Introduction to RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Research Report Writing

Transcription

1 Introduction to RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Research Report Writing Prof. Dr. S. Swapna Kumar Dept. of Electronics and Communication Engg. Vision: Progress through the growing knowledge of Electronics and Communication technology. Mission: To emerge as a world class center of learning, research and development, integrating with the latest trends in Electronics and Communication Engineering for the service of humanity.

2 About A research report is one type that is often used in the sciences, engineering and psychology. The aim is to write clearly and concisely about your research topic so that the reader can easily understand the purpose and results of your structure research..

3 Publish or Perish is an old saying in the academic circles. Its primary motivation for academics to publish is to justify their devoted works themselves;

4 What is a research proposal? A research proposal is your plan It describes in detail your study Decisions about your study are based on the quality of the proposal Research funding Approvals to proceed by the Institutional Review Board

5 Sections of the Proposal Summary Need Budget Plan Evaluate Method

6 Avoid Plagiarism Plagiarism is presenting someone else s ideas or words as though they were your own. DANGEROUS!!!!

7 Research Proposal Elements Background/ significance Research Question/Aim/Purpose Methods Design Sample/Sample Size Setting Protocol Analysis plan Timeline

8 Types of research articles: Research results may be published in many ways. These are some of the more traditional ones: 1. A journal article 2. A conference paper 3. An article in a trade or scholarly periodical 4. A thesis 5. A research report 6. A research monograph

9 A Research Monogram: A research monogram is a book written by the researcher and published by a publisher for the purpose of general sale. It is usually free from most stylistic and logistics limitations otherwise imposed on publications destined for journals or conferences.

10 Journal papers These come in two general categories: 1. Peer reviewed 2. Non- peer-reviewed A peer-reviewed journal is one in which the articles submitted for publication are sent to a panel of expert peers in the discipline to read and evaluate the suitability of publication of the material presented. Only peer-reviewed publications are of significance as scientific research publication. The non-reviewed publications is not the point of discussion.

11 Peer-reviewed journals: Reviewed journals again fall into two categories: 1. Archival journals 2. Non-archival journals Archival journals are those that are usually reviewed most stringently and usually only contain the confirmed and principle findings of the discipline. Those that establish or extend the foundation for the discipline. Non-archival journals publish those papers, that whilst important, report on the newest and most significant current developments in the field. Yet the work may need further qualification.

12 Conferences papers Almost every discipline also has a number of conferences associated with work in it. Conferences may be: 1. Commercially or trade oriented 2. Professionally/scholarly oriented, or 3. Research oriented. Commercially oriented conferences are really trade shows, we will not discuss them here.

13 Peer-reviewed journals The main objectives is to promote scientific and educational activities and bring together Researchers, Scientists, Engineers, Scholars and Students, by providing a forum for the dissemination and by publishing technology and innovation.

14 Numbers of pages Title Abstract Keywords Introduction Related Work or Literature Studies Motivation Problem Domain Problem Definition Statement Innovative Content Problem Formulation or Representation or Design Solution Methodologies or Problem Solving Results and Sensitivity Analysis Data Model Comparison of Results Justification of the Results Conclusion Future work (if any) Acknowledgement (if any) References Usually papers must have minimum of 7 pages with details described precisely. Explanation of it refer to Paper Guidelines of Journals in the D- space.

15 IT IS USUALLY A LOT EASIER TO WRITE THESES OR RESEARCH REPORTS THAN IT IS TO WRITE JOURNAL OR CONFERENCE PAPERS.

16 In general the following is a typical arrangement for a thesis: Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 2: Scene setting/background Chapter 3: Literature review Chapter 4: The Hypothesis Chapter 5: Methodology and research design Chapter 6: Conduct Chapter 7: Results Chapter 8: Analysis Chapter 9: Findings and impact of work Chapter 10: Conclusion and future work

17 TYPICAL RESEARCH REPORT STRUCTURE 1. Title Page 2. Abstract 3. Acknowledgements (optional) 4. Contents List of Tables List of Figures 5. Introduction 6. Literature Review 7. Methodology 8. Results 9. Discussion 10. Conclusions + Recommendations 11. Reference List 12. Appendices

18 ABSTRACT What your research aim was. Key background theory. What data were collected from whom, and how. How it was analysed. Key findings.

19 INTRODUCTION WHAT you have done aims/objectives. WHY you have done it justification. HOW you have presented the report structure/ signposting.

20 LITERATURE REVIEW What do we know. What we do not know (research gap). How your study fits the research gap. What you may expect to find (hypotheses). Relate the literature to your study. Be critical if appropriate.

21 METHODOLOGY Information needs. Research design. Research strategy. Methods. Sample. Procedure. Analysis. Is it repeatable to the reader?

22 METHODOLOGY explained the rationale behind your chosen means of collecting information chosen hypothesis or research question, or objectives Based on assumptions or someone else be able to replicate your study on the basis of the information. Any limitations? Anything you might have done differently?

23 RESULTS Tables essential for quantitative data. Graphs only if they add to understanding. Use quotes sparingly for qualitative data. Only report relevant results.

24 PRESENTING TABLES Table 1.1.2: Summary of t-test for paired sample results comparing Gluten Free Diet Totals with Recommended Nutrient Intake Literature Values Nutrient Value of t Significance Level for twotailed test Significant p 0.05 Protein Yes Calcium Yes Iron No Riboflavin Yes Folate No These results show a significant difference for Protein, Calcium and Riboflavin. Gluten Free Diet participants consumed significantly more protein and calcium than is recommended by the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food Policy (1991, cited Department of Health, 1991).

25 WRITING THE DISCUSSION Discuss the implications of your results in light of your research objectives. Can be combined with results for a qualitative study. Common error = Discussing your own findings without any reference to existing knowledge. Your research should build on existing knowledge so refer back to the literature review.

26 CONCLUSION What the key findings were. Should relate to aims/objectives in introduction. May include recommendations for future research.

27 REFERENCES Must be consistent with text. APPENDICES Must relate to the research, but not be directly related.

28 KEY WEAKNESSES Abstract lacks specific detail. Introduction no justification, aim and objectives unclear. Literature review not related to the research question, no critical awareness, limited sources, limited relevance, inappropriate theory. Methodology lacking specific detail, justification, limited awareness of reliability, validity. Results focus on graphs, limited analysis, lacking relevance. Discussion not revisiting the literature, simply repeating results, lack of awareness of the implications of the findings. Conclusions unrelated to results/discussion.

29 Section on discussion The Method section contains the discussion of the approach taken to answer the research question discussed. It usually contains five sections: 1. Hypothesis (eses) 2. Measures 3. Subjects 4. Apparatus/set-up or environment 5. Procedures

30 Research writing style Good writing is important. Some of these are as follows: 1. Traditionally the research report is written in the past tense and primarily in the third person (e.g. the investigator assigned each program to a. ). 2. Ensure the paper has page numbers starting with the title page as page 1. Page numbering must be in Indo-Arabic numbering system and follow through to the appendices and figures pages. No Roman numerals unless specifically required. 3. The running head should be even more concise (5-7 words max). 4. It is customary not to cite references in the abstract. 5. Descriptive statistics should precede inferential ones in the Results section.

31 7. Use the correct verb to describe the nature of the work cited. For example: Hardy and Ramanujan (1932) proved that.. Here Hardy and Ramanujan have mathematically proven a fact to which you are referring. Hoare (1967) demonstrated that... Here Hoare has shown logically that a fact follows from another but is short of proving it.

32 Author/publisher rights and responsibilities A publication is also an agreement between the author/authors and a publishing organization. This creates a set of mutual rights and responsibilities between the two parties. Authors Responsibilities: The main responsibility of the author is to produce a work that is publishable, original and not published before (except when journals ask specifically to re-print a previously published work).

33 Publishers responsibilities It is the responsibility of the publisher to: Adequately distribute the material to be published Handle all the copyright permission requests and legal issues of breach of copyright. Distribute paper copy reprints upon request.

34 Publisher s rights The publisher usually has the copyright to the material To select, appoint or change review and editorial panels.

35 Evaluating a research article A research article is usually evaluated by a panel of experts before it is accepted for publication. This process is called The Peer Review Process. The process entails the scrutiny of the paper by a number (usually 3 or larger) of eminent authorities or experts in the field. They would study the paper independently (and blind to each other and often to the name of the author) and independently write a report on the suitability of a paper proposed for publication.

36 1. Technical robustness 2. Clarity 3. Style/language/presentation 4. Interest and relevance 5. Appropriateness for venue The reviewers usually rate the paper from each of these perspectives and even at times with respect to many attributes of each perspective. Most publications also ask the reviewer to provide an overall acceptance rating for each paper.

37 These ratings are usually: 1. Accept without any modifications 2. Accept with minor stylistic modifications to the satisfaction of the editor 3. Accept with minor structural or technical modifications as advised 4. Accept after modifications sought have been reviewed 5. Reject out-right

38 Conclude Thank you