; therefore heavy
smoking causes lung cancer.
Show me a person who goes to
church regularly, and I will show
you a reliable worker.
Concepts to Practice
1. If smoking causes lung cancer, heavy smokers
will have a higher lung cancer rate than non-
smokers.
2. Heavy smokers do have a higher lung cancer
rate.
3. Heavy smoking causes lung cancer. (Induction)

1. If a person goes to church regularly, this person

is a reliable worker.
2. “Bob” goes to church regularly.
3. “Bob” is a reliable worker. (Deduction)
Epistemology
Epistemology addresses the “nature
of knowledge, its possibility, scope
and general basis” (Hamlyn, 1995).
“Epistemology is concerned with
providing a philosophical grounding
for deciding what kinds of
knowledge are possible, and how we
can ensure they are both adequate
and legitimate” (Maynard, 1994).
Paradigms of Research
A paradigm is a “worldview” or a set of
assumptions about how things work.
Rossman & Rollis define paradigm as
“shared understandings of reality”
Frames of reference we use to organize
our observations and reasoning.
Often implicit, assumed, taken for
granted.
New paradigms proposes unique ways
of seeing and explaining things that
then take hold
PARADIGM SHIFT

Thomas Kuhn wrote The Structure

of Scientific Revolution, and
fathered, defined and popularized
the concept of "paradigm shift”.
It's a revolution, a transformation,
a sort of metamorphosis. It just
does not happen, but rather it is
driven by agents of change.
Scientific Method

Scientificmethod is a way to ask

and answer scientific questions by
making observations and doing
experiments.
Steps of the scientific method are to:
 Ask a Question
 Do Background Research
 Construct a Hypothesis
 Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment
 Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion
 Communicate Your Results
Flow diagram of Scientific
Method.
Hallmarks of Scientific
Research
Hallmarks or main distinguishing
characteristics of scientific
research:
 Purposiveness
 Rigor
 Testability
 Replicability
 Precision and Confidence
 Objectivity
 Generalizability
 Parsimony
The Friendly Telephone
Company
Customer complaints were mounting, and letters of complaint
regarding the problems they experienced with the residential
telephone lines were constantly pouring in at the Friendly
Telephone Company. The company wanted to pinpoint the
specific problems and take corrective action.

Researchers were called in, and they spoke to a number of

customers, noting down the nature of the specific problems
they faced. Since the problem had to be attended to very
quickly, they developed a theoretical base, collected relevant
detailed information from a sample of 100 customers, and
analyzed the data. The results are expected to be fairly
accurate with at least an 85% chance of success in problem
solving. The researchers will make recommendations to the
company based on the results of data analysis.
Assignment 1
 Identify a full-text research paper published recently on a
topic of your interest that is related to your research topic.
 Provide a written summary (1-2 pages, double spaced,
times roman font) of your answers and answer the
following questions.
 You’ll be asked to give a brief oral presentation (5 – 7 min)
regarding your article and your answers to the following
questions:
 What is the research problem?
 What is the purpose statement?
 What were the delimitations of this study?
 What were some potential limitations of this study?
 What were the initial hypotheses for this study?
 Where the hypotheses rejected or accepted?
 What was the overall conclusion of this paper?
 If you were to replicate this study, describe how you
would do it ?
Questions
1. Write two new conclusion statements
by using deductive and inductive
reasoning.
2. Re-write the title using 5 – 8 words.
3. Re-write the title using 15 – 18 words.