Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

METHODS: REASEARCH - Coggle Diagram

- - - - What relation researcher has with the research? How do we discover new things? What approach you take to your research subject?
      - ETIC
        
        Outsiders view
        
        Measure, observation without touching it.
      - EMIC
        
        Subject, interacting with people in order to understand
        
        Influence of researcher is acknowledge, embraced, avoided
        
        In-depth understanding
    - - How knowledge is discovered and analysed?
      - METHODS is not same
      - PHENOMENOLOGICAL STUDY
        
        RELATIVISM + EMIC
        
        Specific information -> Patterns
        
        Qualitative, Inductive reasoning
      - EXPERIMENTAL METHODOLOGY
        
        REALISM + ETIC
        
        Objective, measured.
        
        Quantative, Deductive reasoning
      - POSITIVISM
        
        METHODS
        
        Experiments
        
        Comparative method -> Durkheim - Suicide
        
        Surveys
        
        Non-participant observation
        
        Other ex) Crime & Education statistics, Social Attitude Surveys.
        
        LIMITATIONS
        
        Lack validity, answers what they do but doesn't answer why
        
        Ignores individuals when focuses on structural forces.
        
        Too fixed, doesn't gain insight. Opinions numerals, no meanings.
        
        STRENGHTS
        
        Quantative data -> objective and scientific
        
        Realibility -> Can be replicated & checked
        
        Causality & Correlation
        
        Macro-level allows generalisations of different groups (Preffered by NGO's and Goverments)
        
        WHAT IT IS?
        
        Social facts can measured and quantified objectively, natural science way. Can be replicated
        
        Durkheim. Macro-perspective, Quantative data, Etic.
        
        Study of social facts in a systematic and scientific way -> behaviours and actions of people .
      - INTERPRETIVISM
        
        STRENGHTS
        
        Validity, qualitative -> uncovers meanings and motivation.
        
        Giving voice to those unheard
        
        Gains an insight into hard-to-reach groups.
        
        LIMITATIONS
        
        Lacks objectivity -> Influenced too much by researchers interpretations
        
        Small-scale -> Hard to generalise.
        
        Difficult replictate -> Lack rebiality
        
        Seen as unscientific.
        
        METHODS
        
        Secondary sources
        
        Journals, diaries, media reports
        
        Personal / historical documents.
        
        Surveys
        
        Open questionnaires
        
        Interviews
        
        Observation. participant.
        
        What is is?
        
        Insight into experiences of individuals and groups
        
        Researcher need to develop empathy with their subject -> to better understand.
        
        Understanding the interpretations and meanings people give to actions.
        
        Micro-perspective, qualitative, subjective, individuals unique, cannot be studied scientifically.
    - - BELIEFS / NATURE ABOUT REALITY
        
        REALISM
        
        One truth, generalizable
        
        Doesn't change
        
        Measured objectively
        
        RELATIVISM
        
        Multiple realities exists
        
        Truth evolves and changes
        
        Shaped by context, go deep and talk
        
        May use in similar context.
      - Impacts every decision made in the study
- - - - Quantative, critical realism
      - Careful observation
      - VS. POSITIVISM
      - Can be falsivied.
    - - Understanding the world
      - Qualitative
      - Multiple participant meanings, cultural and historical influence
      - Multiple truths, socially constructed
    - - Voice to miniorities
      - Change orientated
      - justice, effiecy
      - Political, life or participants
    - - Consequences of actions
      - Problem-centered, pluralistic.
      - Mixed methods
      - Use of ontology, methodology based on the problem
  - - - Identify variables, explore it.
      - Initial research into a hypothetical or theoretical idea
      - What is happening?
      - A) Taking well defined theories and applying them in your area
      - B) Developing your own theories from a scratch.
      - Most usebul for university student
      - Understanding the relatively new phenomenon of college students’ addictions to their electronic gadgets.
    - - How things work together?
      - Attempts to explore and explain while providing additional information about the topic.
      - Correletation between variables. Decstibe or define the topic at hand.
      - A lot of data together. What kind of data to gather, what do I need to look for? (thanks to exploratory we know on this stage better)
      - Aim to describe patterns in how many hours students use gadgets or which sorts of gadgets students tend to use most regularly.
    - - Why something is happening?
      - Causality
      - Tries to explain relationships between variables
      - Builds on both exploratory and descriptive designs.
      - Aim to understand why students become addicted. Does the addiction have anything to do with their family histories, extracurricular hobbies and activities?
    - - RESULTS are called FINDINGS
      - Descriptive: Something is happening - what it is that is going on? How people manage with what is going on? / Deductive, Abductive
      - Exploratory: What is going on? Is there something going on? / Inductive
      - Explanatory: Why? Not often is qualitative ways, hard to generalize. / Deductive, Abductive
      - Why choose these solutions? What is the new problem that comes up?
      - Exploring complexity, entanglement of practices, meanings and structures of individuals or groups.
    - - Descriptive: How it is being tweeted per location? (Deductive)
      - Explanatory: Why some functions generate more retweets and replies? -> New Hypothesis?
      - Exploratory: What type of data you can gather?
    - - Concurent
      - Cyclical
      - Sequential
  - - - OBSERVING
        
        Recording observations while participating
      - TALKING
        
        How researches are intercating with participants?
        
        Goal is to understand perspectives, focus group.
      - COLLECTING
        
        Gathering existing objects (text, visuals, etc)
        
        Discourse analysis
        
        No straight access to the group
      - Designed in relation to research objective
      - Systematic data collection
      - Positioned researcher
    - - Concurrent
        
        Many same time, more robust.
      - Transformative
        
        Doing research that has an action focus -> making an intervention to change the world
      - Sequential
        
        Quantive 2. Qualitative
    - - Survey
        
        Pros: Time efficient, Designed to get desired response
        
        Cons: May get biased responses, wording interpretations of Q.
        
        Keys: Randomly selected people
      - Observational study
        
        Keys: Randomly selected ppl
        
        Pros: Can aquire more data (actions, reactions)
        
        Cons: Time consuming, difficult to observe. No control group
        
        No invervention from researcher
      - Experiment
        
        Cons: Time consuming, may not be ethical
        
        Pros: Reduced biases (control group), causality -> deeper understanding of the treatment.
        
        Key: Randomly selected ppl, split into groups -> dirrefent treatment ( plasibo)
    - - Training & Research Community
        
        Peers, colleques, the community we address
      - Real-World limitations
        
        Time we have, fundings, priorities.
      - Research philosophy, premise, problem & objectives.
- - - - HYPOTHESE -> EXAMINATIONS -> LOGICAL CONCLUSION
      - A = B, B = C, A = C
      - THEORY -> DATA
      - Hypothese has to be correct (spider has 8 legs).
      - Most likeliest for bachelor. (takes less time)
      - Find theories and try to apply them to a specific phenomena. Data (your own) will then approve / disapprove the theory.
      - Can come up with something new anyway.
    - - Incomplete observations -> Likeliest explanation
      - DATA -> THEORY (more commplicated)
      - ex) Medical diagnosis, criminal scene
      - Can change if: More likely explanation, other observations (data).
      - Almost like inductive, not all the data, just enough to formulate theories and make presumptions.
      - Why? Premise & Conclusion.
      - Not supposed to be deductive valid
      - Important critical thinking skill.
      - Good explanations: 1. FIT what we already know. 2. SIMPLE is better than complicated one.
      - Challenge: 1. better explanation. 2 more evidence to premises
    - - DATA -> THEORY
      - Broad generalisations from specific observations
      - Premise can be true but conclusion still incorrect
      - EXAMINATIONS -> DATA -> CONCLUSION
      - Use to generate hypotheses to investigate more
      - Truly inductive reasoning rare, hard to manage.
      - No theories (references) used as backround.
- - - - Methods: Does this data collection strategy best fit with my RQ?
      - Design: which specific direction of my research fit w / research goals.
      - Worldview: What is the nature of reality?
- - - - 'Hello World', 'I like Python'
      - String of chracters
    - - '1, 23, 45', 'yes, no, maybe'
    - - 'name' : 'Fred', 'age': 21
  - - - Print / sum -> function
      - print('hello world') -> Argument