OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH PROCESS

Lesson 2

 Explain the eight hallmarks of science

Objectives  Describe the building blocks of science

Welcome to lesson 2 of module 1! This lesson introduces you to the hallmarks

and building blocks of science. The things you will be learning in lesson 2 will be
your guide as you conduct studies/researches in the future. Enjoy and keep reading!

Activity

Steps in the Research Process

Based on what you’ve learned and experience in high school (e.g.
investigatory project) , try to recall and write down the steps in the research process.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Analysis

1. Where you able to write down the steps in research process completely and in a
correct order?

2. Which step or part of the research process do you think is most crucial?

Abstraction

Eight Hallmarks of Science

 The hallmarks or main distinguishing characteristics of scientific research may
be listed as follows:
1. Purposiveness
2. Rigor
3. Testability
4. Replicability
5. Precision and Confidence
6. Objectivity
7. Generalizability
8. Parsimony

Each of these characteristics can be explained in the context of a concrete

example. Let us consider a case of a manager who is interested in investigating how
employees’ commitment to the organization can be increased. We shall examine how
the eight hallmarks of science apply to this investigation so that it may be considered
― scientific.

Purposiveness
The manager should start the research with a definite aim or purpose. The
focus is on increasing the commitment of employees to the organization, as this will
be beneficial in many ways. An increase in employee commitment will translate into
less turnover, less absenteeism, and probably increased performance levels, all of
which would definitely benefit the organization. The research thus has a purposive
focus.

Rigor
A good theoretical base and a sound methodological design would add rigor to
a purposive study. Rigor connotes carefulness, thoroughness, and the degree of
exactitude in research investigations. In the case of our example, let us say the
manager of an organization asks 10 to 12 of its employees to indicate what would
increase their level of commitment to it. If, solely on the basis of their responses, the
manager reaches several conclusions on how employee commitment can be increased,
the whole approach to the investigation would be unscientific.

Testability
If, after talking to a random selection of employees of the organization and
study of the previous research done in the area of organizational commitment, the
man- ager or researcher develops certain hypotheses on how employee commitment
can be enhanced, then these can be tested by applying certain statistical tests to the
data collected for the purpose.

Replicability
Let us suppose that the manager/researcher, based on the results of the study,
concludes that participation in decision making is one of the most important factors
that influences the commitment of employees to the organization. We will place more
faith and credence in these findings and conclusion if similar find- ings emerge on the
basis of data collected by other organizations employing the same methods. To put it
differently, the results of the tests of hypotheses should be supported again and yet
again when the same type of research is repeated in other similar circumstances. To
the extent that this does happen (i.e., the results are replicated or repeated), we will
gain confidence in the scientific nature of our research. In other words, our
hypotheses would not have been supported merely by chance, but are reflective of the
true state of affairs in the population. Replicability is thus another hallmark of
scientific research.

Precision and Confidence

Precision refers to the closeness of the findings to reality based on a sample.
In other words, precision reflects the degree of accuracy or exactitude of the results on
the basis of the sample, to what really exists in the universe.
Confidence refers to the probability that our estimations are correct. That is, it
is not merely enough to be precise, but it is also important that we can confidently
claim that 95% of the time our results would be true and there is only a 5% chance of
our being wrong. This is also known as confidence level.
As a researcher, you should aim to design the research in a manner that
ensures that our findings are as close to reality (i.e., the true state of affairs in the
universe) as possible, so that you can place reliance or confidence in the results.

Objectivity
The conclusions drawn through the interpretation of the results of data
analysis should be objective; that is, they should be based on the facts of the findings
derived from actual data, and not on our own subjective or emotional values.

Generalizability
Generalizability refers to the scope of applicability of the research findings in
one organizational setting to other settings. Obviously, the wider the range of applic-
ability of the solutions generated by research, the more useful the research is to the
users.
For wider generalizability, the research sampling design has to be logically
developed and a number of other details in the data-collection methods need to be
meticulously followed.

Parsimony
Simplicity in explaining the phenomena or problems that occur, and in
generating solutions for the problems, is always preferred to complex research frame-
works that consider an unmanageable number of factors.
Therefore, the achievement of a meaningful and parsimonious, rather than an
elaborate and cumbersome model for problem solution becomes a critical issue in
research.

Building Blocks of Science

One of the primary methods of scientific investigation is the hypothetico-
deductive method. The deductive and inductive processes in research are described as
follows:
Deduction is the process by which we arrive at a reasoned conclusion by logical
generalization of a known fact.
Induction is a process where we observe certain phenomena and on this basis arrive at
conclusions. In other words, in induction we logically establish a general proposition
based on observed facts.
The building blocks of scientific inquiry are depicted in the figure below and
include the processes of initially observing phenomena, identifying the problem,
constructing a theory as to what might be happening, developing hypotheses,
determining aspects of the research design, collecting data, analyzing the data, and
interpreting the results.
The significance of these building blocks can be illustrated through an
example.

Example:
A sales manager might observe that customers are perhaps not as pleased as
they used to be. The manager may not be certain that this is really the case but may
experience anxiety and some uneasiness that customer satisfaction is on the decline.
This process of observation or sensing of the phenomena around us is what gets most
of the research—whether applied or basic—started. The next step for the manager is
to determine whether there is a real problem, and if so, how serious it is. This problem
identification calls for some preliminary data gathering. The manager might talk
casually to a few customers to find out how they feel about the products and customer
service. During the course of these conversations the manager might find that the
customers like the products but are upset because many of the items they need are
frequently out of stock, and they perceive the salespersons as not being helpful. From
discussions with some of the salespersons, the manager might discover that the
factory does not supply the goods on time and promises new delivery dates that it fails
on occasions to keep. Salespersons might also indicate that they try to please and
retain the customers by communicating the delivery dates given to them by the
factory.
Integration of the information obtained through the informal and formal
interviewing process has helped the manager to determine that a problem does exist. It
also helps the manager to formulate a conceptual model or theoretical framework of
all the factors contributing to the problem. In this case, there is a network of
connections among the following factors: delays by the factory in delivering goods,
the notification of later delivery dates that are not kept, the promises of the
salespersons to the customers (in hopes of retaining them) that cannot be fulfilled, all
of which contribute to customer dissatisfaction. From the theoretical framework,
which is a meaningful integration of all the information gathered, several hypotheses
can be generated and tested to determine if the data support them. Concepts are then
operationally defined so that they can be measured. A research design is set up to
decide on, among other issues, how to collect further data, analyze and interpret
them, and finally, to provide an answer to the problem. The process of drawing from
logical analysis an inference that purports to be conclusive is called deduction.

The Seven-Step Process in the Hypothetico-Deductive Method

The seven steps involved in the hypothetico-deductive method of research
stem from the building blocks discussed above, and are listed and will be discussed in
detail in the following lessons.
1. Observation
2. Preliminary information gathering
3. Theory formulation
4. Hypothesizing
5. Further scientific data collection
6. Data analysis
7. Deduction

Application

Write a three-paragraph reflection paper on what you have learned in lesson 2.

Well done! You have just finished lesson 2 of this module. Should you have
some questions regarding this lesson, feel free to send your message in the class GC.

You are now ready to proceed to lesson 3 of this module which is all about
ethics in research.