DEFINING A RESEARCH PROBLEM

Defining a research problem is the fuel that drives the scientific process, and is the foundation of any research method and experimental design, from true experiment to case study.

by Martyn Shuttleworth (2008) It is one of the first statements made in any research paper and, as well as defining the research area, should include a quick synopsis of how the hypothesis was arrived at. Operationalization is then used to give some indication of the exact definitions of the variables, and the type of scientific measurements used. This will lead to the proposal of a viable hypothesis. As an aside, when scientists are putting forward proposals for research funds, the quality of their research problem often makes the difference between success and failure.

STRUCTURING THE RESEARCH PROBLEM

Look at any scientific paper, and you will see the research problem, written almost like a statement of intent. Defining a research problem is crucial in defining the quality of the answers, and determines the exact research method used. A quantitative experimental design uses deductive reasoning to arrive at a testable hypothesis. Qualitative research designs use inductive reasoning to propose a research statement.

DEFINING A RESEARCH PROBLEM

Formulating the research problem begins during the first steps of the scientific process.

As an example, a literature review and a study of previous experiments, and research, might throw up some vague areas of interest. Many scientific researchers look at an area where a previous researcher generated some interesting results, but never followed up. It could be an interesting area of research, which nobody else has fully explored. A scientist may even review a successful experiment, disagree with the results, the tests used, or the methodology, and decide to refine the research process, retesting the hypothesis. This is called the conceptual definition, and is an overall view of the problem. A science report will generally begin with an overview of the previous research and real-world observations. The researcher will then state how this led to defining a research problem.

THE OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS

The operational definition is the determining the scalar properties of the variables. For example, temperature, weight and time are usually well known and defined, with only the exact scale used needing definition. If a researcher is measuring abstract concepts, such as intelligence, emotions, and subjective responses, then a system of measuring numerically needs to be established, allowing statistical analysis and replication. For example, intelligence may be measured with IQ and human responses could be measured with a questionnaire from 1- strongly disagree, to 5 strongly agree. Behavioral biologists and social scientists might design an ordinal scale for measuring and rating behavior. These measurements are always subjective, but allow statistics and replication of the whole research method. This is all an essential part of defining a research problem.

EXAMPLES OF DEFINING A RESEARCH PROBLEM

An anthropologist might find references to a relatively unknown tribe in Papua New Guinea. Through inductive reasoning, she arrives at the research problem and asks, How do these people live and how does their culture relate to nearby tribes? She has found a gap in knowledge, and she seeks to fill it, using a qualitative case study, without a hypothesis. The Bandura Bobo Doll Experiment is a good example of using deductive reasoning to arrive at a research problem and hypothesis. Anecdotal evidence showed that violent behavior amongst children was increasing. Bandura believed that higher levels of violent adult role models on television, was a contributor to this rise. This was expanded into a hypothesis, and operationalization of the variables, and scientific measurement scale, led to a robust experimental design

Read more: http://www.experiment-resources.com/defining-a-researchproblem.html#ixzz1cdsG2YQy

Research forms a cycle. It starts with a problem and ends with a solution to the problem. The problem statement is therefore the axis which the whole research revolves around, beacause it explains in short the aim of the research. 1 WHAT IS A RESEARCH PROBLEM? A research problem is the situation that causes the researcher to feel apprehensive, confused and ill at ease. It is the demarcation of a problem area within a certain context involving the WHO or WHAT, the WHERE, the WHEN and the WHY of the problem situation. There are many problem situations that may give rise to reseach. Three sources usually contribute to problem identification. Own experience or the experience of others may be a source of problem supply. A second source could be scientific literature. You may read about certain findings and notice that a certain field was not covered. This could lead to a research problem. Theories could be a third source. Shortcomings in theories could be researched. Research can thus be aimed at clarifying or substantiating an existing theory, at clarifying contradictory findings, at correcting a faulty methodology, at correcting the inadequate or unsuitable use of statistical techniques, at reconciling conflicting opinions, or at solving existing practical problems. 2 IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROBLEM The prospective researcher should think on what caused the need to do the research (problem identification). The question that he/she should ask is: Are there questions about this problem to which answers have not been found up to the present? Research originates from a need that arises. A clear distinction between the PROBLEM and the PURPOSE should be made. The problem is the aspect the researcher worries about, think about, wants to find a solution for. The purpose is to solve the problem, ie find answers to the question(s). If there is no clear problem formulation, the purpose and methods are meaningless. Keep the following in mind: Outline the general context of the problem area. Highlight key theories, concepts and ideas current in this area. What appear to be some of the underlying assumptions of this area? Why are these issues identified important? What needs to be solved? Read round the area (subject) to get to know the background and to identify unanswered questions or controversies, and/or to identify the the most significant issues for further exploration.

The research problem should be stated in such a way that it would lead to analytical thinking on the part of the researcher with the aim of possible concluding solutions to the stated problem. Research problems can be stated in the form of either questions or statements. The research problem should always be formulated grammatically correct and as completely as possible. You should bear in mind the wording (expressions) you use. Avoid meaningless words. There should be no doubt in the mind of the reader what your intentions are. Demarcating the research field into manageable parts by dividing the main problem into subproblems is of the utmost importance.

3 SUBPROBLEM(S) Subproblems are problems related to the main problem identified. Subproblems flow from the main problem and make up the main problem. It is the means to reach the set goal in a manageable way and contribute to solving the problem.

4 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM The statement of the problem involves the demarcation and formulation of the problem, ie the WHO/WHAT, WHERE, WHEN, WHY. It usually includes the statement of the hypothesis. 5 CHECKLIST FOR TESTING THE FEASIBILITY OF THE RESEARCH PROBLEM

YES NO
1 Is the problem of current interest? Will the research results have social, educational or scientific value?

2 Will it be possible to apply the results in practice? 3 Does the research contribute to the science of education? 4 Will the research opt new problems and lead to further research? 5 Is the research problem important? Will you be proud of the result? 6 Is there enough scope left within the area of reseach (field of research)? 7 Can you find an answer to the problem through research? Will you be able to handle the research problem?

8 Will it be pratically possible to undertake the research? 9 Will it be possible for another researcher to repeat the research? 10 Is the research free of any ethical problems and limitations? 11 Will it have any value? 12 Do you have the necessary knowledge and skills to do the research? Are you qualified to undertake the research? Is the research viable in your situation? Do you have enough time and energy to complete the project?

13 Is the problem important to you and are you motivated to undertake the research? 14

15 Do you have the necessary funds for the research? 16 Will you be able to complete the project within the time available? 17 Do you have access to the administrative, statistic and computer facilities the research necessitates? TOTAL

Research Problem
The creation of knowledge as a social and cultural process is the research object of the Virtual Knowledge Studio. In the context of e-research, it is tempting to focus on the digital technologies. Such a singular approach would ignore, however, the epistemic dimension of knowledge practices. Scholarly and scientific developments are intellectually codified, so that they are relatively resistant to external steering (Van den Daele, Krohn and Weingart 1977; Weingart 1974; (Whitley 2000), but not to technological change (Joerges and Shinn 2001). The study of the interaction between users, designers and technological artefacts is the topic of a number of well-established fields of research: humanities computing, social informatics, technology studies, human computer interaction, computer supported cooperative work, and innovation studies. And although the researchers at the Studio will be able to draw upon this knowledge, its research agenda should not be limited to these types of user-oriented paradigms. The central problem in the development of e-research is not the technology, nor the role of the user in technological environments, but the cultural and historical specificity of knowledge production in the new technologically mediated contexts. This is the reason the Studio puts knowledge creation centre stage. The central research question of the Studio is how it is possible to develop novel ways of knowledge creation in the humanities and social sciences by utilizing and adapting eresearch concepts, instruments and ways of working. This includes the epistemic and cultural effects of e-research on the humanities and social sciences. In terms of e-research: are the social sciences and humanities susceptible to enhancement and what would enhancement mean for the nature and role of academic scholarship? This approach contrasts with three more limited approaches:

It is not in the first place a matter of changing the humanities and social sciences to make them fit a particular model of large-scale, data oriented research It is not only a matter of creating information technologies that better fit the needs of scholars in the humanities and social sciences It is not simply a matter of responding to the perceived needs of scholars with new tools, tailor-made software and research instruments.

All three aspects are part of the problem of e-research, and will provide important building blocks of the Studio, but none of them are the central issue. The central research question will be tackled by developing analysis and design in three intellectual dimensions. The first dimension consists of the topical research themes, the second dimension is the development of novel methodologies, and the third dimension is theory development in the humanities and social sciences to further specify the research question and its ramifications. The first dimension of the Studio is the research theme to which a particular research project belongs. In the first five years of the Studio, three themes will be studied:

Data and Digital Information: the role of data, digital information and data standards in scholarly research Networked Research: novel forms of collaboration and communication in the humanities and social sciences

Virtual Institutions: the emergence and dynamics of new institutional arrangements in eresearch.

The second dimension is methodological innovation of the study of e-research. Of course, this should be relevant to other researchers in the humanities and social sciences as well. The Studio focuses on those methodologies that (1) are not yet well covered by methodologists in social sciences and humanities at the universities, and (2) are particularly relevant for the study of scientific and scholarly knowledge practices. Three methodological foci will be given priority in the first three years of the Studio:

Virtual Ethnography Web Archiving for scholarly research Simulation in e-research.

The third dimension is the intellectual frame of reference for the research at the Studio. The empirical research in the Studio will address a number of theoretical questions that pertain to the development of e-research in the humanities and social sciences. Although we will focus our theoretical work, the Studio will maintain theoretical plurality in its approach of eresearch phenomena. This is necessary since we cannot expect that e-research, being a part of culture and of social reality, can ever be interpreted as a theoretically unified reality (Wallerstein, Calestous et al. 1996). To better understand the dynamics and meaning of eresearch practices and infrastructures therefore means to converse in different theoretical traditions. We need to be able to create trading zones (Galison and Stump 1996; Galison 1997) to make local connections between different theories. The most important questions are:

does e-research lead us to redefine how we can understand the development of scholarly cultures? how can we explain and understand diversity of mediated knowledge practices, for example across disciplines and specialties? what roles do digital epistemic objects play in knowledge creation, and how can we use them to reformulate informatics problems in the humanities and social sciences? do we need to rethink the conceptualisation of scientific labour and markets to understand the dynamics of e-research practices? does the extra connectivity of e-research lead to new forms of complex relationships in social structures and does this lead to new understandings of complex systems? does the operationalisation of concepts of agency, institution, textuality and infrastructure need to be revised in order to study mediation in e-research