Research Framework Development Dr. Bakhtiar Ali SZABIST, Islamabad Campus Week-5 SZABIST

Problem Definition The indication of a specific decision area that will be clarified by answering some research questions. SZABIST SZABIST

Example: Theory and Research The case of development According to Michael Todaro (1994:18) development is both a physical reality and a state of mind in which society has, through some combination of social, economic, and institutional processes, secure the means for obtaining a better life, development in all societies must have a least the following three objectives: To increase the availability and widen the distribution of basic life sustaining goods To rise levels of living To expand the range of economic and social choices SZABIST

Example: Theory and Research Quality of Public Institutions Civil Liberties GDP Per Capita Theory (Target) Development Income Distribution Theory Theory Theory SZABIST

Stay Focused ! SZABIST

Use of Theory in Research Creswell presents quantitative research as being more driven by theory (an entire section of a research proposal may be devoted to presenting the theory for the study. By contrast, a qualitative study may conclude with the development of a theory. Qualitative studies research may also use theory as a lens that shapes what is looked at and the questions asked. SZABIST

The Abstraction Ladder Theory Abstract Level Propositions Levels of Abstraction Concepts / Constructs Observations of Objects, Events and Occurrences (Reality) Empirical Level SZABIST

Defining Problem Results in Clear Cut Research Objectives Symptom Detection Analysis of the Situation Exploratory Research (Optional) Problem Definition Statement of Research Objectives SZABIST SZABIST

Problems do not exist in nature but in the minds of people This can be seen from an examination of the definition of problem: problems stem from the juxtaposition of factors which results in a perplexing or enigmatic state of mind (a cognitive problem), an undesirable consequence (a psychological or value problem), or a conflict which obscures the appropriate course of action (a practical problem). These three (Cognitions, Values and Practices) are attributes of persons, not the objective world (Dan Cline, 2011) SZABIST

Here comes in Research Frameworks and Models Problems cannot be articulated except within a conceptual system. No inquirer can investigate a problem from all perspectives simultaneously. And that is what a logical structure or theoretical framework is all about. It establishes a vantage point, a perspective, a set of lenses through which the researcher views the problem.  (Dan Cline, 2011) SZABIST

Enters Perspective Paradigms, Theory and Your own Epistemology Choice of frameworks chosen by the researcher may lead to new understandings or problem solutions . or to inadequate inquiry or false conclusions For example, Decades of research on organizational management and behavior viewed organizations from the classic, rational model of hierarchical bureaucracy – X theory (perspective never led to adequate understandings, such as corporations and universities) Recent researchers, working from the vantage point of alternative perspectives, using metaphors derived from long-term observation of life in universities and other organizations, developed Y theory  (Dan Cline, 2011) SZABIST

Your Position Your ontological Position Your Epistemological Position Positivist Interpretivisim SZABIST

Three Types Frameworks Philosophical Framework (Monti & Tingen, 1999) Determines how reality is explained, the source of knowledge, and the perspective taken in research and practice. Theoretical Framework (Alderson, 1998). Influences how research questions are generated, studies are conducted, data are analysed, findings are understood, and results are used. Conceptual Framework (Warelow, (1997). Brings theory into practice by organizing themes to form models, and operationalizing findings of synthesis. Enables experience, reflection and wisdom as praxis, allowing practice to drive theory. SZABIST

The Difference - TWF A theoretical framework is much broader. Our epistemology and ontology greatly shape the way our framework is perceived and how it is used within our research. Patton’s remark (1990), “How you study the world determines what you learn about the world” (p. 67) The theoretical framework dwells on time tested theories that embody the findings of numerous investigations on how phenomena occur. The theoretical framework provides a general representation of relationships between things in a given phenomenon SZABIST

The Difference - CFW A conceptual framework is the researcher’s idea on how the research problem will have to be explored. This is founded on the theoretical framework, which lies on a much broader scale of resolution. The conceptual framework embodies the specific direction by which the research will have to be undertaken. Statistically speaking, the conceptual framework describes the relationship between specific variables identified in the study. The conceptual framework is also called the research paradigm. SZABIST

Conceptual Framework Definition Concise description (often accompanied by a graphic or visual depiction) of the major variables operating within the arena of the problem to be pursued together with the researcher's overarching view of how the variables interact to produce a more powerful or comprehensive "model" of relevant phenomena than has heretofore been available for shedding light on the problem (Dan Cline, 2011) SZABIST

Devising a Conceptual framework What are concepts? General representations of the phenomena to be studied – ‘building blocks’ What is a conceptual framework? Verbal and/or diagrammatic representation of the possible relationships between concepts In academic contexts may be ‘theoretical framework’ or a ‘model’ SZABIST SZABIST

The process of devising a conceptual framework SZABIST SZABIST

Conceptualization and Concepts Conceptualization is a process of defining the agreed meaning of the terms used in a study. Indicators are identified to mark the presence or absence of a concept. Some concepts have more than one aspect or facet, called dimensions. The interchangeability of indicators means that if several indicators represent the same concept, they should behave in the same way as the concept. SZABIST SZABIST

From Conceptualization to Operationalization From conceptualization the researcher creates a nominal definition to identify the focus of the study. An operational definition is created to defined the procedures or steps used in measuring a concept. An operational definition must be specific (mutually exclusive) and unambiguous Operational decisions are made based on the purposes of the study.. SZABIST SZABIST

From Concepts to Variable From Concepts to Variable SZABIST SZABIST

From Concepts to Variable SZABIST SZABIST

Concept Mapping SZABIST SZABIST

Variables A variable is anything that can take on differing or varying values. The values can differ at various times for the same object or person or at the same time for different objects or persons. Dependent Variable: The variable of primary interest. Independent Variable A variable that influences the Dependent variable (+/-) The variance in the DV is accounted for by the IV Moderating Variable That has strong contingent effect on the IV-DV relationship.. MV can modify this relationship of IV-DV Intervening/Mediating Variable That surfaces the time the IV start operating to influence the DV and the time their impact is felt on. SZABIST SZABIST

Schematic Diagrams Illustrating Moderation & Intervening Variables SZABIST SZABIST

Example of Moderated Effect SZABIST SZABIST

Example of Mediated Effect SZABIST SZABIST

Moderating & Mediating Variables SZABIST SZABIST

Research Framework SZABIST

Conceptual Framework with Intervening Variable SZABIST SZABIST

Conceptual Framework with Moderating Variable SZABIST

Proposition and Hypothesis A proposition is a statement concerned with the relationship between concepts. It asserts a universal connection and logical linkage between concepts. Propositions are at a higher level of abstraction than concepts Example: Smoking is injurious to health Hypotheses are propositions which are empirically testable. They are usually concerned with the relationships between variables Example: Increasing salary by 10% will double the production SZABIST SZABIST

Hypotheses Development After Literature Review, Theoretical Framework (logical relationship between variables) A Logically conjectured relationship between two or more variables expressed in the form of testable statement This relationships are conjectured on the basis of the network of associations established in the TF formulated for the research study Several Testable statement or hypotheses can be drawn from TF SZABIST

Statement of Hypotheses Formats IF-Then Statement Employees who are more healthy will take sick leave less frequently IF employees are more healthy, Then they will take sick leave less frequently Directional Hypotheses The greater the stress experienced in the job, the lower the job satisfaction of employees Satisfied workers are more motivated than un-satisfied Non-Directional Hypotheses There is a relationship between age and job satisfaction There is difference between the work ethic values of American and Asian employees SZABIST

Statement of Hypotheses Formats Null and Alternate Hypotheses Null: A proposition which states a definitive, exact relationship between two variables Statement is expressed as NO (significant) relationship between two variables NO (significant) difference between two group. WE state that there is no difference between what we might find in the population characteristics and sample we are studying H0: There is no relationship between stress experienced on the job and the job satisfaction of employee Alternate: The opposite of Null hypotheses, is statement expressing a relationship between two variables or indicating differences between groups SZABIST

Operationalization of Variable for Instrument Development

Dimensions (D) and Elements (E) of the Concept (C) ‘Achievement Motivation’ SZABIST

Examples of Questions to Tap the level of ‘Achievement Motivation’ To what extent would you say you push yourself to get the job done on time? How frequently do you think of your work when you are at home? How much do you concentrate on achieving your goals? How annoyed do you get when you make mistakes? SZABIST

Common Mistakes with Operational Definitions Excluding some of the important dimensions and elements Arising from failure to recognise or conceptualise them Including certain irrelevant features mistakenly thought to be relevant. SZABIST

Dimensions (D) and Elements (E) of the Concept (C) ‘Learning’ SZABIST

The Remainng Topics: Methdology Analysis In Next Class SZABIST