Friday 31 August 2012

its about research ............

Nice explanation by experiment-resources.com

Wednesday 29 August 2012

Research as a creative and strategic thinking process

As a budding research .it is important to remember that particular research strategies are good or bad to the exact degree that they fit with the question in hand. the perspective you will adopt and the method you will use need to

Fluid
Flexible
Eclectic

Research as whole brain en-devour :

Logical, analytic, systematic,formal,factual,linear ,these are the words we use to associate with research while organized,disciplined and even pedantic are words associate with researchers. These are the words which physiologists use to describe left-brain thinking. many of descriptors for left-brain double as adjective of itself. But what about the creative or right-brain ? Word such as intuitive,spontaneous, random, informal and holistic are rarely associated with 'rigorous' research.Well in my mind this is like try to understand a two sided world using only one-sided skills and thought processes.
Albert Einstein said " the intuitive mind is a scared gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant"
research need to be seen as process reliant on both the creative right as well as strategic and logical left.

Why is R&D so Important?

Let me provide some brief background on the historical importance of R&D. It has been apparent for at least a century that future economic progress will be driven by the invention and application of new technologies. R&D is one category of spending that develops and drives these new technologies. However, private sector firms are prone to focus their R&D on “applied” projects, where the payoff to their bottom line is likely to accrue only to them. Their role is not to undertake broad R&D for the general benefit of our nation.
In contrast, government can sponsor the kind of “basic” research projects that seek wide ranging scientific understanding that can affect entire industries, rather than individual firms. For example, government research funding has been critical to many technologies of everyday
importance. Just a few examples would include the development of plant genetics, fiber optics, magnetic resonance imaging, computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM), data compression technologies that make all manner of electronic devices more powerful, progress toward edible vaccinations, and the “eye chip” that might help 6 million blind Americans .From the perspective of U.S. competiveness, many of these government-sponsored technological advances have been instrumental in driving economic growth and raising living standards for American families. They have created new industries and high paying jobs that have benefitted a wide-range of regional, state, and local economies.

Tuesday 28 August 2012

Baic research as an ideal

A point that must not be overlooked in any analysis of the concept basic research is the
importance of the ideal of basic research to scientists. Many of those interviewed would describe
basic research as autonomous and driven purely by curiosity when defining it in the abstract, but
when they came to describe their own research in practice they often described it rather
differently.
For example, although there was a strong definitional emphasis on curiosity in basic research, in
discussing their own research several scientists demonstrated that they were motivated by much
more pragmatic aims. A US biologist said, “I like seeing the fruit of the research and what it
means to society”, and a UK biologist described how curiosity, ambition, peer approval, a desire
to serve humanity and his enjoyment of conferences in attractive locations all motivated him in
his scientific work. Many of those scientists who present an idealized image of science as the
unadulterated quest for greater understanding do not describe their own work in this manner.
There was a similar ‘idealizing’ in the case of autonomy. Some scientists described themselves
as autonomous researchers as one might expect. A UK policy maker said that the kind of people
attracted into academic research in the first place are those who like a “free-ranging life”. Many
scientists, however, would initially say they had complete autonomy in their work and then go
on, when considering grant applications, for example, to admit that in reality they did not have so
much. One UK physicist summarized this in one sentence; “in principle I have autonomy, in
practice there’s quite a lot of constraints”. It is this ‘in principle’ that is interesting here. ‘In
principle’ refers to the idealized image of what basic scientific work comprises. Again it seems
to be important for scientists to maintain that they do, in some respects, have autonomy, even
while at the same time admitting that, when it comes to obtaining funds, this autonomy is often
restricted.

Introduction To Basic research

Basic research is often thought to produce a certain type of knowledge, and a distinction is
labelled ‘epistemological’ when it refers to the properties and/or the nature of the knowledge
basic research is said to produce. There are several sub-categories of this epistemological
distinction – unpredictability, generality, theory and reductionism.

Unpredictable/novel research
In interviews, both scientists and policy makers distinguished basic research in terms of its
unpredictability or novelty. According to a UK physicist, in basic research “what you’re trying to
do is find a new concept or push the boundaries of existing knowledge”. Unpredictability of this
kind can lead to truly novel outcomes; for example, a UK policy maker observed that “the word
processor didn’t come about through research on a quill pen”.3
Some interviewees, however, disagreed with this definition of basic research as unpredictable or
novel research (a reminder that it is difficult to formulate a finalised definition of basic research).
They talked instead of conservatism in the research agenda, which discourages spectacular novel
outcomes. Indeed, a US biologist described scientific methodology as being inherently
predictable, in that it puts forward hypotheses which predict certain outcomes. Similarly Ziman
(1998) argues that much research, such as astronomical research, can be very mundane and
predictable because its results are dependent on routine, repetitive observations. One biologist
from the UK described the Human Genome Mapping Project as “quite predictable and dreadfully
boring”. He went on to assert that funding agencies liked it precisely because of its
predictability.
General
According to some definitions, research is ‘basic’ if it is general rather than specific. General
research refers to research done at such a ‘level’ that it applies to a wide range of instances or
phenomena, whereas applied research will help solve the particular problem being investigated
but little else. A UK biologist suggested that the generality of basic research provided an overall
vision and an ability to connect disparate pieces of information.
As with the definition in terms of unpredictability, there were some critics of the idea that
generality is the defining characteristic of basic research. A US molecular biologist said she
thought that basic research was actually specific research because in her field it involved working
out how a specific gene functioned and hence it became difficult to generalise this to the level of
the organism.

Monday 27 August 2012

Hard and soft disciplines. Pure and applied research.

Firstly I think that we just have to accept that disciplines can be categorized according to hard or soft and that research can be classified according to pure or applied.

What is the significance of this? A discipline that tends to use quantitative data, tends to be predictive, tends to be experimental is classified as a hard discipline. While a soft discipline is one that tends to use qualitative data, generally no experiments are performed, and no predictions concerning the future are made based on the research performed. As such as biology tends to be quantitative rather than qualitative, the discipline is classified as hard. History f. ex. tends to be qualitative rather than quantitative and thus it can be classified as soft.

However, the world is rarely simple. Some researcher in history may say that, I will argue that my branch of history, or the way I perform history is quantitative and therefore hard science (I don’t know if this would be very likely). And it may perhaps be argued that somebody would classify biology as soft.

With regard to the difference between pure and applied research, this difference is closely tied to the rationale and the purpose of the study as well as the research questions posed. The rationale of applied research would be to use the results for some specific purpose, often related to management related issues.

As the pure and applied classification refers to research, that would theoretically mean that most disciplines could have research that was applied. Though for some disciplines it may be difficult to think that applied research could be possible. Such as for instance the disciplines history and Latin.

Sunday 26 August 2012

Transform research questions to testable hypotheses

Transform research questions to testable hypotheses

A hypothesis is a declarative sentence that predicts the results of a research study based on existing scientific

knowledge and stated assumptions. It is a prediction that answers the research question. Hypotheses are

statements that, if true, would explain the researchers’ observations. A hypothesis specifies a relationship

between two or more variables. In practice-based research, a hypothesis typically involves a prediction

that a program or a treatment will cause or otherwise be related to a specified outcome. For example,

“Patients who receive medication counseling will have greater adherence to the medication regimen” is a

hypothesis. It identifies medication counseling and adherence as two variables whose relationship can be observed and measured. Acknowledging the assumptions associated with the hypotheses is a prerequisite for all studies. Assumptions that are not recognized or acknowledged can lead to research plans and designs that are overly simplified or overly complex and possibly even unnecessary.17 Interesting research questions always challenge assumptions, and the presence of assumptions confirms that a study poses a sound research question. It is helpful to think about an investigation in terms of a working model. The dependent variable is the focus of the activity or project. It is the circumstance or problem that is to be affected or changed—in this case, medication adherence. Independent variables, such as medication counseling, are causal factors that appear to influence the issue or problem. They are precursors of the dependent variable. Correlates are variables that can influence the dependent variable and the independent variable and should be noted.

Research is structured to examine variables that are critical to the model and feasible to investigate given the time, resources, and characteristics of the participants. It is the researcher’s responsibility to describe precisely how the variables of interest will be measured. For example, counseling might be measured as being present or absent, the amount of time spent, or the number of points discussed. The outcome—adherence—might be measured by the number of doses missed as reported by the patient, refills that were obtained according to the dispensing record, the proportion of timely doses as measured by an automated pill dispenser, or one of many other options.

Saturday 25 August 2012

Identify a good research question

Not all interesting questions make good research questions. Research generates conclusions based on an analysis of evidence. For example, “Are the prices charged by the XYZ pharmaceutical company fair?” is not a research question, because the answer rests on individual attitudes and beliefs. A question that can be answered by gathering evidence might be “What are the best measures for reducing the prices of drugs that our organization purchases from company X?”
Questions about study design rather than the underlying issue or problem are not research questions. A research question is a logical statement that progresses from what is known or believed to be true to that which is unknown and requires validation. Some questions are too broad and must be broken down into a logical series of steps. Rather than asking what can be done to reduce the amount of medications that are wasted each year in the United States, a more precise and manageable questions, “What can be done in our institution to reduce the number of intravenous preparations that are not used before their expiration date?” The latter question clearly expresses a precise locale and scope for study. Research has a purpose and objectives.The research question is the purpose stated in the form of a question. Research objectives specify exactly what is to be done to achieve the purpose. Both the purpose and objectives are clear and unambiguous: What do we need to know and why?
Meaningful inquiry ignores details and gets to the heart of the issue. One technique is to ask “why” five times in succession. Why did the patient have a poor outcome? If the answer is because she received the wrong treatment, the second question is “Why did she receive the wrong treatment?” If the answer is that the clinician was not aware of new information, then the third question becomes “Why was the clinician not aware of the new information?” The process continues through at least five iterations until questions about root causes are revealed.

Friday 24 August 2012

Objectivity of research .....

Objectivity of Scientific Research Information

To ensure the objectivity of scientific research information deals with certain parameter :

Require a clear statement of the research objectives and a description of the approaches and methods used in conducting the research.
Subject the proposed research project(s) to a high quality and objective review.
Where applicable, ensure the quality of research through the use of Good Laboratory Practices.
Provide appropriate oversight to ensure that sound scientific practices are followed.
Provide research information to the public that is reliable, accurate, and presented clearly.
Provide an explanation that accompanies all research information detailing how it was obtained, what it is, the conditions to which it applies, and the limitations or reservations that should be applied in using the information.

ITS ABOUT MY BLOG

Blog that deals with research.....

With so many areas of research that are clouded by debates on ethics and morality, it's no wonder that science is often a hot-button issue in politics and policy. For college students and science professionals alike, keeping up with the latest news on research funding, government initiatives and bioethics is a must, no matter your field of expertise. My blogs will prove to be a great way to do that, providing the news and commentary you need to better understand science policies as they are today and find new ways to change and adapt them for the future.

Thursday 23 August 2012

meaning of systematic research

Research in common parlance refers to a search for knowledge. Once can also define research as

a scientific and systematic search for pertinent information on a specific topic. In fact, research is an

art of scientific investigation. The Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English lays down the

meaning of research as “a careful investigation or inquiry specially through search for new facts in

any branch of knowledge.”1 Redman and Mory define research as a “systematized effort to gain

new knowledge.”2 Some people consider research as a movement, a movement from the known to

the unknown. It is actually a voyage of discovery. We all possess the vital instinct of inquisitiveness

for, when the unknown confronts us, we wonder and our inquisitiveness makes us probe and attain

full and fuller understanding of the unknown. This inquisitiveness is the mother of all knowledge and

the method, which man employs for obtaining the knowledge of whatever the unknown, can be

termed as research.

Research is an academic activity and as such the term should be used in a technical sense.

According to Clifford Woody research comprises defining and redefining problems, formulating

hypothesis or suggested solutions; collecting, organising and evaluating data; making deductions and

reaching conclusions; and at last carefully testing the conclusions to determine whether they fit the

formulating hypothesis. D. Slesinger and M. Stephenson in the Encyclopaedia of Social Sciences

define research as “the manipulation of things, concepts or symbols for the purpose of generalising to

extend, correct or verify knowledge, whether that knowledge aids in construction of theory or in the

practice of an art.”3 Research is, thus, an original contribution to the existing stock of knowledge

making for its advancement. It is the persuit of truth with the help of study, observation, comparison

and experiment. In short, the search for knowledge through objective and systematic method of

finding solution to a problem is research. The systematic approach concerning generalisation and the

formulation of a theory is also research. As such the term ‘research’ refers to the systematic method

Wednesday 22 August 2012

PURPOSE OF RESEARCH STATEMENT

It is expected that you
will have begun to think coherently about 

research beyond your dissertation.

The
research statement tells

–what you have been doing recently
and currently,

–in what direction you hope to go,

–how your research contributes to
your field.

 It helps hiring
committees assess your

–areas of specialty,

–potential to get grants,

–academic ability,

–compatibility with the department
or school.

Tuesday 21 August 2012

Research Vs evaluation

Various definitions of evaluation have been offered over the years. While
each definition takes a slightly different view of evaluation, they all share
important commonalities. First, evaluation is viewed as a systematic process.
It should not be conducted as an afterthought; rather, it is a planned and
purposeful activity. Second, evaluation involves collecting data regarding
questions or issues about society in general and organizations and programs
in particular. Third, evaluation is a process for enhancing knowledge and
decision making, whether the decisions are for improving or refining a
program, process, product, system, or organization or for determining whether

or not to continue or expand a program. And, in each of these decisions,
there is some aspect of judgment about the merit, worth, or value of the
evaluand (that which is being evaluated). Finally, the notion of evaluation
use is either implicit or explicit in most definitions. Ultimately, evaluation is
concerned with asking questions about issues that arise out of everyday
practice. It is a means for gaining better understanding of what we do and
the effects of our actions in the context of society and the work environment.
A distinguishing characteristic of evaluation is that, unlike traditional forms
of academic research, evaluation is grounded in the everyday realities of
organizations. Evaluations can be conducted of programs, processes, products,
systems, organizations, personnel, and policies.

Monday 20 August 2012

Developing great research questions

BY Earlene E. Lipowski

Three steps comprise the formulation of a great research question:

(1)Ask interesting questions

(2) Select the best question for research, and

(3) Transform the research question into a testable hypothesis.

Research is designed to generate information that cannot be gained from any other source. A research question is a narrow, challenging question addressing an issue, problem, or controversy that is answered with a conclusion based on the analysis and interpretation of evidence. A variety of strategies can be applied to stimulate creative thinking and generate new insights into old problems. A good research question challenges researchers to see matters from a new perspective and to learn something new. Practice research questions are evaluated by the probability of achieving their goal, along with the potential impact and feasibility of the project.