Research design selection: skills, methodology, and practical considerations

¶ … expression of interest. A topic or subject that, one finds worthy enough of contributing to and that one can contribute to, through academic rigor is forms the body of a research. The work produced thus requires academic training and skills and the outcome is a 'work of scholarship'. The skills that are needed for research are: ability to clearly define a research subject/topic; identify a research query that will be pursued; identification of the main points that the topic encompasses; identifying the correct approach to gather the data/information that provides an answer to the research question (this in itself incorporates validation and reliability of the data); recognizing the advantages, disadvantages and limitations of the discussions that follow and critically evaluating work done while pointing out the main conclusions and describing the possibility of further scope of work under the topic.

Key Definitions

Theoretical, physical environs or work done on a topic may form the context of a research. The research design, then, implicitly demands the attention of the researcher to ascertain the validity and relevance of inferences he comes across in the sources used or data accessed. The research setting can be both; the physical environment; and the scholarly perspective, the reasonable system inside which we infer and make judgment (Biggs, 2006).

Research design plan

The most important part of a research is to focus on the objectives to find a methodology that would help answer the question thereby approaching the subject of the research. The researcher then has to detail each step in sequence. All points-of-view as discussed in following discussion have to be taken into account in the initial stage itself. Components like the examination objective, the significance of the choice, expenses included in conducting the study and the accessibility of information sources focus the determination of a suitable exploration outline (Sreejeesh, Mohapatra and Anusree, 2014).

How do you go about deciding what kind of research design will best serve the purposes of your research? The answer to that question involves an examination of four areas:

The characteristics of your research subject and queries

The query faced by the research itself and modes of countering them

The different methodologies available at your disposal and their features, advantages and disadvantages what your resources and time constraints are

The matter of consideration is to design a research construct rather than a research study to obtain worthwhile data and information and to be aware of discernment of the external influences that may affect your interests (Fawcett & Rabinowitz, n.d.).

Subject under investigation determining research design

The established methods adopted for research are: Quantitative, Qualitative and mix of the two designs. Quantitative research is an objective means that establishes relevance of data to the research objective. It makes use of, statistical and other tools and devices and verifiable, replicable, and relevant models and experiments to obtain data. It is at the discretion of the subject to choose research model (Creswell, 2009). The models chosen could be any or combination of Survey or Experimental nature. Survey research approaches a sample of the mass to arrive at an inference about attitudes, trends or opinions about the entire population. Experimental research seeks to appropriate if a specific intrusion impacts a result. The assessment is based on outcomes of intrusion to a group and withholding it from other similar one. Experiments comprise of real experiments, with the random conditions assigned to subjects, and quasi-experiments that are consistent (Creswell, 2009).

Qualitative analysis is of wider percept and draws on subjective inferences of the interviews carried out or literature reviewed. In this method, critical, insightful deliberation is sought. Qualitative analysis allows for deviation from established theologies and novel deductions. There are various designs of subjective examination analysis, which are specifically applied to the zone or subject under scrutiny and need to be chosen relying upon the sort of subject under examination (Creswell, 2009) as briefed below.

Ethnography is a construct where a particular ethnic group is investigated for a longer duration by consolidating observations and data acquisitions.

Grounded theory is a process of inquiry in which the analyst infers an abstraction of a process, activity, or interaction grounded in the percept of the respondents. This process is grounded in multiple stages of inquiry for the essence and interactive construct of the respondents.

Case studies are processes in which the analyst chooses to take a deeper insight into a single case, process, or activity. Cases are confined to activity and time, and analysts obtain insightful information giving the activity or process required time.

In Phenomenological research the analysts examine the experiences of human disposition about a particular happening from interviews that they conduct. Thus this method is a construct as well as being a philosophy. The sample populace is generally small, however, under investigation for a longer period.

In Narrative research the researchers chooses to listen to the narrations of the respondent to draw inferences. (Creswell, 2009).

Mixed methods research is a fine mix of the qualitative and quantitative approaches that seeks to derive the best of the two methods and give a more assertive outcome as well as an studied inferences from the interviews, case-studies and narratives, as the case might be. (Creswell, 2009).

Simultaneous mixed methods processes happen to be those wherein the researcher meshes both quantitative and qualitative data so as to offer a wider perspective as well as analysis of the research variables. Transformative mixed methods procedures comprise of a theoretical view as an overarching perspective within a construct that includes both qualitative and quantitative quantities.

Opting for a particular mode of methodology is dependent on the research question and the design stage of the work is the correct time to address on this issue (Creswell, 2009). Then again, if an idea or happening needs to be comprehended on the grounds that little research has been carried out on it, then it justifies a qualitative methodology. Subjective research is exploratory and is helpful when the scientist is unaware of the essential variables to inspect. This kind of methodology may be required in light of the fact that the point is new, the subject has never been tended to towards certain example or gathering of individuals, and existing hypotheses don't have any significant bearing with the specific specimen or gathering under consideration (Creswell, 2009).

A blended configuration gains significance when either the quantitative or subjective approach independently is unable to comprehend the issue or the combined qualities of both quantitative and subjective examination can give a better understanding. As an illustration, if an analyst needs to generalize a construct to a populace and also create an specific perspective of the importance of a sensation or idea for people a mix of the objective and subjective may become imperative. In this methodology, the inquirer first investigates for the most part to realize what variables to study and after that studies those variables with a substantial sample of people. Then again, analysts might first review an entire mass and after that reach with a couple of members to get their particular syntax, dialect, and voices about the topic. In these circumstances, gathering both close-ended quantitative information and open-ended subjective information could be useful (Creswell, 2009).

Sample, data and resources

Selecting the research methodology is dependent on the available resources for obtaining data. The inclination of students, girls and boys, towards science subjects may be inadequate and misrepresentative when done in a school environment. Gender preferences done thus may not be accurate representation of the facts when sampled in the constraints of institutional construct. It may be more well represented in the general open environment The focus group methodology may thus have its own limitations when sought for the entire populace (NSF, 2002).

Qualitative analysis methods have been evolving since its early days. The ease of acquiring theoretical concepts and building on them has made them the preferred method in many studies of social relevance. It scores over quantitative methodologies by this virtue. Though quantitative analysis is accepted as a more definite assertion of facts, its inherent rigidity may fail to appropriate the variations in context and hence generalization may not always be possible through samples. In both the methodologies in any research work only samples can be attempted, and hence each has its own limitations along with its capacity to deliver outcomes. Both the methodologies also depend on the respondent as well as the interviewer.

Qualitative systems, including thorough interviews, perceptions, and the utilization of focus class, oblige great staff adroitness and extensive supervision to provide dependable information. Some quantitative methodologies can be comprehended through manuals; but only in a smaller scale, self-controlled surveys in which most inquiries can be replied by yes/no checkmarks or selecting numbers on a basic scale. Large-scale scales, complex reviews, nonetheless, typically oblige more talented staff to plan the devices and to oversee information accumulation and examination (NSF, 2002).

It is hard to speculate on the relative expenses of the two techniques: much relies on the measure of data required, quality gauges emulated for the information accumulation, and the minimal quantity of cases needed for dependability and legitimacy. A short review focused around a small data (25-50) and comprising of a couple of "simple" inquiries would be economical, yet it likewise would give just restricted information. Much less expensive would be substituting a center gathering session for a subset of 25-50 respondents; while this strategy may give more "fascinating" information, those information would be basically valuable for creating new theories to be tried by more proper subjective or quantitative systems. To acquire vigorous discoveries, the expense of information accumulation is certain to be high irrespective of the strategy used (NSF, 2002).

Likewise, quality and complexity may require adequate time. Albeit innovative advancements have lessened the time to process quantitative information, a quality review obliges significant time to make and preliminary inquest and to get better response. Be that as it may, qualitative techniques may take considerably longer to achieve on the grounds that information gathering and information investigation overlap, and need for further enquiry cannot be wished away. On the off chance that time is a constraint, it might be important to forego some measure of information to be gathered or curtail the rigor, consequently compromising the accuracy. For assessments that work under serious time limitations, for instance, where budgetary choices rely on the outcomes, picking the best technique can be a difficult proposition (NSF, 2002).

Ethics in selection of research design

Research ethics identify with inquiries concerning how we define and illuminate our examination motive, plan our exploration and get access get to in an ethical and capable way. This implies that you will need to guarantee that the way you outline your examination is both methodologically sound and ethically in agreement to all concerned. Most ethical issues need be expected and managed in the initial phases of design of the venture. This ought to be endeavored by trying to direct the exploration in accordance with the moral standard of not creating damage (as already examined) and by adjusting your examination system or decision of techniques where this agrees. (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009).

In addition to professional bodies, the federal government obliges that all scientists accepting federal stipends to undertake research on humans are endorsed from an Institutional Review Board ( IRB ). An IRB is a scientists' group and professionals that inspects the specialist's proposed procedure to guarantee that the scientist will ensure the fundamental privileges of the targeted respondents (Weathington, Cunningham & Pittenger, 2012).

In selecting a group, the most pertinent question that one would needed to be answered may revolve around biased opinion of the researcher. The inclusion and exclusion criteria have to be in consonance with ethical norms prevalent.

Also, Consent is the focal act in exploration ethics, as set out in the 1947 Nuremberg Code. The 1964 Helsinki Declaration stipulated that legitimate assent is appropriately enlightened and given without reservations -- without pressures, for example, persuasion, threat or coercion. The ESRC Framework for Research Ethics has two central percepts apropos 'freely given' and 'thoroughly informed' assent -- they are variously also called 'Valid consent'.

Principle Two states that: 'Research respondents or subjects must be informed fully about the objective, methodology used and implications of the research, their value to the research and risks, if at all, involved.'

Principle Four states: 'Research participation should be devoid of any pressure and fully voluntary.'(The Research Ethics Guidebook, n.d.).

Educated assent ought to likewise obviously express that members have the privilege to end their investment whenever they choose to (Abbot and Mckinney, 2013). The target group will have to be informed thoroughly and well in advance about the intentions, methodology and consequences of the research work (Greener, 2008). 'Proper' consent also requires that the respondents be made aware of the implications, if any on them personally or otherwise. Hence ethical position also demands the clause of confidentiality (Smith & Albaum, 2010).

The following is not a total construct of the queries, rather a guide to tread the key considerations to comprehend the ethical implications of chosen research design:

Meaning do the methods answer the research questions adequately and efficiently?

Advantages and disadvantages of the methods?

Do the respondents agree with the methods chosen to comprehend the structure and design?

Does the fallout of research have any undesirable or unlikely implication (e.g. disclosures of sensitive information)? The respondents should hence have the liberty of opting out of the interview at any point of time in the process.

Researcher's own role

Research cannot be 'neutral', but is a reflection of the researcher's personal inclinations and preferences, perceptions, capabilities, presumptions, objectives and ambitions (Hale & Napier, 2013). An individual trained in technical, scientific writing, mathematical constructs and tools and devices would most likely opt for quantitative methodology. Alternatively, individuals who like to elaborate in written format or narrate experiences may lean towards the qualitative methods. The mixed methods analyst is generally conversant with both approaches. Such ventures require time and equal proficiency in both constructs (Creswell, 2009).

Since quantitative researches are the conventional form of analyses, the rules therefore are meticulously laid down. Researchers of this type are generally very disciplined and stringent in this approach. They may also be exhibit reluctance to alteration in norms and established procedures and notions. Flexibility is the cornerstone of qualitative researchers quite opposingly. Creative inferences exhibited through the narration in work produced are the hallmark of the qualitative researcher. Transformative researches thrive in an pursuit and environment where the scope of revolutionizing the construct is presented. (Creswell, 2009).

Conclusion

A research design seeks to answer relevant questions under a topic of choice. The process or the methodology undertaken by the scholar varies in consonance with the needs of the research subject and question. However, the deliberations needed to choose the process needs to be empirical and should make the choice-making procedure easier. Most conventionally used methodologies have been touched upon briefly in this work. The possibilities and virtues of adopting a mixture of methodologies require a more rigorous approach that can be dealt with in a lengthier presentation. In the contemporary times, the socio-economic changes have and are unfolding across the globe. This has necessitated change in outlook in the academic circles, too. The quantitative and qualitative data collection methods have become easier as well as speedier owing to technological advances. This raises the possibility of more work in lesser time though that possibility is open to availability of funds as well as ethical and moral issues.