This seminar will be held on Tuesday, September 28.
Directions posted on GUL (https://gul.gu.se/courseId/41279/showMessage.do?id=456149&tableSortBynoticeboard=lastChanged):
"You are individually requested to prepare, in writing, a proposed research design and a discussion of pros and cons of different research designs, in relation to the given research task (as described in the instructions). As with the previous seminars, you are only requested to hand in the written assignment if you fail to attend the seminar or fail to actively participate in the seminar (e.g. attending the seminar without having prepared for it). During the seminar you will discuss your proposals and their pros and cons."
Sunday, September 26, 2010
GS2321: Quantitative Analysis--- An example using secondary data
Marcia Grimes
This lecture was presented via PowerPoint and will hopefully be posted on GUL. The lecture explored the methodology of a paper recently published by the presentor:
Grimes, M. and Lena Wängnerud (2010). Curbing Corruption through Social Welfare Reform? The Effects of Mexico’s Conditional Cash Transfer Program on Good Government. The American Review of Public Administration. http://arp.sagepub.com/content/early/2010/05/12/0275074009359025.full.pdf
This lecture was presented via PowerPoint and will hopefully be posted on GUL. The lecture explored the methodology of a paper recently published by the presentor:
Grimes, M. and Lena Wängnerud (2010). Curbing Corruption through Social Welfare Reform? The Effects of Mexico’s Conditional Cash Transfer Program on Good Government. The American Review of Public Administration. http://arp.sagepub.com/content/early/2010/05/12/0275074009359025.full.pdf
GS2321: An Introduction to Multivariate Statistical Analysis
Agnes Cornell
According to the course description, "This lecture gives an introduction to the potentials of using multivariate statistical analysis in social science research. The aim is to provide the basic skills needed to read, interpret and evaluate results presented in research articles based on statistical methods. Furthermore it discusses some methodological (and design) challenges in this type of research such as the relation between theory and data, issues of correlation and causation, measurement validity, and data availability and reliability."
The lecture was presented via PowerPoint which will hopefully be posted on GUL and was a close analysis of:
Dunning, Thad. 2004. "Conditioning the Effects of Aid: Cold War Politics, Donor Credibility, and Democracy in Africa." International Organization 58 (02):409-23
According to the course description, "This lecture gives an introduction to the potentials of using multivariate statistical analysis in social science research. The aim is to provide the basic skills needed to read, interpret and evaluate results presented in research articles based on statistical methods. Furthermore it discusses some methodological (and design) challenges in this type of research such as the relation between theory and data, issues of correlation and causation, measurement validity, and data availability and reliability."
The lecture was presented via PowerPoint which will hopefully be posted on GUL and was a close analysis of:
Dunning, Thad. 2004. "Conditioning the Effects of Aid: Cold War Politics, Donor Credibility, and Democracy in Africa." International Organization 58 (02):409-23
GS2321: Comparative Analysis-- Regionalism
Fredrik Söderbaum
This presentation was made via PowerPoint and will, hopefully, be posted on GUL.
This presentation was made via PowerPoint and will, hopefully, be posted on GUL.
GS2321: Discourse Analysis
Maria Stern
This lecture explored discourse analysis as used by Maria Eriksson Baaz in her PhD dissertation and Maria Stern in the article, "Gender and Race in European Security Strategy: Europe as a Force for 'Good' ". Maria Stern said that both of these papers were posted on GUL but, unfortunately, I cannot find them.
Example 1: The Paternalism of Partnership by Maria Eriksson Baaz
- Interest/ Passion/ Curiosity
● donor identities within a post-colonial context
● donor identities and their manifestations
● How is development aid playing out in an African context?
-Research Problem
● How are donor identities constructed?
● How do aid workers see themselves in relation to their work with African partners in Tanzania?
● The above is relevant to development studies, aid, and post-colonialism and is both researchable and needed because it addresses gaps in the literature.
-Aim
● The construction of self in relationship to "partners".
-Methods
● Open-ended interviews of aid workers dealing with procedures and daily practices.
● Maria first created the interview texts and then used discourse analysis to analyze them.
-Theoretical underpinings
● Social constructivism
● Divisions between self and other
● The work of Stuart Hall who argues that identity is chosen as well as not chosen.
● Post-colonialism: Traces of colonial discourses are reproduced in current discourses.
-Delimitations
● The study is delimited via the theoretical underpinings.
-Operationalization
● Embedded in theories of post-colonialism
● It is possible to categorize identities such as how the self is represented through the other.
***Note: There is always a risk of finding what you are looking for.***
- Conclusions
● Discourses are complex and not simply post-colonial.
● Partnership neither replicates nor breaks from colonialism but is marked by a colonial past.
Example 2: ""Gender and Race in European Security Strategy: Europe as a Force for 'Good' " by Maria Stern
This lecture explored discourse analysis as used by Maria Eriksson Baaz in her PhD dissertation and Maria Stern in the article, "Gender and Race in European Security Strategy: Europe as a Force for 'Good' ". Maria Stern said that both of these papers were posted on GUL but, unfortunately, I cannot find them.
Example 1: The Paternalism of Partnership by Maria Eriksson Baaz
- Interest/ Passion/ Curiosity
● donor identities within a post-colonial context
● donor identities and their manifestations
● How is development aid playing out in an African context?
-Research Problem
● How are donor identities constructed?
● How do aid workers see themselves in relation to their work with African partners in Tanzania?
● The above is relevant to development studies, aid, and post-colonialism and is both researchable and needed because it addresses gaps in the literature.
-Aim
● The construction of self in relationship to "partners".
-Methods
● Open-ended interviews of aid workers dealing with procedures and daily practices.
● Maria first created the interview texts and then used discourse analysis to analyze them.
-Theoretical underpinings
● Social constructivism
● Divisions between self and other
● The work of Stuart Hall who argues that identity is chosen as well as not chosen.
● Post-colonialism: Traces of colonial discourses are reproduced in current discourses.
-Delimitations
● The study is delimited via the theoretical underpinings.
-Operationalization
● Embedded in theories of post-colonialism
● It is possible to categorize identities such as how the self is represented through the other.
***Note: There is always a risk of finding what you are looking for.***
- Conclusions
● Discourses are complex and not simply post-colonial.
● Partnership neither replicates nor breaks from colonialism but is marked by a colonial past.
Example 2: ""Gender and Race in European Security Strategy: Europe as a Force for 'Good' " by Maria Stern
- Please see article.
GS2321: Ethnography and Life History Interviews
Marita Eastmond
This presentation was made via PowerPoint and will, hopefully, be posted on GUL. The article that Marita references throughout the presentation is posted at:
https://gul.gu.se/courseId/41279/showMessage.do?id=454444&tableSortBynoticeboard=lastChanged
This presentation was made via PowerPoint and will, hopefully, be posted on GUL. The article that Marita references throughout the presentation is posted at:
https://gul.gu.se/courseId/41279/showMessage.do?id=454444&tableSortBynoticeboard=lastChanged
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Woefully behind...
Hi Everyone!
I'm so sorry that I have not updated the blog recently. I shall remedy the situation shortly.
Take care!
I'm so sorry that I have not updated the blog recently. I shall remedy the situation shortly.
Take care!
Monday, September 20, 2010
GS2321: Seminar 2
The following instructions are posted on GUL, https://gul.gu.se/public/courseId/41279/lang-sv/publicShowMessage.do?id=456149:
Purpose of Seminar 2:
The main purpose of the seminar is to assess and compare the research design of two different studies: one qualitative and one quantitative.
Individual preparation for the seminar:
Each student shall read both the papers uploaded at GUL (entitled seminar paper 1, and seminar paper 2). Each student should write a short report, comparing the two papers, based on the following questions (you don’t have to cover all questions, but can focus on those which you find useful in your comparison):
1. Please describe, according to your own understanding, the epistemology of the paper.
2. Is the research question/s well formulated and motivated? Why/why not? Is the research question answered during the course of paper? How?
3. Which are the case/cases of the study? How are they selected? Is the selection clear and well motivated?
3. How is theory used in the paper (in relation to the research problem/research question/s? In the analysis? In the form of a theoretical framework?). In what way/s, if any, does theory add to the quality of the paper?
4. Is the choice and implementation of the research method/s well formulated and motivated? How/why not?
5. How are the conclusions of the paper drawn? Do you agree with the conclusions? Are the conclusions firmly based on the empirical data presented in the thesis? What about the generalizability of the results?
6. Is this a thesis of high quality? Why/why not? (e.g. according to which criteria is the thesis good/not so good?)
If you participate actively in the seminar (e.g. contributing to the seminar discussions based on your individual preparation), you don’t have to submit your written report. However, if you fail to participate actively (being at the seminar unprepared or being absent from the seminar) you are requested to submit a written report of 2 – 4 pages (12p Times New Roman, 1,5 line spacing) to Per Knutsson (per.knutsson@globalstudies.gu.se).
Organization of the seminar:
There will be 8 seminar groups of which 4 meet 10 – 12 and 4 meet 13 – 15 (please refer to GUL to see which seminar group you should participate in and the course guide or schedule for information on which group room you should be in. The discussions of each seminar group will be lead by a seminar leader (a PhD-student or a lecturer).
GOOD LUCK!
Purpose of Seminar 2:
The main purpose of the seminar is to assess and compare the research design of two different studies: one qualitative and one quantitative.
Individual preparation for the seminar:
Each student shall read both the papers uploaded at GUL (entitled seminar paper 1, and seminar paper 2). Each student should write a short report, comparing the two papers, based on the following questions (you don’t have to cover all questions, but can focus on those which you find useful in your comparison):
1. Please describe, according to your own understanding, the epistemology of the paper.
2. Is the research question/s well formulated and motivated? Why/why not? Is the research question answered during the course of paper? How?
3. Which are the case/cases of the study? How are they selected? Is the selection clear and well motivated?
3. How is theory used in the paper (in relation to the research problem/research question/s? In the analysis? In the form of a theoretical framework?). In what way/s, if any, does theory add to the quality of the paper?
4. Is the choice and implementation of the research method/s well formulated and motivated? How/why not?
5. How are the conclusions of the paper drawn? Do you agree with the conclusions? Are the conclusions firmly based on the empirical data presented in the thesis? What about the generalizability of the results?
6. Is this a thesis of high quality? Why/why not? (e.g. according to which criteria is the thesis good/not so good?)
If you participate actively in the seminar (e.g. contributing to the seminar discussions based on your individual preparation), you don’t have to submit your written report. However, if you fail to participate actively (being at the seminar unprepared or being absent from the seminar) you are requested to submit a written report of 2 – 4 pages (12p Times New Roman, 1,5 line spacing) to Per Knutsson (per.knutsson@globalstudies.gu.se).
Organization of the seminar:
There will be 8 seminar groups of which 4 meet 10 – 12 and 4 meet 13 – 15 (please refer to GUL to see which seminar group you should participate in and the course guide or schedule for information on which group room you should be in. The discussions of each seminar group will be lead by a seminar leader (a PhD-student or a lecturer).
GOOD LUCK!
Saturday, September 11, 2010
GS2321: Mixed Methods
Per Knutsson
This lecture was delivered via PowerPoint. While this PowerPoint file has not yet been uploaded to GUL it is feasible that it will be unloaded in the near future.
This lecture was delivered via PowerPoint. While this PowerPoint file has not yet been uploaded to GUL it is feasible that it will be unloaded in the near future.
GS2321: The Qualitative/ Quantitative Divide
Anna Persson
This lecture was delivered via PowerPoint. While this PowerPoint file has not yet been uploaded to GUL it is feasible that it will be unloaded in the near future.
This lecture was delivered via PowerPoint. While this PowerPoint file has not yet been uploaded to GUL it is feasible that it will be unloaded in the near future.
GS2321: Comparative Case Studies
Martin Sjöstedt, Department of Political Science
Please see PowerPoint at https://gul.gu.se/public/courseId/41279/lang-sv/publicNoticeboard.do (Not yet posted)
Please see PowerPoint at https://gul.gu.se/public/courseId/41279/lang-sv/publicNoticeboard.do (Not yet posted)
GS2321: Single Case Studies
Joakim Öjendal, Department of Peace and Development, Gothenburg University
031-7864675
Lecture Outline
1. What is a case study?
2. Research Design (Abstract/ Concrete)
3. Example of a case study
4. Pro's and Con's of cases studies
5. Controversial aspects of case studies
What is a case study?
- A case study is a study of a specific case.
● This is the most simplistic definition of a case study.
- What key words are associated with case studies?
● Explore: A case study is exploratory and not a matter of hypothesis testing.
● Event/ Activity/ Process: Case studies are not limited to a village or a country and often include analysis of an event, activity, etc.
● Bounded in Space and/or Scope: The boundaries of a case must be defined.
● Detail/ Depth Oriented: A case study is a "thick" empirical study.
● History/ Time/ Chronology: The case must be understood in its own right and include exploration of history.
- Case studies are a common approach in the social sciences.
- Case studies are typically within the qualitative tradition
● In other words, case studies are usually not large, statistical studies.
-Case studies are done on something, somewhere, and in some place.
- Case studies are descriptive.
● They are also analytical but the approach is principally descriptive or "thick".
● Never the less, conclusions are and can be drawn from a case study.
- Case studies do entail "trial and error" and "learn as you go" approaches.
● A researcher does not always know what he or she is looking for at the outset.
● Knowledge/ theory is often generated as a result of the study.
● The case study may lead to the development of better research questions rather than a conclusion.
- Case studies are inductive and not, necessarily, driven by a theoretical framework.
● The data generates theory rather than the theory generating data.
- The goal of a case study is in-depth understanding and they are often very focused.
- Case studies are a way of getting away from journalism because they are framed, focused, comprehensive, in depth, and beyond generalization.
-All methods are applicable to case studies but life histories, interviews, participant observation, etc. are typical methodological approaches in certain academic traditions.
- If done well, a case study can yield more than an outsider's perspective of the case.
Weaknesses
- You do not start with a hypothesis.
- Case studies are often messy and seemingly lacking in a red thread.
- It is difficult to produce a coherent narrative.
- Case studies are risky because the researcher may not come up with anything important.
- Representation is a major problem.
● It is important to ask: what does one case actually represent?
● A hypothesis is generated as a result of the study.
● Representation is strengthened through multiple case studies.
● As a result, a researcher must be careful of generalizing.
- It is difficult to determine the boundaries of the case or where it begins and ends.
● The boundaries of the case must be constantly questioned and justified.
● Anything and everything can and will be contested by the audience of the case study.
● However, anything goes as long as it is justified.
-When should a researcher select single/ multiple case studies as a key methodological approach?
● Single case studies are the dominate approach in qualitative research.
● Multiple case studies are a reasonable approach in qualitative research.
● Statistical analysis doesn't (usually) make sense in qualitative research.
● Single case studies don't (usually) make sense in quantitative research.
● Multiple case studies are a reasonable approach in quantitative research.
● Statistical analysis is the dominate approach in quantitative research.
Research Design Checklist
i) Passion is absolutely essential!
ii) The research problem is the key to everything and must be coherent with the research design.
iii) Case studies can be used to delimit/ focus the research problem.
iv) Operationalization
v) Theory: There must be a correlation between theory, the case study, and the research problem.
vi) Method: A case study is a part of a methodological design but is also governed by methods.
vii) Ethics become increasingly important in a case study and a researcher must ask, Who could I hurt/ abuse? Who could I anger? Will I traumatize people with my questions?
viii) Framework: What does it all mean?/ How does the case study feed into the larger analytical questions?
ix) Writing/ Voice: What can I say in my case study? What does my audience want to hear?
Example of a Case Study
- Joakim studied development in Cambodia in relation to food production and, more specifically, water management.
- He believes that there is a huge need for improved water management in rural Cambodia as well as a need to research effective water management systems.
- Research question: Can small scale water management improve water access?
- In selecting cases, Joakim tried to avoid extremes.
● He did this in an effort to make his conclusions more likely and generalizable.
- He ended up with three cases and spent 4-6 weeks studying each in turn.
- One thing he took away from the experience: There is always excess data that cannot be explored and does not fit into the analytical frame.
- Some of Joakim's personal conclusions:
● No study is ever ideal.
● Studies are limited by time, access, funding, etc.
● Often only weak comparisons can be made between cases which can be intentional and incorporated into the research design.
● Joakim was a little too analytical from the outset and was criticized by colleagues as a result.
● Overall, though, it was a successful study despite the fact that the findings could not be generalized.
- The bottom line: Be humble in your ignorance.
031-7864675
Lecture Outline
1. What is a case study?
2. Research Design (Abstract/ Concrete)
3. Example of a case study
4. Pro's and Con's of cases studies
5. Controversial aspects of case studies
What is a case study?
- A case study is a study of a specific case.
● This is the most simplistic definition of a case study.
- What key words are associated with case studies?
● Explore: A case study is exploratory and not a matter of hypothesis testing.
● Event/ Activity/ Process: Case studies are not limited to a village or a country and often include analysis of an event, activity, etc.
● Bounded in Space and/or Scope: The boundaries of a case must be defined.
● Detail/ Depth Oriented: A case study is a "thick" empirical study.
● History/ Time/ Chronology: The case must be understood in its own right and include exploration of history.
- Case studies are a common approach in the social sciences.
- Case studies are typically within the qualitative tradition
● In other words, case studies are usually not large, statistical studies.
-Case studies are done on something, somewhere, and in some place.
- Case studies are descriptive.
● They are also analytical but the approach is principally descriptive or "thick".
● Never the less, conclusions are and can be drawn from a case study.
- Case studies do entail "trial and error" and "learn as you go" approaches.
● A researcher does not always know what he or she is looking for at the outset.
● Knowledge/ theory is often generated as a result of the study.
● The case study may lead to the development of better research questions rather than a conclusion.
- Case studies are inductive and not, necessarily, driven by a theoretical framework.
● The data generates theory rather than the theory generating data.
- The goal of a case study is in-depth understanding and they are often very focused.
- Case studies are a way of getting away from journalism because they are framed, focused, comprehensive, in depth, and beyond generalization.
-All methods are applicable to case studies but life histories, interviews, participant observation, etc. are typical methodological approaches in certain academic traditions.
- If done well, a case study can yield more than an outsider's perspective of the case.
Weaknesses
- You do not start with a hypothesis.
- Case studies are often messy and seemingly lacking in a red thread.
- It is difficult to produce a coherent narrative.
- Case studies are risky because the researcher may not come up with anything important.
- Representation is a major problem.
● It is important to ask: what does one case actually represent?
● A hypothesis is generated as a result of the study.
● Representation is strengthened through multiple case studies.
● As a result, a researcher must be careful of generalizing.
- It is difficult to determine the boundaries of the case or where it begins and ends.
● The boundaries of the case must be constantly questioned and justified.
● Anything and everything can and will be contested by the audience of the case study.
● However, anything goes as long as it is justified.
-When should a researcher select single/ multiple case studies as a key methodological approach?
● Single case studies are the dominate approach in qualitative research.
● Multiple case studies are a reasonable approach in qualitative research.
● Statistical analysis doesn't (usually) make sense in qualitative research.
● Single case studies don't (usually) make sense in quantitative research.
● Multiple case studies are a reasonable approach in quantitative research.
● Statistical analysis is the dominate approach in quantitative research.
Research Design Checklist
i) Passion is absolutely essential!
ii) The research problem is the key to everything and must be coherent with the research design.
iii) Case studies can be used to delimit/ focus the research problem.
iv) Operationalization
v) Theory: There must be a correlation between theory, the case study, and the research problem.
vi) Method: A case study is a part of a methodological design but is also governed by methods.
vii) Ethics become increasingly important in a case study and a researcher must ask, Who could I hurt/ abuse? Who could I anger? Will I traumatize people with my questions?
viii) Framework: What does it all mean?/ How does the case study feed into the larger analytical questions?
ix) Writing/ Voice: What can I say in my case study? What does my audience want to hear?
Example of a Case Study
- Joakim studied development in Cambodia in relation to food production and, more specifically, water management.
- He believes that there is a huge need for improved water management in rural Cambodia as well as a need to research effective water management systems.
- Research question: Can small scale water management improve water access?
- In selecting cases, Joakim tried to avoid extremes.
● He did this in an effort to make his conclusions more likely and generalizable.
- He ended up with three cases and spent 4-6 weeks studying each in turn.
- One thing he took away from the experience: There is always excess data that cannot be explored and does not fit into the analytical frame.
- Some of Joakim's personal conclusions:
● No study is ever ideal.
● Studies are limited by time, access, funding, etc.
● Often only weak comparisons can be made between cases which can be intentional and incorporated into the research design.
● Joakim was a little too analytical from the outset and was criticized by colleagues as a result.
● Overall, though, it was a successful study despite the fact that the findings could not be generalized.
- The bottom line: Be humble in your ignorance.
Saturday, September 4, 2010
GS2321: Seminar 1
Thursday, September 9, 10.00-12.00 or 13.00-15.00 at the School of Global Studies
The following is posted on GUL, https://gul.gu.se/public/courseId/41279/lang-sv/publicShowMessage.do?id=456149
Purpose of Seminar 1
There are two main purposes of the seminar. The first is to assess and discuss research design (including epistemological and ontological considerations) in a given thesis, based on the initial lectures of the course and the literature assigned to these lectures. The second purpose the seminar is to discuss the criteria by which we assess the quality of a master thesis.
Individual preparation for the seminar
Each student shall read one of the three master theses uploaded at GUL (entitled master thesis 1, 2 and 3) intensively (in detail) and the other two more extensively (you should be able to follow discussions on the research design of these master theses during the seminar). Each student should write a short report on the thesis which they have read in detail, based on the following questions:
1. Please describe and reflect upon the underlying epistemological and ontological assumptions of the thesis, according to your own understanding,.
2. Is the research question/s well formulated and motivated? Why/why not? Is the research question answered during the course of thesis? How?
3. How is theory used in the thesis (in relation to the research problem/research question/s? In the analysis? In the form of a theoretical framework?). In what way/s, if any, does theory add to the quality of the thesis?
4. Are the choice and implementation of the research method/s well formulated and motivated? How/why not?
5. How are the conclusions of the thesis drawn? Do you agree with the conclusions? Are the conclusions firmly based on the empirical data presented in the thesis?
6. Is this a thesis of high quality? Why/why not? (e.g. according to which criteria is the thesis good/not so good?)
If you participate actively in the seminar (e.g. contributing to the seminar discussions based on your individual preparation), you don’t have to submit your written report. However, if you fail to participate actively (being at the seminar unprepared or being absent from the seminar) you are requested to submit a written report of 2 – 4 pages (12p Times New Roman, 1,5 line spacing) to Per Knutsson (per.knutsson@globalstudies.gu.se).
The following is posted on GUL, https://gul.gu.se/public/courseId/41279/lang-sv/publicShowMessage.do?id=456149
Purpose of Seminar 1
There are two main purposes of the seminar. The first is to assess and discuss research design (including epistemological and ontological considerations) in a given thesis, based on the initial lectures of the course and the literature assigned to these lectures. The second purpose the seminar is to discuss the criteria by which we assess the quality of a master thesis.
Individual preparation for the seminar
Each student shall read one of the three master theses uploaded at GUL (entitled master thesis 1, 2 and 3) intensively (in detail) and the other two more extensively (you should be able to follow discussions on the research design of these master theses during the seminar). Each student should write a short report on the thesis which they have read in detail, based on the following questions:
1. Please describe and reflect upon the underlying epistemological and ontological assumptions of the thesis, according to your own understanding,.
2. Is the research question/s well formulated and motivated? Why/why not? Is the research question answered during the course of thesis? How?
3. How is theory used in the thesis (in relation to the research problem/research question/s? In the analysis? In the form of a theoretical framework?). In what way/s, if any, does theory add to the quality of the thesis?
4. Are the choice and implementation of the research method/s well formulated and motivated? How/why not?
5. How are the conclusions of the thesis drawn? Do you agree with the conclusions? Are the conclusions firmly based on the empirical data presented in the thesis?
6. Is this a thesis of high quality? Why/why not? (e.g. according to which criteria is the thesis good/not so good?)
If you participate actively in the seminar (e.g. contributing to the seminar discussions based on your individual preparation), you don’t have to submit your written report. However, if you fail to participate actively (being at the seminar unprepared or being absent from the seminar) you are requested to submit a written report of 2 – 4 pages (12p Times New Roman, 1,5 line spacing) to Per Knutsson (per.knutsson@globalstudies.gu.se).
GS2321: Introduction to Research Design
Maria Stern, International Relations
Introductory Note
Research may appear simple until you start doing it yourself. It is important to keep in mind that confusion and frustration are absolutely normal.
Review
- Epistemology: How we can know (which has an impact on methods and research questions)
- Ontology: How we understand the world / What are the relevant units of analysis?
- Method: What are our tools of research and analysis?
- Ethics: The rights and responsibilities that govern the relationship between researcher and subject
- Methodology: How epistemology, ontology, method, and ethical responsibilities work together
Research Design
-Step One: Interest / Passion / Curiosity
● Interest, passion, and curiosity about your topic and research question are absolutely vital.
● They help you to identify a problem, topic, and/or a theoretical puzzle.
● Your problem, topic, and our theoretical puzzle must be justified/ defended, ideally in the introduction of your thesis. In other words, you must specify the motivation of your study as well as the relevance (in relation to "reality" and/ or in relation to other research theories), the contribution (in relation to existing literature and/ or academic debates), and aim (what is the point of your research).
-Step Two: Purpose Statement
● You must state the purpose of your research.
● You must also state a central question. It is important to note that this central question can and will be reformulated throughout the research process. If you are conducting a quantitative study, your central question is likely to be a hypothesis. If you are a conducting a qualitative study, your central question is likely to be a theme.
● You must also state researchable sub-questions that delimit your study.
- Step Three: Theoretical Underpinnings
● Your theoretical underpinnings must be made explicit.
● These are usually based on or derived from the literature review.
● They are used to motivate your research problem.
● They also help you to formulate researchable questions.
● Most importantly, theoretical underpinnings provide a theoretical framework for your analysis and must be explicitly stated.
- Step Four: Method
● Method is an account of what you are going to do and why. In selecting a method, you should consider the following questions:
→ How does your choice relate to your aim, questions, and the theoretical underpinnings of your study?
→ Do you need to use more than one method?
→ How feasible are your methods?
- Step Five: Ethical Considerations
● The Swedish Research Council has established guidelines and these will (probably) be posted on GUL.
● It is important to consider ethics but not to get too bogged down by them. If you do, it is virtually impossible to complete your study.
- Step Six: Writing Process
● It is important to consider and understand your audience.
● It is also important to consider your voice. In other words, how present will you be in the text? This is related to method as well as epistemology and ontology.
Concluding Remarks
- The steps detailed above are simply a guideline and subject to change. If you follow them sequentially, you are in a small minority.
- It is virtually impossible to complete all of these steps perfectly so don't be too hard on yourself.
Introductory Note
Research may appear simple until you start doing it yourself. It is important to keep in mind that confusion and frustration are absolutely normal.
Review
- Epistemology: How we can know (which has an impact on methods and research questions)
- Ontology: How we understand the world / What are the relevant units of analysis?
- Method: What are our tools of research and analysis?
- Ethics: The rights and responsibilities that govern the relationship between researcher and subject
- Methodology: How epistemology, ontology, method, and ethical responsibilities work together
Research Design
-Step One: Interest / Passion / Curiosity
● Interest, passion, and curiosity about your topic and research question are absolutely vital.
● They help you to identify a problem, topic, and/or a theoretical puzzle.
● Your problem, topic, and our theoretical puzzle must be justified/ defended, ideally in the introduction of your thesis. In other words, you must specify the motivation of your study as well as the relevance (in relation to "reality" and/ or in relation to other research theories), the contribution (in relation to existing literature and/ or academic debates), and aim (what is the point of your research).
-Step Two: Purpose Statement
● You must state the purpose of your research.
● You must also state a central question. It is important to note that this central question can and will be reformulated throughout the research process. If you are conducting a quantitative study, your central question is likely to be a hypothesis. If you are a conducting a qualitative study, your central question is likely to be a theme.
● You must also state researchable sub-questions that delimit your study.
- Step Three: Theoretical Underpinnings
● Your theoretical underpinnings must be made explicit.
● These are usually based on or derived from the literature review.
● They are used to motivate your research problem.
● They also help you to formulate researchable questions.
● Most importantly, theoretical underpinnings provide a theoretical framework for your analysis and must be explicitly stated.
- Step Four: Method
● Method is an account of what you are going to do and why. In selecting a method, you should consider the following questions:
→ How does your choice relate to your aim, questions, and the theoretical underpinnings of your study?
→ Do you need to use more than one method?
→ How feasible are your methods?
- Step Five: Ethical Considerations
● The Swedish Research Council has established guidelines and these will (probably) be posted on GUL.
● It is important to consider ethics but not to get too bogged down by them. If you do, it is virtually impossible to complete your study.
- Step Six: Writing Process
● It is important to consider and understand your audience.
● It is also important to consider your voice. In other words, how present will you be in the text? This is related to method as well as epistemology and ontology.
Concluding Remarks
- The steps detailed above are simply a guideline and subject to change. If you follow them sequentially, you are in a small minority.
- It is virtually impossible to complete all of these steps perfectly so don't be too hard on yourself.
GS2321: Ontology and Epistemology
Erik Andersson, International Relations
What is the nature of research?
- To do research is to produce meaning and knowledge.
- Research is expensive but is accorded a high status in society.
-Why then do universities invest so much money in research?
● Research appeals to certain principles including openness with regard to sources, methodology, and theoretical framework; accessibility to criticism which helps to determine reliability and validity; and collective ownership of the information and conclusions.
● These principles are upheld so that research can contribute to "development".
● Research happens within a contextof epistemology and ontology.
Ontology
- The Oxford English Dictionary defines ontology as, "the branch of metaphysics dealing with the nature of being."
-Ontology varies between academic disciplines.
● In international relations, for example, some say that the primary entity is actors while others such as nation-states while other contend that it is structures.
● International relations research must relate to these ontologies.
-Depending on your adopted onotology, you will produce different research.
● History: Imminence ↔ Intention
● Identity: Primordialism ↔ Constructivism (J. Butler)
● Philosophy: Dualism (mind/matter) ↔ Holism
Epistemology
- The Oxford English Dictionary defines epistemology as, "the theory of knowledge especially with regard to methods and validity."
Qualitative ↔ Quantitative Epistemologies
- The divisions between qualitative and quantitative epistemologies was the subject of intense academic debate for centuries. However, now, most agree that both are imporatnt and scientific.
● In other words, one cannot understand the social phenomena of divorce without interviews (qualitative research) and statistical analysis (quantitative research).
● Most also agree that you can't engage in quantiative analysis without first thinking about meaning and ideas.
● The reverse is also true; qualitative analysis necessitates quantitative analysis.
● Thus, qualitative research can be and is often conducted on the foundation of a quantative notion.
● See more information see Alvesson and Deetz.
Subjectivity ↔ Objectivity
- Can a researcher divorce themselves from their research and be objective? Yes and no.
● A subjective researcher can attempt to be more objective by being open and transparent about their biases.
- Is there any pure/objective "data"?
● "Data" is always approaced through onological and epistemological lenses.
● "Data" in the social sciences is usally constructed and interpreted according to specified frameworks.
Induction (discovery) ↔ Deduction (hypothesis testing)
- Pure induction does not exist but is related to ontology, epistemology, and worldview.
- These are useful general approaches.
Paradigms
- Paradigms are small, scientific discourses in regard to how experiements are conducted and how research is done.
- Discourse is a similar concept.
- Different paradigms have different languages.
● Language itself is not neutral and, as a result, must be considered and analyzed.
● Economists of a certain kind speak and write in specific ways.
- Language relates to and is influneced by ontologies and epistemologies.
- Language is what we use to tell the "truth" and express and interpret "data".
● "Truth" is always preliminary to some and always valid to others.
Methodology
- The Oxford English Dictionary defines methodology as, "the science of method or body of methods used in a particular branch of science."
- It is important to distinguish between empirical and analytical methods.
● For example, in your thesis, it is useful to specify that you did one thing in the field and something else when you got home because...
Coherence
-A thesis must be coherent on all levels!
● In other words, don't mix ontological concepts with incompatible epistemological procedures.
-Coherence is created through theory.
● Theory helps the research with positioning, analytical "tools"/ framework, and contribution.
● Positioning is done through literature review and details how your research will contribute to and build upon previous research. (It is important to express agreement as well as disagreement with previous research.)
● Analytical "tools"/ framework can be conceptual and eclectic in which you take bits and pieces from established theories in order to construct your own as well as to define variables.
● Contribution helps show validity, reliability, etc. and outlines how your research alters the ways in which we see the world.
What is the nature of research?
- To do research is to produce meaning and knowledge.
- Research is expensive but is accorded a high status in society.
-Why then do universities invest so much money in research?
● Research appeals to certain principles including openness with regard to sources, methodology, and theoretical framework; accessibility to criticism which helps to determine reliability and validity; and collective ownership of the information and conclusions.
● These principles are upheld so that research can contribute to "development".
● Research happens within a contextof epistemology and ontology.
Ontology
- The Oxford English Dictionary defines ontology as, "the branch of metaphysics dealing with the nature of being."
-Ontology varies between academic disciplines.
● In international relations, for example, some say that the primary entity is actors while others such as nation-states while other contend that it is structures.
● International relations research must relate to these ontologies.
-Depending on your adopted onotology, you will produce different research.
● History: Imminence ↔ Intention
● Identity: Primordialism ↔ Constructivism (J. Butler)
● Philosophy: Dualism (mind/matter) ↔ Holism
Epistemology
- The Oxford English Dictionary defines epistemology as, "the theory of knowledge especially with regard to methods and validity."
Qualitative ↔ Quantitative Epistemologies
- The divisions between qualitative and quantitative epistemologies was the subject of intense academic debate for centuries. However, now, most agree that both are imporatnt and scientific.
● In other words, one cannot understand the social phenomena of divorce without interviews (qualitative research) and statistical analysis (quantitative research).
● Most also agree that you can't engage in quantiative analysis without first thinking about meaning and ideas.
● The reverse is also true; qualitative analysis necessitates quantitative analysis.
● Thus, qualitative research can be and is often conducted on the foundation of a quantative notion.
● See more information see Alvesson and Deetz.
Subjectivity ↔ Objectivity
- Can a researcher divorce themselves from their research and be objective? Yes and no.
● A subjective researcher can attempt to be more objective by being open and transparent about their biases.
- Is there any pure/objective "data"?
● "Data" is always approaced through onological and epistemological lenses.
● "Data" in the social sciences is usally constructed and interpreted according to specified frameworks.
Induction (discovery) ↔ Deduction (hypothesis testing)
- Pure induction does not exist but is related to ontology, epistemology, and worldview.
- These are useful general approaches.
Paradigms
- Paradigms are small, scientific discourses in regard to how experiements are conducted and how research is done.
- Discourse is a similar concept.
- Different paradigms have different languages.
● Language itself is not neutral and, as a result, must be considered and analyzed.
● Economists of a certain kind speak and write in specific ways.
- Language relates to and is influneced by ontologies and epistemologies.
- Language is what we use to tell the "truth" and express and interpret "data".
● "Truth" is always preliminary to some and always valid to others.
Methodology
- The Oxford English Dictionary defines methodology as, "the science of method or body of methods used in a particular branch of science."
- It is important to distinguish between empirical and analytical methods.
● For example, in your thesis, it is useful to specify that you did one thing in the field and something else when you got home because...
Coherence
-A thesis must be coherent on all levels!
● In other words, don't mix ontological concepts with incompatible epistemological procedures.
-Coherence is created through theory.
● Theory helps the research with positioning, analytical "tools"/ framework, and contribution.
● Positioning is done through literature review and details how your research will contribute to and build upon previous research. (It is important to express agreement as well as disagreement with previous research.)
● Analytical "tools"/ framework can be conceptual and eclectic in which you take bits and pieces from established theories in order to construct your own as well as to define variables.
● Contribution helps show validity, reliability, etc. and outlines how your research alters the ways in which we see the world.
GS2321: Research Design and Methods, Introduction
Per Knutsson, School of Global Studies
Learning Outcomes
- Students will understand the power and limitations of various research methods.
- Students will evaluate the validity and reliability of secondary data.
- Students will evaluate and design data collection methods.
- Students will assess ethical issues.
- Students will design and plan an independent research project using quantitative and/or qualitative methods.
- Students will critically reflect on the coherence of research designs.
Course Structure
- Part one: Research Design and Methods (planning and overarching questions.
- Part two: Either Quantitative or Qualitative Methods
Content
- Students will work towards writing a master thesis through exploration of the following:
● Ontology and Epistemology
● Introduction to research design
● Single and comparative case studies
● Quantitative/ Qualitative divide
● Mixed methods
● Crash course on quantitative and qualitative research designs, methods, and data analysis
Seminars
- 1st: Evaluate and discuss the research design of a master thesis.
- 2nd: Evaluate and discuss research design and selection of cases in research papers.
- 3rd: Propose a research design based on a specific research theme/ question.
Course Coordinators
- Per Knutsson, "the spider in the web"
- Maria Stern
- Anna Persson
- Martin Sjöstedt
Part Two: Qualitative Methods
- ethnography and participant observation
- interviews
- discourse and argumentation analysis
- action research and trans-disciplinary methods
-policy and project evaluation
Part Two: Quantitative Methods
- Evaluate correlations
- Estimate regressions
- How to interpret results
What's Expected in a Master Thesis?
- One of the principal expectations is a coherent argument running throughout the thesis.
- The thesis must unfold logically.
- Conclusions must be theoretically and empirically based.
- The thesis must have a well-defined, viable, relevant, and feasible research question.
- It is essential that you "live" with your research question.
- The thesis must be no more than 25,000 words in length.
Learning Outcomes
- Students will understand the power and limitations of various research methods.
- Students will evaluate the validity and reliability of secondary data.
- Students will evaluate and design data collection methods.
- Students will assess ethical issues.
- Students will design and plan an independent research project using quantitative and/or qualitative methods.
- Students will critically reflect on the coherence of research designs.
Course Structure
- Part one: Research Design and Methods (planning and overarching questions.
- Part two: Either Quantitative or Qualitative Methods
Content
- Students will work towards writing a master thesis through exploration of the following:
● Ontology and Epistemology
● Introduction to research design
● Single and comparative case studies
● Quantitative/ Qualitative divide
● Mixed methods
● Crash course on quantitative and qualitative research designs, methods, and data analysis
Seminars
- 1st: Evaluate and discuss the research design of a master thesis.
- 2nd: Evaluate and discuss research design and selection of cases in research papers.
- 3rd: Propose a research design based on a specific research theme/ question.
Course Coordinators
- Per Knutsson, "the spider in the web"
- Maria Stern
- Anna Persson
- Martin Sjöstedt
Part Two: Qualitative Methods
- ethnography and participant observation
- interviews
- discourse and argumentation analysis
- action research and trans-disciplinary methods
-policy and project evaluation
Part Two: Quantitative Methods
- Evaluate correlations
- Estimate regressions
- How to interpret results
What's Expected in a Master Thesis?
- One of the principal expectations is a coherent argument running throughout the thesis.
- The thesis must unfold logically.
- Conclusions must be theoretically and empirically based.
- The thesis must have a well-defined, viable, relevant, and feasible research question.
- It is essential that you "live" with your research question.
- The thesis must be no more than 25,000 words in length.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)