Communicatiewetenschappelijke onderzoeksdesigns
Introductie:
Doel:
∙ kwalitatieve & kwantitatieve onderzoeksmethoden
∙ volledig onderzoeksontwerp zelfstandig formuleren
∙ empirische communicatiestudies evalueren
Hoe?
a) gemeenschappelijk traject:
∙ introductie
∙ onderzoeksvraag vinden
∙ kwaliteitscriteria empirisch sociaal wetenschappelijk onderzoek
- validiteit
- ethiek
- veralgemening
- causaliteit
- betrouwbaarheid
b) individueel traject:
persoonlijk programma (workshops)
Finding a research question:
research process:
starting point: research problem
theory empirical research
methodology
- theoretical claim to a generalizable vision on the what, how & why of social phenomena
- repeatedly testing 'grip on reality': refinement, adjustment
, (research problem)
(research subject)
Finding a research question:
1. think broadly
∙ brainstorming on relevant research question / sub-questions
∙ different sources:
- observation
- public debate
- personal experience
- open questions in the literature
∙ go through literature & get further inspiration
2. narrow
∙ grouping, distinguishing issues
∙ what = innovative – theoretical, empirical?
3. refine
∙ what (description), how (process, change, effects), why (causes, reasons?)
∙ documenting assumptions, focusing core concepts
research question...:
∙ determines the quality of the research design & its elaboration
∙ has a theoretical basis, without being hindered by it (be innovative)
∙ has direction & is not too broad in scope
∙ = unambiguous, if necessary divided into sub-questions
∙ possibly gives rise to the formulation of concrete hypotheses
-> depending on epistemiological approach
∙ can take different forms:
∙ descriptive question -> how often (prevalence) or what is the course of a trend?
∙ explanatory/causal question -> what is the cause?
∙ prescriptive question -> how can we intervene?
! often concern about originality
˃ conceptual: gap or inconsistency in theories
˃ incidental: new phenomenon that arouses interest
! challenging theories in:
- in a new context (bv. time & space)
- in a new population
- with a new method
! replication = also possible:
added value of frequent repetition research in checking the stability of previous findings
, Refinement through literature study:
- goals of literature study:
∙ context of intellectual development in the field
∙ overview of current status, contradictions, inconsistencies, gaps
∙ positioning of oneself & the research
- 2 types of literature study:
1) narrative literature study: broad, descriptive exploration
2) systematic literature review: highly targeted, comprehensive analysis, driven by close &
concrete hypotheses
- literature review = essential:
∙ provides additional insight to delineate the problem
∙ you rely on what = known in advance, gives inspiration
∙ = open to knowledge based on a multitude of designs
∙ = open to a wide range of research outlets
- critically approaching literature = necessary:
∙ different types of sources, different ways to publish:
- books - book chapters: peer-reviewed? (long time lapse)
- journal articles: ISI, discipline, language, peer-reviewed? (medium time lapse)
- conference contributions: so-called 'proceedings' (short time lapse)
- open access? predatory publishers? internet resources? newspaper articles?
Publication culture:
- publication cycle & double blind peer review (articles, books, conference contributions):
∙ editor as an intermediary: authors & reviewers do not know each other
∙ reviewers as advisers – reject/revise/accept
∙ editor summarizes reviewer comments & makes final decision
- publication bias:
∙ pressure to publish - nuanced story
∙ tendency to non-publication when not 'interesting' or statistically significant
∙ both by rejects from editor/reviewers & by not offering (file drawer phenomenon)
- consequences problematic for science:
∙ published material distorted image?
∙ needless effort & resources? (non-significant findings just disappear in drawer)
∙ relatively recent - fortunately exceptional - cases of fraud
- countermovement: (‘open science’)
∙ pre-registration of design (pre-register hypotheses & research design)
∙ submit data & make it available
∙ initiatives publication 'non-significant' results
Introductie:
Doel:
∙ kwalitatieve & kwantitatieve onderzoeksmethoden
∙ volledig onderzoeksontwerp zelfstandig formuleren
∙ empirische communicatiestudies evalueren
Hoe?
a) gemeenschappelijk traject:
∙ introductie
∙ onderzoeksvraag vinden
∙ kwaliteitscriteria empirisch sociaal wetenschappelijk onderzoek
- validiteit
- ethiek
- veralgemening
- causaliteit
- betrouwbaarheid
b) individueel traject:
persoonlijk programma (workshops)
Finding a research question:
research process:
starting point: research problem
theory empirical research
methodology
- theoretical claim to a generalizable vision on the what, how & why of social phenomena
- repeatedly testing 'grip on reality': refinement, adjustment
, (research problem)
(research subject)
Finding a research question:
1. think broadly
∙ brainstorming on relevant research question / sub-questions
∙ different sources:
- observation
- public debate
- personal experience
- open questions in the literature
∙ go through literature & get further inspiration
2. narrow
∙ grouping, distinguishing issues
∙ what = innovative – theoretical, empirical?
3. refine
∙ what (description), how (process, change, effects), why (causes, reasons?)
∙ documenting assumptions, focusing core concepts
research question...:
∙ determines the quality of the research design & its elaboration
∙ has a theoretical basis, without being hindered by it (be innovative)
∙ has direction & is not too broad in scope
∙ = unambiguous, if necessary divided into sub-questions
∙ possibly gives rise to the formulation of concrete hypotheses
-> depending on epistemiological approach
∙ can take different forms:
∙ descriptive question -> how often (prevalence) or what is the course of a trend?
∙ explanatory/causal question -> what is the cause?
∙ prescriptive question -> how can we intervene?
! often concern about originality
˃ conceptual: gap or inconsistency in theories
˃ incidental: new phenomenon that arouses interest
! challenging theories in:
- in a new context (bv. time & space)
- in a new population
- with a new method
! replication = also possible:
added value of frequent repetition research in checking the stability of previous findings
, Refinement through literature study:
- goals of literature study:
∙ context of intellectual development in the field
∙ overview of current status, contradictions, inconsistencies, gaps
∙ positioning of oneself & the research
- 2 types of literature study:
1) narrative literature study: broad, descriptive exploration
2) systematic literature review: highly targeted, comprehensive analysis, driven by close &
concrete hypotheses
- literature review = essential:
∙ provides additional insight to delineate the problem
∙ you rely on what = known in advance, gives inspiration
∙ = open to knowledge based on a multitude of designs
∙ = open to a wide range of research outlets
- critically approaching literature = necessary:
∙ different types of sources, different ways to publish:
- books - book chapters: peer-reviewed? (long time lapse)
- journal articles: ISI, discipline, language, peer-reviewed? (medium time lapse)
- conference contributions: so-called 'proceedings' (short time lapse)
- open access? predatory publishers? internet resources? newspaper articles?
Publication culture:
- publication cycle & double blind peer review (articles, books, conference contributions):
∙ editor as an intermediary: authors & reviewers do not know each other
∙ reviewers as advisers – reject/revise/accept
∙ editor summarizes reviewer comments & makes final decision
- publication bias:
∙ pressure to publish - nuanced story
∙ tendency to non-publication when not 'interesting' or statistically significant
∙ both by rejects from editor/reviewers & by not offering (file drawer phenomenon)
- consequences problematic for science:
∙ published material distorted image?
∙ needless effort & resources? (non-significant findings just disappear in drawer)
∙ relatively recent - fortunately exceptional - cases of fraud
- countermovement: (‘open science’)
∙ pre-registration of design (pre-register hypotheses & research design)
∙ submit data & make it available
∙ initiatives publication 'non-significant' results
