The purpose of research can be a complicated issue and varies across different scientific fields and disciplines. At the most basic level, science can be split, loosely, into two types, 'pure research' and 'applied research'. Both of these types follow the same structures and protocols for propagating and testing hypotheses and predictions, but vary slightly in their ultimate purpose. An excellent example for illustrating the difference is by using pure and applied mathematics.
Pure maths is concerned with understanding underlying abstract principles and describing them with elegant theories. Applied maths, by contrast, uses these equations to explain real life phenomena, such as mechanics, ecology and gravity.
Some science, often referred to as 'pure science', is about explaining the world around us and trying to understand how the universe operates. It is about finding out what is already there without any greater purpose of research than the explanation itself.
It is a direct descendent of philosophy, where philosophers and scientists try to understand the underlying principles of existence. Whilst offering no direct benefits, pure research often has indirect benefits, which can contribute greatly to the advancement of humanity. For example, pure research into the structure of the atom has led to x-rays, nuclear power and silicon chips. Applied scientists might look for answers to specific questions that help humanity, for example medical research or environmental studies.
Such research generally takes a specific question and tries to find a definitive and comprehensive answer. The purpose of research is about testing theories, often generated by pure science, and applying them to real situations, addressing more than just abstract principles.
Applied scientific research can be about finding out the answer to a specific problem, such as 'Is global warming avoidable? You will, on occasion, come across a piece of evidence that contradicts your a priori assumptions those that you hold as self-evident, some thing is simply because it is , and that is at best disconcerting and at worst traumatic.
For example, you may hold an a priori assumption "all men are created equal". You may then find an article that states "it is a basic fact of life that all men are inherently unequal" people raised in the caste system in India would find that statement so true it wouldn't need to be said.
Which statement is correct? Think about it for a moment. If you've actually thought about it, you should have come to the conclusion that both statements , "all men are created equal," and "all men are unequal," are correct. They are also both incorrect. They are also both meaningless noises as evidence. They are, by nature, unprovable and thus not evidence. What is evidence in this case? Your first step must lie in defining your terms.
Do you mean the male sex of the human species? Do you mean human beings in general: What do you mean by "all"? All "men" whatever that means that are like you? That are not like you? That are like anything at all? The word "all" connotes "without limit". You put no limits on what are "men"? Are children, whatever sex, "men"? Are you discussing sociology, biology, politics, historicity, economics?
Are you discussing war, voting, pay rates, restrooms? What do you mean by "created"? Born through biological processes? Through technological procedures test tube babies, cloning, genetic engineering?
By some supernatural intervention with universal entropy? What do you mean by "equal"? Under the divinity of your choice? If you find these questions confusing, good. You're thinking about them. If you find the above sentence insulting, you either have an over-developed sense of empathy or you prove my point.
Is that what you mean by "All men are created equal"? All humans are born physically, biologically, socially, economically, politically, geographically, intellectually, etc. One needs only enter a maternity ward to realize that such a case is ridiculous. Let us change the definition slightly. The question becomes, "Which God? This definition also leaves the above questions intact. Perhaps the word that needs defining is "equal". For every fat human there's a thin? For every tall human there's a short?
Is any of those what you mean by the phrase? What has happened to the phrase "All men are created equal" as evidence to prove a point you wish to make? The answer to this question is, "It's disappeared. Emotionally, it's extremely effective. As evidence, it doesn't exist. The research you do is designed to give you the ammunition you need to back up what you have to say even with those that disagree with you and question what you say. That ammunition is evidence that your opponent can, or has no choice except to agree with.
You will, of course, have those that disagree with what you say; nobody agrees with anybody on everything. Thus, if you make a point, you must back it up with evidence that even those that disagree must accept.
Such evidence must be what is termed objective; that is, evidence that even those that disagree can discover for themselves. For example, Galileo said that objects, regardless of their weight, fell at the same speed. Aristotle said that heavy objects fell faster than light objects. Giovanni Benedetti did experiments that demonstrated his ideas. Such objective evidence could not be argued away and thus the evidence was accepted.
One thing that many people leave out of their discussions of just about anything is evidence. They often rely more on volume or force of personality rather than proof to back up their ideas. They shout down their less forceful opponents so opposing ideas or evidence are either not heard or disregarded.
Imagine one of these people in a court of law: Nonetheless, people accept such statements all the time because getting evidence to support them is not typical. For example, if your friend father, mother, teacher, etc. After all, why would or should they lie to you?
Determine the effect of telling stories on nursery children's vocabulary. Determine the effect of telling stories on nursery children's interest in reading. As previously stated, the Research Questions should only be written for descriptive topics only.
The only research question for the purposes above is: How often do nursery teachers tell stories in the classroom? Typically, research hypotheses are stated as a null hypothesis. Null hypotheses are based on probability theory. In other words, there are always "chance" events that may influence scores on research instruments - perhaps one person guessed very well on an achievement test and scored higher than they should have, or another person was quite tired and misunderstood the purpose of the questionnaire.
To determine whether differences in mean scores are truly different, inferential statistics e. Researchers want to be quite confident that their conclusions are true, so they want a low probability that their conclusion is due to chance, typically less than 5 in This is exactly the p-value that identifies statistical significance: For example, the researcher hopes that computerized instruction will improve maths skills, but they have to assume that computerized instruction does not improve maths skills unless they can show their study has a low probability of chance - less than 5 in p There is NO significant There are three basic formats for writing research hypotheses, and they each depend on the type of research design that was selected.
Causal Comparative The key identifying factor of a causal comparative study is that it compares two or more groups on a dependent variable. Therefore, a research question for a causal comparative study will read as follows: There is no significant difference between [define the two groups] on [dependent variable].
For example, "There is no significant difference between males and females on interest in reading. An example is socioeconomic status whereby children are placed into three socioeconomic status groups: Instead of defining all three groups, state that there is no significant effect of the variable:
Research Questions. A research question is an answerable inquiry into a specific concern or issue. It is the initial step in a research project. The 'initial step' means after you have an idea of what you want to study, the research question is the first active step in the research project. A metaphor for a research project is a house.
A research question is the fundamental core of a research project, study, or review of literature. It focuses the study, determines the methodology, and guides all stages of inquiry, analysis, and reporting.
Four key components to a research project are the purpose statement, research questions, hypotheses, and research objectives. In this post, we will define each of these. Definitions The purpose statement provides the reader with . The Purpose of the Paper One of the major parts of developing any research paper is defining the research paper question. This article is a part of the guide.
That’s because research questions are more than handy tools; they are essential to the research process. By defining exactly what the researcher is trying to find out, these questions influence most of the rest of the steps taken to conduct the research. The purpose of research questions in research is to: state goals that the research should accomplish. make predictions about what the research will reveal. raise questions to be answered by the research. provide overall direction to the research.