ORIGIN OF WORD RESEARCH

1.  1570s, "act of searching closely," from M.Fr. recerche (1530s), from O.Fr. recercher "seek out, search closely," from re-, intensive prefix, + cercher "to seek for". Meaning "scientific inquiry" is first attested 1630s.
2.  Related: Researched; researching. Phrase research and development is recorded from 1923.

Great description about research by "SCRIBD"

http://www.scribd.com/doc/49788769/Res-Method

Qualities of good quality researcher ........

nobel prize winners of chemistry

1901	Jacobus H. van't Hoff	Netherlands
1902	Hermann Emil Fischer	Germany
1903	Svante A. Arrhenius	Sweden
1904	Sir William Ramsay	Great Britain
1905	Adolf von Baeyer	Germany
1906	Henri Moissan	France
1907	Eduard Buchner	Germany
1908	Ernest Rutherford	Great Britain
1909	Wilhelm Ostwald	Germany
1910	Otto Wallach	Germany
1911	Marie Curie	Poland - France
1912	Victor Grignard Paul Sabatier	France France
1913	Alfred Werner	Switzerland
1914	Theodore W. Richards	United States
1915	Richard M. Willstätter	Germany
1916
1917
1918	Fritz Haber	Germany
1919
1920	Walther H. Nernst	Germany
1921	Frederick Soddy	Great Britain
1922	Francis W. Aston	Great Britain
1923	Fritz Pregl	Austria
1924
1925	Richard A. Zsigmondy	Germany
1926	Theodor Svedberg	Sweden
1927	Heinrich O. Wieland	Germany
1928	Adolf O. R. Windaus	Germany
1929	Sir Arthur Harden Hans von Euler-Chelpin	Great Britain Sweden
1930	Hans Fischer	Germany
1931	Friedrich Bergius Karl Bosch	Germany Germany
1932	Irving Langmuir	United States
1933
1934	Harold C. Urey	United States
1935	Jean Frédéric Joliot Iréne Joliot-Curie	France France
1936	Peter J. W. Debye	Netherlands
1937	Walter N. Haworth Paul Karrer	Great Britain Switzerland
1938	Richard Kuhn	Germany
1939	Adolf F. J. Butenandt Leopold Ruzicka	Germany Switzerland
1940
1941
1942
1943	Georg de Hevesy	Hungary
1944	Otto Hahn	Germany
1945	Artturi I. Virtanen	Finland
1946	James B. Sumner John H. Northrop Wendell M. Stanley	United States United States United States
1947	Sir Robert Robinson	Great Britain
1948	Arne W. K. Tiselius	Sweden
1949	William F. Giauque	United States
1950	Kurt Alder Otto P. H. Diels	Germany Germany
1951	Edwin M. McMillan Glenn T. Seaborg	United States United States
1952	Archer J. P. Martin Richard L. M. Synge	Great Britain Great Britain
1953	Hermann Staudinger	Germany
1954	Linus C. Pauling	United States
1955	Vincent du Vigneaud	United States
1956	Sir Cyril N. Hinshelwood Nikolai N. Semenov	Great Britain Soviet Union
1957	Sir Alexander R. Todd	Great Britain
1958	Frederick Sanger	Great Britain
1959	Jaroslav Heyrovsky	Czech Republic
1960	Willard F. Libby	United States
1961	Melvin Calvin	United States
1962	John C. Kendrew Max F. Perutz	Great Britain Great Britain
1963	Giulio Natta Karl Ziegler	Italy Germany
1964	Dorothy C. Hodgkin	Great Britain
1965	Robert B. Woodward	United States
1966	Robert S. Mulliken	United States
1967	Manfred Eigen Ronald G. W. Norrish George Porter	Germany Great Britain Great Britain
1968	Lars Onsager	United States
1969	Derek H. R. Barton Odd Hassel	Great Britain Norway
1970	Luis F. Leloir	Argentina
1971	Gerhard Herzberg	Canada
1972	Christian B. Anfinsen Stanford Moore William H. Stein	United States United States United States
1973	Ernst Otto Fischer Geoffrey Wilkinson	Germany Great Britain
1974	Paul J. Flory	United States
1975	Sir John Cornforth Vladimir Prelog	Australia - Great Britain Yugoslavia - Switzerland
1976	William N. Lipscomb	United States
1977	Ilya Prigogine	Belgium
1978	Peter Mitchell	Great Britain
1979	Herbert C. Brown George Wittig	United States Germany
1980	Paul Berg Walter Gilbert Frederick Sanger	United States United States Great Britain
1981	Kenichi Fukui Roald Hoffmann	Japan United States
1982	Aaron Klug	South Africa
1983	Henry Taube	Canada
1984	Bruce Merrifield	United States
1985	Herbert A. Hauptman Jerome Karle	United States United States
1986	Dudley Herschbach Yuan T. Lee John C. Polanyi	United States United States Canada
1987	Donald J. Cram Charles J. Pedersen Jean-Marie Lehn	United States United States France
1988	Johann Deisenhofer Robert Huber Hartmut Michel	Germany Germany Germany
1989	Thomas R. Cech Sidney Altman	United States United States
1990	Elias James Corey	United States
1991	Richard R. Ernst	Switzerland
1992	Rudolph A. Marcus	Canada - United States
1993	Kary B. Mullis Michael Smith	United States Great Britain - Canada
1994	George A. Olah	United States
1995	Paul Crutzen Mario Molina F. Sherwood Rowland	Netherlands Mexico - United States United States
1996	Harold W. Kroto Robert F. Curl, Jr. Richard E. Smalley	Great Britain United States United States
1997	Paul D. Boyer John E. Walker Jens C. Skou	United States Great Britain Denmark
1998	Walter Kohn John A. Pople	United States Great Britain
1999	Ahmed H. Zewail	Egypt-United States
2000	Alan J. Heeger Alan G. MacDiarmid Hideki Shirakawa	United States United States - New Zealand Japan
2001	William S. Knowles Ryoji Noyori K. Barry Sharpless	United States Japan United States
2002	John B. Fenn Koichi Tanaka Kurt Wüthrich	United States Japan Switzerland
2003	Peter Agre Roderick MacKinnon	United States United States
2004	Aaron Ciechanover Avram Hershko Irwin Rose	Israel Israel United States
2005	Yves Chauvin Robert H. Grubbs Richard R. Schrock	France United States United States
2006	Roger D. Kornberg	United States
2007	Gerhard Ertl	Germany
2008	Gerhard Ertl Martin Chalfie Roger Y. Tsien	United States United States United States
2009	Venkatraman Ramakrishnan Thomas A. Steitz Ada E. Yonath	United Kingdom United States Israel
2010	Richard F. Heck Ei-ichi Negishi Akira Suzuki	United States China Japan
2011	Dan Shechtman	Israel

noble laureate thought on research

Sir Harry Kroto, Nobel Laureate in Chemistry 

1996

Article by Richard F. Taflinger, PhD

Article by  

Richard F. Taflinger, PhD

WHAT IS RESEARCH?

Research is finding out what you don't already know. No one knows everything, but everybody knows something. However, to complicate matters, often what you know, or think you know, is incorrect.

There are two basic purposes for research: to learn something, or to gather evidence. The first, to learn something, is for your own benefit. It is almost impossible for a human to stop learning. It may be the theory of relativity or the RBIs of your favorite ball player, but you continue to learn. Research is organized learning, looking for specific things to add to your store of knowledge. You may read SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN for the latest research in quantum mechanics, or the sports section for last night's game results. Either is research.

What you've learned is the source of the background information you use to communicate with others. In any conversation you talk about the things you know, the things you've learned. If you know nothing about the subject under discussion, you can neither contribute nor understand it. (This fact does not, however, stop many people from joining in on conversations, anyway.) When you write or speak formally, you share what you've learned with others, backed with evidence to show that what you've learned is correct. If, however, you haven't learned more than your audience already knows, there is nothing for you to share. Thus you do research.

THREE TYPES OF RESEARCH

There are three types of research, pure, original, and secondary. Each type has the goal of finding information and/or understanding something. The difference comes in the strategy employed in achieving the objective.

Pure Research

Pure research is research done simply to find out something by examining anything. For instance, in some pure scientific research scientists discover what properties various materials possess. It is not for the sake of applying those properties to anything in particular, but simply to find out what properties there are. Pure mathematics is for the sake of seeing what happens, not to solve a problem.

The fun of pure research is that you are not looking for anything in particular. Instead, anything and everything you find may be joined with anything else just to see where that combination would lead, if anywhere.

Let's take an example. I was reading a variety of books and magazines once. There were a some science fiction novels, Jean Auel's THE CLAN OF THE CAVE BEAR, Carl Sagan's BROCA'S BRAIN, several Isaac Asimov collections of science essays and two of his history books, ADVERTISING AGE and AD WEEK magazines, some programs on PBS, a couple of advertising textbooks I was examining for adoption in my class, and several other things I can't even remember now. This was pure research; I was reading and watching television for the sake of reading and watching about things I didn't know.

Relating all of the disparate facts and opinions in all of these sources led me to my opinions on stereotyping and pigeonholing as vital components of human thought, now a major element in my media criticism and advertising psychology classes. When I started I had no idea this pure research would lead where it did. I was just having fun.

Original Research

Original, or primary research is looking for information that nobody else has found. Observing people's response to advertising, how prison sentences influence crime rates, doing tests, observations, experiments, etc., are to discover something new.

Orginal research requires two things: 1) knowing what has already been discovered, having a background on the subject; and 2) formulating a method to find out what you want to know. To accomplish the first you indulge in secondary research (see below).

For the second, you decide how best to find the information you need to arrive at a conclusion. This method may be using focus groups, interviews, observations, expeditions, experiments, surveys, etc.

For example, you can decide to find out what the governmental system of the Hittite Empire was like on the basis of their communication system to determine how closely the empire could be governed by a central bureaucracy. The method to do this original research would probably require that you travel to the Middle East and examine such things as roads, systems of writing, courier systems without horses, archeological evidence, actual extent of Hittite influence (commercial, military, laws, language, religion, etc.) and anything else you can think of and find any evidence for.

Secondary Research

Secondary research is finding out what others have discovered through original research and trying to reconcile conflicting viewpoints or conclusions, find new relationships between normally non-related research, and arrive at your own conclusion bas ed on others' work. This is, of course, the usual course for college students.

An example from recent years was the relating of tectonic, geologic, biologic, paleontologic, and astronomic research to each other. Relating facts from these researches led to the conclusion that the mass extinctions of 65 million years ago, including the dinosaurs, was the result of an asteroid or comet striking the earth in the North Atlantic at the site of Iceland. (For a full explanation see THE GREAT EXTINCTION by Michael Allaby and James Lovelock.) Later research based on the above has found a potential crater for the impact on the Yucatan Peninsula.

Secondary research should not be belittled simply because it is not original research. Fresh insights and viewpoints, based on a wide variety of facts gleaned from original research in many areas, has often been a source of new ideas. Even more, it has provided a clearer understanding of what the evidence means without the influence of the original researcher's prejudices and preconceptions.

Quantitative and qualitative research..........

In terms of research methodology, probably the most important
distinction is that of quantitative and qualitative methods.
Quantitative methods have a much longer history in research into
aspects of healthcare and the use of medicines. Nevertheless, qualitative methods are now well established as well as being seen as 

essential for many research questions.

Researchers who come from health professions, including pharmacists, are generally more familiar with quantitative approaches to 

inquiry than qualitative approaches.Quantitative studies are those 

in which the researcher aims to quantify phenomena. They may be 

small or large, or local, national or international. In terms of design,

studies may be descriptive or experimental. Examples of quantitative
studies may be:
*

assessments of the frequencies of events

*

establishing the proportion of people in a population/sample who

hold particular views or attitudes
*

audits of professional practice and use of medicines, requiring

assessment against set criteria
*

assessment of rates of adherence among particular populations

*

the timing, duration and resources associated with activities

*

a comparison of prescribing patterns and rates between hospitals

*

examination of associations between variables in a data set, e.g. number of medicines prescribed and reports of medication-related problems, or attitudes and population characteristics or experiences

*

 randomized controlled trials in which differences in outcomes

between groups are measured and compared
*

studies that involve the application of statistical procedures

KNOWLEDGE OF RESEARCH THROUGH DIFFERENT MEDIA

HOW TO RESEARCH  A PAPER  ......................

Einstein thought on "research"

Einstein thought on "research"

"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?"

chemistry noble prize winner thoughts on "research"

MEANING OF WORD "RESEARCH"

MEANING OF WORD "RESEARCH"............


* A careful critical inquiry or examination in seeking facts for principles, careful  investigation  in order to ascertain something.




* Systematized effort to gain new knowledge is known as research.




* Research always start with question or problem. Its purpose is to find answer to question through application of scientific methods and knowledge.



* it is a systematic and intensive study directed towards a more complete knowledge of the subject studied.