Lecture 1 DHX_MET1 Methodology 1 Stanislav Ježek Faculty of Social Studies MU Overview •Course introduction •Research with people •The process of research Course introduction •Textbook – Sekaran, Bougie •Consultations – see my profile in IS •Final assignment •Topic selection, due November 7, 2020 •Final project proposal, due January 15, 2021 •Final exam – 3rd week in January, based on textbook • This course •Is an introduction to social-science research •Research of people‘s behavior, emotions, beliefs… •Research of something else using data about people •Assuming no previous knowledge, just some exposure to research •Assuming you have a broad dissertation topic but not a particular focus yet •Assuming research with people may not be a significant part of your dissertation Follow-up elective course DHX_MET2 •Workshop An example to start. • • • • Research with/about people •…just like any other science, •systematic, data-based, critical investigation into a problem • except… •People study people •People react to being studied •People react to findings •There are other people besides the researcher and the participants who have other interests… • •… it is difficult to achieve as much control as we would wish for. • Sekaran, Bougie p. 4 Relevance •Management – employees, leaders… •Marketing - customers •Finance – professionals, customers •Accounting ? • Social science x Business research General answers valid for populations x answers valid for business (segment) Basic & aplied x mostly applied What do we need to learn? •Observe & measure people •Make use of people‘s observations of themselves –Interview them •Use the products of people‘s activity to learn about them •Achieve enough control over people to be able to experiment with them without ethical issues •Select the right people as sources of information and Persuade them to participate •Make sense of all the data through analysis while humbly taking into account all the things that have or might have gone wrong Why? What for? •To be able to plan & carry out research successfully. •To be a critical consumer of research •To be a manager knowing when to get a consulting firm to do research and recognize if they do a good job •To be a social scientist or a psychologist in an economic field • What is research? •Activity producing new KNOWLEDGE by •Posing a question to which the knowledge would be an answer •Gathering information/data from which we could rationally infer the answer •Producing the answer and •Assess uncertainties • What is (scientific) research? •Activity producing new KNOWLEDGE • • •KNOWLEDGE is a BELIEF about the world that is TRUE based on some argument • •The type of ARGUMENTATION gives different meanings of TRUTH • A little epistemological detour Truth as Correspondence and Coherence •Truth based on Corespondence •A belief (a proposition) about the world is true when it is consistent with the actual state of the world •But we must believe that there is some actual world and that we are able to get to know its state – epistemological realism (objectivism) •It is intuitively easy to believe in but complicated by language •Truth based on Coherence •A belief about a world is true when it is consistent with other beliefs about the world within a domain of discourse •The world is what we believe it is, it is made of our beliefs – epistemological idealism (subjectivism) •While it is serious philosophy to try to defend this position for the natural world, it is easy to believe this about the social world and people‘s minds A little epistemological detour The Pragmatic position •Truth considered in the context (of inquiry) not absolutely •Truth as the correspondence with the limit of infinite scientific investigation – Peirce, Dewey •True are beliefs that work (have effect) when aplied in practice – William James A little epistemological detour Epistemology •What does it mean to know? •What is knowable? •How can we get to know what is knowable? •Answers come in packages „-isms“ •Empiricism, positivism, realism – sensing the real world •Constructivism – creating a meaningful intersubjective world •Pragmatism – relaxed, contextual empiricism, if it works… •Critical realism – Roy Bhaskar – empiricism-constructivism hybrid – social phenomena are construed and become part of the real world. This increases uncertainty but doesn‘t make empirical social science meaningless. • What does it mean to KNOW something? How do we know we have LEARNED something? How do we know whether our belief is TRUE? •Refuse to doubt and stick to TRADITION, experience •Delegate the decision to AUTHORITY •Cast away authority (and data) and A PRIORI rationally argue the (obvious) truth •Do SCIENCE by combining data (facts) with previous beliefs • •19th century Charles Peirce Peirce – methods of fixating beliefs We are still doing all of this and in life it is good to know which method to use when. The Process of Science Hypothetico-deductive method 1.Identify a broad problem area. Define the problem statement or research question. 2.Identify relevant theory 2. •3. Develop hypotheses (expectations) from theory. •4. Determine measures, procedures to create data •5. Collect data •6. Analyze data and compare findings with expectations •7. Evaluate conclusions and update theory (in writing). TEORIE PHENOMENA THEORY THE EMPIRICAL CYCLE HYPOTHESES DATA DATA DATA, OBSERVATIONS Abduction, abductive inference - starts with observations and seeks to find the simplest and most likely explanation for the observations. It is like a deduction but in an opposite direction – considering several possible beliefs, we chose the one which is most likely to have produced the observations. One very specific form of abduction is maximum likelihood estimation in statistics. Like with induction the conclusions are not certain. The inductive method •Developing theory from individual observations •No „pure“ induction – there is always some preexisting theory (beliefs) •Starting from „pre-conceptual“ theory – so far we have no concepts/variables allowing us to describe the phenomenon •Either •starting from existing rich data •or creating rich data free from (most) preconceptions Values of scientific research i.e. ways to make the argument for truth more convincing and open to improvement •Purposiveness - focus •Rigor – unbroken „chain of evidence“ from theory to data and conlusions •Testability of hypotheses •Replicability – even great rigor does not mean certainty •Precision & confidence – knowledge thereof •Objectivity – intersubjectivity & transparency of the chain of reasoning •Generalizability – knowledge thereof •Parsimony – sufficient simplicity David Hiles, lectures at Masaryk University 2001 • Types of research by purpose •Descriptive •what phenomena are there and how frequent they are •Classifications as a way to understand the variability •Predictive •How is the probability of one phenomenon related to the probability of other phenomena •How well can we predict •Causal •Can we show how one phenomenon affects another? •How things work – prediction and explanation in one •Understanding •How people understand situations, how they experience them and what language they use to communicate about this •What are relevant classes of phenomena, variables Types of research by design •Surveys •Observation studies •Experiments lab or field, quasiexperiments •Qualitative studies •Ex-post-facto, post-hoc studies •Case studies • • • Summary •Research is for making knowledge of various levels of generality – personal, local, company, country, mankind… •Methodological knowledge is good for doing research, consuming it, and contracting it •Many research questions in economic fields are about people – either directly (object of interest) or indirectly (sources of data) •Research of people (social world) is complicated by its unstable nature, reactivity and variability of people, ethical requirements etc. •The process of scientific research with people is only partially the same as in natural sciences and the level of uncertainty is much higher. •While there are other ways of justifying beliefs, scientific research is the one most careful and transparent in the argument WHY something is true. • What next? •For efficiency we need to make best use of what we already know. We know a lot, maybe too much in the way of quantity and too little in the way of quality. • •Next we will identify available theory and use it to develop a sound research question.