Chapter 3: Research Methodology

In simple terms, methodology can be defined as, giving a clear cut idea on what methods or
process the researcher is going to use in his or her research to achieve research objectives. In
order to plan for the whole research process at a right point of time and to advance the research
work in the right direction, carefully chosen research methodology is very critical. In other words;
what is Research methodology can be answered as it maps out the whole research work and
gives credibility to whole effort of the researcher.
More over methodology guides the researcher to involve and to be active in his or her particular
field of enquiry.
Right from selecting the topic and carrying out the whole research work till recommendations;
research methodology drives the researcher and keeps him on the right track. The entire
research plan is based on the concept of right methodology.
Further, through methodology the external environment constitutes the research by giving an in
depth idea on setting the right research objective, followed by literature point of view, based on
that chosen analysis through interviews or questionnaires findings will be obtained and finally
concluded message by this research.
On the other hand from the methodology, the internal environment constitutes by understanding
and identifying the right type of research, strategy, philosophy, time horizon, approaches,
followed by right procedures and techniques based on his or her research work. Research
methodology acts as the nerve center because the entire research is bounded by it and to
perform a good research work, the internal and external environment has to follow the right
methodology process.
(http://howtodo.dissertationhelpservice.com/what-is-research-methodology/)

Research methods
Experiments
People who take part in research involving experiments might be asked to complete various tests
to measure their cognitive abilities (e.g. word recall, attention, concentration, reasoning ability
etc.) usually verbally, on paper or by computer. The results of different groups are then
compared. Participants should not be anxious about performing well but simply do their best. The
aim of these tests is not to judge people or measure so-called intelligence, but to look for links
between performance and other factors. If computers are used, this has to be done in such a way
that no previous knowledge of computers is necessary. So people should not be put off by this
either.
The study might include an intervention such as a training program, some kind of social activity,
the introduction of a change in the persons living environment (e.g. different lighting,
background noise, different care routine) or different forms of interaction (e.g. linked to physical
contact, conversation, eye contact, interaction time etc.). Often the interaction will be followed
by some kind of test (as mentioned above), sometimes before and after the intervention. In other
cases, the person may be asked to complete a questionnaire (e.g. about his/her feelings, level of
satisfaction or general well-being).
Some studies are just based on one group (within-group design). The researchers might be
interested in observing peoples reactions or behavior before and after a certain intervention
(e.g. a training program). However, in most cases, there are at least two groups (a betweensubjects design). One of the groups serves as a control group and is not exposed to the
intervention. This is quite similar to the procedure in clinical trials whereby one group does not
receive the experimental drug. This enables researchers to compare the two groups and
determine the impact of the intervention. Alternatively, the two groups might differ in some

important way (e.g. gender, severity of dementia, living at home or in residential care, etc.) and
it is that difference that is of interest to the researchers.

Surveys
Surveys involve collecting information, usually from fairly large groups of people, by means of
questionnaires but other techniques such as interviews or telephoning may also be used. There
are different types of survey. The most straightforward type (the one shot survey) is
administered to a sample of people at a set point in time. Another type is the before and after
survey which people complete before a major event or experience and then again afterwards.
Questionnaires
Questionnaires are a good way to obtain information from a large number of people and/or
people who may not have the time to attend an interview or take part in experiments. They
enable people to take their time, think about it and come back to the questionnaire later.
Participants can state their views or feelings privately without worrying about the possible
reaction of the researcher. Unfortunately, some people may still be inclined to try to give socially
acceptable answers. People should be encouraged to answer the questions as honestly as
possible so as to avoid the researchers drawing false conclusions from their study.
Questionnaires typically contain multiple choice questions, attitude scales, closed questions and
open-ended questions. The drawback for researchers is that they usually have a fairly low
response rate and people do not always answer all the questions and/or do not answer them
correctly. Questionnaires can be administered in a number of different ways (e.g. sent by post or
as email attachments, posted on Internet sites, handed out personally or administered to captive
audience (such as people attending conferences). Researchers may even decide to administer
the questionnaire in person which has the advantage of including people who have difficulties
reading and writing. In this case, the participant may feel that s/he is taking part in an interview
rather than completing a questionnaire as the researcher will be noting down the responses on
his/her behalf.
Interviews
Interviews are usually carried out in person i.e. face-to-face but can also be administered by
telephone or using more advance computer technology such as Skype. Sometimes they are held
in the interviewees home, sometimes at a more neutral place. It is important for interviewees to
decide whether they are comfortable about inviting the researcher into their home and whether
they have a room or area where they can speak freely without disturbing other members of the
household.
The interviewer (which is not necessarily the researcher) could adopt a formal or informal
approach, either letting the interviewee speak freely about a particular issue or asking specific
pre-determined questions. This will have been decided in advance and depend on the approach
used by the researchers. A semi-structured approach would enable the interviewee to speak
relatively freely, at the same time allowing the researcher to ensure that certain issues were
covered.
When conducting the interview, the researcher might have a check list or a form to record
answers. This might even take the form of a questionnaire. Taking notes can interfere with the
flow of the conversation, particularly in less structured interviews. Also, it is difficult to pay
attention to the non-verbal aspects of communication and to remember everything that was said
and the way it was said. Consequently, it can be helpful for the researchers to have some kind of
additional record of the interview such as an audio or video recording. They should of course
obtain permission before recording an interview.

Case studies
Case studies usually involve the detailed study of a particular case (a person or small group).
Various methods of data collection and analysis are used but this typically includes observation
and interviews and may involve consulting other people and personal or public records. The
researchers may be interested in a particular phenomenon (e.g. coping with a diagnosis or a
move into residential care) and select one or more individuals in the respective situation on
whom to base their case study/studies. Case studies have a very narrow focus which results in
detailed descriptive data which is unique to the case(s) studied. Nevertheless, it can be useful in
clinical settings and may even challenge existing theories and practices in other domains.
Participant and non-participant observation
Studies which involve observing people can be divided into two main categories, namely
participant observation and non-participant observation.
In participant observation studies, the researcher becomes (or is already) part of the group to be
observed. This involves fitting in, gaining the trust of members of the group and at the same
time remaining sufficiently detached as to be able to carry out the observation. The observations
made might be based on what people do, the explanations they give for what they do, the roles
they have, relationships amongst them and features of the situation in which they find
themselves. The researcher should be open about what s/he is doing, give the participants in the
study the chance see the results and comment on them, and take their comments seriously.
In non-participant observation studies, the researcher is not part of the group being studied. The
researcher decides in advance precisely what kind of behavior is relevant to the study and can
be realistically and ethically observed. The observation can be carried out in a few different
ways. For example, it could be continuous over a set period of time (e.g. one hour) or regularly
for shorter periods of time (for 60 seconds every so often) or on a random basis. Observation
does not only include noting what happened or was said but also the fact that a specific behavior
did not occur at the time of observation.
Observational trials
Observational trials study health issues in large groups of people but in natural settings.
Longitudinal approaches examine the behavior of a group of people over a fairly lengthy period
of time e.g. monitoring cognitive decline from mid to late life paying specific attention to diet and
lifestyle factors. In some cases, the researchers might monitor people when they are middleaged and then again after 15 years and so on. The aim of such studies is usually to determine
whether there is a link between one factor and another (e.g. whether high alcohol consumption is
correlated with dementia). The group of people involved in this kind of study is known as a cohort
and they share a certain characteristic or experience within a defined period. Within the cohort,
there may be subgroups (e.g. people who drink moderately, people who drink heavily, people
who binge drink etc.) which allow for further comparisons to be made.
In some cases, rather than following a group of people from a specific point in time onwards, the
researchers take a retrospective approach, working backwards as it were. They might ask
participants to tell them about their past behavior, diet or lifestyle (e.g. their alcohol
consumption, how much exercise they did, whether they smoked etc.) They might also ask for
permission to consult the participants medical records (a chart review). This is not always a
reliable method and may be problematic as some people may forget, exaggerate or idealize their
behavior. For this reason, a prospective study is generally preferred if feasible although a
retrospective pilot study preceding a prospective study may be helpful in focusing the study
question and clarifying the hypothesis and feasibility of the latter (Hess, 2004).

Studies using the Delphi method

The Delphi method was developed in the United States in the 1950s and 1960s in the military
domain. It has been considered particularly useful in helping researchers determine the range of
opinions which exist on a particular subject, in investigating issues of policy or clinical relevance
and in trying to come to a consensus on controversial issues. The objectives can be roughly
divided into those which aim to measure diversity and those which aim to reach consensus.
Different ways to employ this method have been devised but they tend to share common
features, namely a series of rounds in which the participants (known as panelists) generate
ideas or identify salient issues, comment on a questionnaire (constructed on the basis of the
results from the first round) and re-evaluate their original responses. After each round, a
facilitator provides an anonymous summary of the forecasts/opinions made by the experts and of
their reasons.
There is no limit to the number of panelists involved but between 10 and 50 might be considered
manageable. The panelists are chosen on the basis of their expertise which could take many
forms (e.g. academic, professional or practical knowledge, personal experience of having a
condition, being a service user etc.).
(http://www.alzheimer-europe.org/Research/Understanding-dementia-research/Types-of-research/Research-methods)

Sample Population and Sample Size

A sample is simply a subset of the population. The concept of sample arises from the inability of
the researchers to test all the individuals in a given population. The sample must be
representative of the population from which it was drawn and it must have good size to warrant
statistical analysis.
The main function of the sample is to allow the researchers to conduct the study to individuals
from the population so that the results of their study can be used to derive conclusions that will
apply to the entire population. It is much like a give-and-take process. The population gives the
sample, and then it takes conclusions from the results obtained from the sample.
Two Types of Population in Research

Target Population - refers to the ENTIRE group of individuals or objects to which

researchers are interested in generalizing the conclusions. The target population usually
has varying characteristics and it is also known as the theoretical population.

Accessible Population - the population in research to which the researchers can apply their
conclusions. This population is a subset of the target population and is also known as the
study population. It is from the accessible population that researchers draw their samples.

(https://explorable.com/research-population)

Instrumentation
Instrument is the generic term that researchers use for a measurement device (survey, test,
questionnaire, etc.). To help distinguish between instrument and instrumentation, consider that

the instrument is the device and instrumentation is the course of action (the process of
developing, testing, and using the device).
Instruments fall into two broad categories, researcher-completed and subject-completed,
distinguished by those instruments that researchers administer versus those that are completed
by participants. Researchers chose which type of instrument, or instruments, to use based on the
research question. Examples are listed below:

Researcher-completed Instruments
Rating scales
Interview schedules/guides
Tally sheets
Flowcharts
Performance checklists
Time-and-motion logs
Observation forms

Subject-completed Instruments
Questionnaires
Self-checklists
Attitude scales
Personality inventories
Achievement/aptitude tests
Projective devices
Sociometric devices

Usability refers to the ease with which an instrument can be administered, interpreted by the
participant, and scored/interpreted by the researcher. Example usability problems include:
1. Students are asked to rate a lesson immediately after class, but there are only a few
minutes before the next class
2. Usability considerations: begins (problem with administration).
3. Students are asked to keep self-checklists of their after school activities, but the directions
are complicated and the item descriptions confusing (problem with interpretation).
4. Teachers are asked about their attitudes regarding school policy, but some questions are
worded poorly which results in low completion rates (problem with scoring/interpretation).
Validity and reliability concerns (discussed below) will help alleviate usability issues. For now, we
can identify five
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

How long will it take to administer?

Are the directions clear?
How easy is it to score?
Do equivalent forms exist?
Have any problems been reported by others who used it?

It is best to use an existing instrument, one that has been developed and tested numerous times,
such as can be found in the Mental Measurements Yearbook.
Validity is the extent to which an instrument measures what it is supposed to measure and
performs as it is designed to perform. It is rare, if nearly impossible, that an instrument be 100%
valid, so validity is generally measured in degrees. As a process, validation involves collecting
and analyzing data to assess the accuracy of an instrument. There are numerous statistical tests
and measures to assess the validity of quantitative instruments, which generally involves pilot
testing. The remainder of this discussion focuses on external validity and content validity.

External validity is the extent to which the results of a study can be generalized from a sample to
a population. Establishing eternal validity for an instrument, then, follows directly from sampling.
Recall that a sample should be an accurate representation of a population, because the total
population may not be available. An instrument that is externally valid helps obtain population
generalizability, or the degree to which a sample represents the population.
Content validity refers to the appropriateness of the content of an instrument. In other words, do
the measures (questions, observation logs, etc.) accurately assess what you want to know? This
is particularly important with achievement tests. Consider that a test developer wants to
maximize the validity of a unit test for 7th grade mathematics. This would involve taking
representative questions from each of the sections of the unit and evaluating them against the
desired outcomes.

Reliability can be thought of as consistency. Does the instrument consistently measure what it is
intended to measure? It is not possible to calculate reliability; however, there are four general
estimators that you may encounter in reading research:

Inter-Rater/Observer Reliability: The degree to which different raters/observers give

consistent answers or estimates.

Test-Retest Reliability: The consistency of a measure evaluated over time.

Parallel-Forms Reliability: The reliability of two tests constructed the same way, from the
same content.

Internal Consistency Reliability: The consistency of results across items, often measured
with Cronbachs Alpha.

(https://researchrundowns.wordpress.com/quantitative-methods/instrument-validity-reliability/)

Data-Gathering Procedure
Data collection is the process of gathering and measuring information on variables of interest, in
an established systematic fashion that enables one to answer stated research questions, test
hypotheses, and evaluate outcomes. The data collection component of research is common to all
fields of study including physical and social sciences, humanities, business, etc. While methods
vary by discipline, the emphasis on ensuring accurate and honest collection remains the same.
The goal for all data collection is to capture quality evidence that then translates to rich data
analysis and allows the building of a convincing and credible answer to questions that have been
posed.

Regardless of the field of study or preference for defining data (quantitative, qualitative),
accurate data collection is essential to maintaining the integrity of research. Both the selection of
appropriate data collection instruments (existing, modified, or newly developed) and clearly
delineated instructions for their correct use reduce the likelihood of errors occurring.
A formal data collection process is necessary as it ensures that data gathered are both defined
and accurate and that subsequent decisions based on arguments embodied in the findings are
valid. The process provides both a baseline from which to measure and in certain cases a target
on what to improve.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_collection)

In collecting or gather data, you must consider these:

Identify any existing sources of data that can be used

Develop a plan for the collection of data which outlines how data will be collected and
analyze

Decide when data collection needs to occur

Considered the requirements for privacy and ethics approval

Develop the data collection tools

Things to consider when choosing data collection methods

In choosing which methods of data collection to use, consider:
1. What methods are likely to be most appropriate for your research participants?
2. What characteristics of your respondents (age, culture, location, literacy levels, language,
time available) might make different methods more or less appropriate?
3. How much time do potential participants have available to participate in the evaluation
and is there a risk of overloading participants?
4. Will extra support for participants be required for data collection activities that are time
intensive or require travel, such as focus groups?

Deciding when to collect data

Data collection for many evaluations only occurs shortly after a community engagement program
has finished. This is too late for the results to contribute to improving the effectiveness of the
program, and too early for the medium to longer-term outcomes of the program to be known.
In most situations data should be collected:

During the course of a program as part of a continuous improvement cycle

Shortly after the program has finished to explore the short-term outcomes; and

After a period of time to explore the medium to longer-term outcomes and/or the
sustainability of changes that resulted from the program.

(http://www.qld.gov.au/web/community-engagement/guides-factsheets/evaluating/evaluation-framework-4.html)

Statistical Treatment
Statistical treatment of data is essential in order to make use of the data in the right form. Raw
data collection is only one aspect of any experiment; the organization of data is equally
important so that appropriate conclusions can be drawn. This is what statistical treatment of data
is all about.
There are many techniques involved in statistics that treat data in the required manner.
Statistical treatment of data is essential in all experiments, whether social, scientific or any other
form. Statistical treatment of data greatly depends on the kind of experiment and the desired
result from the experiment.
An important aspect of statistical treatment of data is the handling of errors. All experiments
invariably produce errors and noise. Both systematic and random errors need to be taken into
consideration.
Depending on the type of experiment being performed, Type-I and Type-II errors also need to be
handled. These are the cases of false positives and false negatives that are important to
understand and eliminate in order to make sense from the result of the experiment.
Treatment of Data and Distribution
Trying to classify data into commonly known patterns is a tremendous help and is intricately
related to statistical treatment of data. This is because distributions such as the normal
probability distribution occur very commonly in nature that they are the underlying distributions
in most medical, social and physical experiments.
Therefore if a given sample size is known to be normally distributed, then the statistical
treatment of data is made easy for the researcher as he would already have a lot of back up
theory in this aspect. Care should always be taken, however, not to assume all data to be
normally distributed, and should always be confirmed with appropriate testing.
Statistical treatment of data also involves describing the data. The best way to do this is through
the measures of central tendencies like mean, median and mode. These help the researcher
explain in short how the data are concentrated. Range, uncertainty and standard deviation help
to understand the distribution of the data. Therefore two distributions with the same mean can
have wildly different standard deviation, which shows how well the data points are concentrated
around the mean. Statistical treatment of data is an important aspect of all experimentation
today and a thorough understanding is necessary to conduct the right experiments with the right
inferences from the data obtained.
(https://explorable.com/statistical-treatment-of-data)

Types of Statistical Analysis

If youre a high school teacher who wants to examine your students scores on a recent test, for
example, you could use dozens of different statistical analyses, depending on the specific
questions you want to ask about the data. Broadly speaking, statistics fall into two categories:
descriptive and inferential. Descriptive statistics can help you understand the data you've
already collected from your students, while inferential statistics can help you determine how
typical students in your sample compare to others in the population.
Measures of Central Tendency

Measures of central tendency are descriptive statistics that assess how spread out the
data points in a sample are. The three primary measures of central tendency are mean,
the basic average; median, the middle score; and mode, the most common score. These
measures are useful for determining what a typical score in a sample looks like. For
example, if the median test scores in a class was 90, that means that half of the students
scored higher than 90 and half scored below 90.
Measures of Dispersion
Measures of dispersion are another class of descriptive statistics that explain how spread
out data points in a sample is. The most common measure of dispersion is standard
deviation, a value calculated by measuring the distance of each point from the sample
mean, squaring them, adding them together and then taking the square root. The larger
the value of the standard deviation, the more spread out data points are. For example, if
the mean score on the math test was 85 and the standard deviation was 5, that means
about two-thirds of students scored between 80 and 90 points. If the standard deviation
was 15, that means two-thirds of students scored between 70 and 100.
Tests of Difference
Tests of difference produce inferential statistics, allowing researchers to determine
whether differences between groups in the sample occur at random or as the result of
some variable. For example, a high school teacher might notice that girls scored an
average of 95 points on the math test while boys scored an average of 85 points. The
teacher might be tempted to conclude that girls are better than boys at the subject, but
the difference in scores might be the result of random chance. The teacher could use a ttest or analysis of variance (ANOVA) to check how likely the different scores are to be the
result of sampling error.
Tests of Relationship
If you wanted to determine whether students who studied more performed better on the
exam, you could use a test of relationship, like a correlation or linear regression. To run
either of these tests, you could ask students to report how many hours they studied for
the exam. A correlation measures how closely related the "hours of study" variable is to
the "exam score" variable. A perfect correlation would have a value of 1, while two
completely unrelated variables would have a value of 0. A negative correlation would
indicate that studying was actually related to decreased scores. You could incorporate
other variables, like previous exam scores, into the calculation by using multiple
regressions.

(http://www.ehow.com/about_5114196_types-statistical-analysis.html)