We have finally come to the end of this long series on research design and how to write a research script. In the last column, we looked at how we could articulate our voice through the argument that we put forward in our research script. We had said that our argument must be an answer to the research question, it must entail evidence from our object of research, and finally, it must fill the gap in the literature which gave the research question. It also in a broad sense provides a way forward with regard to the problem in the world with which the research began. In doing so, we have truly contributed to both the real world, the lived world where we began with its problem, as well as to the world of text, literature and the discipline and field of study whose knowledge boundaries we have advanced through our new findings. In this last episode of the series on research, I want to once again look at the big picture and then give a few hints on how to best write out our research script and finally, how we can publish it and take our research findings into the world.
Let's look back at the big picture of what a research project entails. We begin with the real world, our lived world, our society, our planet, our earth, our communities, our families, our social structures, and we look at a significant problem that has value and meaning for us. That's the beginning of research. A problem significant for the researcher, which is us, in order for us to invest time and effort to find a solution. For some people, the problem is so significant, they would spend an entire lifetime working on various iterations of solutions. For others, if the problem is superficial, after a brief period of engagement, one gives up on this hunt for solutions.
Therefore, this problem has to be ontological. It must come from within the researcher who genuinely believes that there is something broken in the world that needs to be fixed, something that needs to be resolved.
The second stage of research involves us getting into the world of literature, the world of text. We find out the discipline or field of study within which this problem is best addressed. We look for the technical vocabulary within that discipline for the problem. And that is what we call a thematic. With the discovery of our thematic, our research truly begins. This is our first key into formal research – identifying our thematic. Once we have got hold of our thematic within a certain discipline or field of study, then we dig deep. We hunt for past sources, academic sources, and credible research sources. And we look at how this thematic has been studied in the past within the discipline. We trace the historical discourse on the thematic. We identify the key moments when there have been changes in the study on the thematic. And we thus get a clear understanding of the past literature and research on our thematic. Hence, it is called a literature review.
Once we have done a historical review of literature on our thematic, we come to the current times, the contemporary scholarship on our thematic. And we look for the latest and most significant debate. Why a debate? Because a debate means there are two sides, two different views, which are in conflict. And the answer to that conflict has not yet been found. Just like discovering the thematic was our first key for research, the second key is the discovery of this latest significant debate on the thematic. The conflict reveals that there is an unsettled intellectual dispute on the thematic. So, we very carefully look at both the positions, the debate between them, the strengths of each position, as well as the limitations. And then we look to see the gap that exists which both these positions are trying to fill and being unable to do so. Hence by critiquing both these different schools of thought, we would be able to carve out the gap that is there in the literature. And this must be contemporary, as recent as possible, so that we can be sure that no one else has tried to fill the gap. With this, the red bucket, as we called it, the questioning discourse, the red light of the traffic signals, metaphorically, has done its bit for research. Now we need to proceed in two other directions.
The green bucket represents the object of research, the field of study, from which we will get answers for our research question, and the yellow bucket, or traffic light, that gives us both the methods and the methodology for research. So, we began by identifying the appropriate object of research, which had solutions or insights to respond to the research question that we have raised. And we have a hunch that in that body of knowledge, whether it's data about a text, a society, a community, or an experiment that generates data, we know that its analysis would give us insights to answer the research question.
Once we have identified the object of research and we have identified the type of object it is, we will be able to finalize our methodology. We said the methodology is of two types. We used the metaphor of eyes and hands. Hands are the methods required to collect data and analyse it.
And that is dependent on the type of object of research that we have finalised. For example, if we are studying a living community, then our hands and methods would be anthropological, ethnographical, and participant-observer methods of data collection. This would entail qualitative, semi-structured, open-ended interviews and observations.
All of these methods would be a means to collect data. On the other hand, if our object of research is an experiment that needs to be done, from which data needs to be collected, then our method would be a scientific experiment that we need to set up and collect data outputs from it, whose analysis will give us insights. Once we have got hold of those insights, in the last column, we looked at how we can shape them into an argument which then becomes the new knowledge that we add to the existing discourse on the thematic.
Once the research is complete, we need to write it up. How do we write it up? There are standard outlines for how to write a research script. Every research script will obviously have an introduction and a conclusion. It will also have a section on the background of the research project, which gives the context of the initial problem and its significance, and the area of study is demarcated. Then, there is an important section on literature review, which introduces the thematic within the disciplinary literature, traces its historical development and presents the contemporary debate on it. From this both the gap and the research question are articulated. The next section is the methodology section, where both the methods used, the operations of collecting and analyzing the data are shared, and the data is presented, and its analysis is shown. In the last major section called results and findings, the main insights that are obtained from this research are described, and the insights are connected to the research questions, thus answering them. The final section is the conclusion, where the entire story is set in summary form.The limitations of the research are also shared, and future direction is given on how this research can be taken forward. Thus, we find that this generic structure captures the narrative of our entire research.
I would like to end the series with what’s next. You have worked very hard, perhaps for six to twelve months. You have conducted fieldwork, collected data, analysed it, engaged with texts, read extensively, and completed a literature review. Finally, you've written it all up, with perhaps 5,000 to 8,000 words. Now is the time to look for a good conference in your field of study where you can present your research findings and seek publication. If your work makes a significant contribution, you might even consider submitting it to a journal in your field. Yes, research is fundamentally driven by one's curiosity and the quest for knowledge and solutions. It stems from a desire to transform the world and an intellectual mission to seek new insights. However, for this knowledge to reach those in the field who can utilise it to facilitate the change you aspire to achieve, it is essential that the research gets published.
Dr Brainerd Prince is the Associate Professor and Director, Centre for Thinking, Language and Communication, Plaksha University.
