Page 15 - DLIS401_METHODOLOGY_OF_RESEARCH_AND_STATISTICAL_TECHNIQUES

Methodology of Research and Statistical Techniques

Notes our currently accepted ideas, or to problematic theories, current ideas that are challenged by
new hypotheses. This unit first looks at the role of such questions in the research process, and
especially the ongoing debate among social scientists as to when and how problems should be
formulated.
Second, we consider methodology’s effect on defining problems, and how the multimethod
approach can be used to focus research more sharply upon the substance of research problems.
Finally, we consider the role of theory in problem formulation, and how the multimethod
approach integrates theory and research more closely in posing these research questions.

The Role of Research Problems in the Research Process
The problems of everyday life are difficulties to be avoided, if possible. Research problems are
eagerly sought after. The difference is that research problems represent opportunities as well
as trouble spots. Because scientific knowledge is provisional, all empirical findings and theories
are in principle problematic and are, therefore, subject to further investigation.

But in addition to seeking more exact confirmations of existing claims to knowledge, research
has the equally important goal of generating new claims. Problem formulation is the logical
first step toward this goal. As Northrop (1966) writes, “Inquiry starts only when something is
unsatisfactory, when traditional beliefs are inadequate or in question, when the facts necessary
to resolve one’s uncertainties are not known, when the likely relevant hypotheses are not even
imagined. What one has at the beginning of inquiry is merely the problem”.
The formulation of research problems also has an important social function. As Merton, Broom,
and Cottrell (1959) suggest, researchers must justify the demands for attention and other
scarce resources that research makes: “In conferring upon the scientist the right to claim that
a question deserves the concerted attention of others as well as himself, the social institution
of science exacts the obligation that he justify the claim”.
Achieving significant research results is perhaps the most powerful justification for such claims,
but this type of justification can be offered only after the fact, and only in the event that the
research is successful. A compelling research problem, by contrast, must marshal support in
advance of research and, if it is sufficiently compelling, can even sustain that support through
the sometimes fruitless periods that researchers experience.
However, despite research problems’ logical priority in inquiry, and their importance as a
priori justifications, a problem’s formulation, as John Dewey stresses, is in fact a “progressive”
matter. Dewey means that problem formulations are themselves problematic and so require
continual attention to assure that the questions being asked will direct research toward the
desired end: “If we assume, prematurely, that the problem involved is definite and clear,
subsequent inquiry proceeds on the wrong track. Hence the question arises; How is the formation
of a genuine problem so controlled that further inquiries will move toward a solution?”

When and How to Formulate Problems : A Debate

It sometimes seems that there is little about which social scientists agree, and the most effective
procedure for formulating research problems is no exception. In particular, there has been
considerable debate over whether or not it is important to define problems explicitly in advance
of research and to show how they are linked to prior work. Many social scientists hold that
research problems should be formulated by carefully analyzing as much of the relevant research
literature as possible, formally stating the problem and the major hypotheses that the literature
suggests, and only then collecting the data. Their intention is to give research a clear and firm
justification and to encourage hypothesis testing.

10 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY