Understanding Research Design

Research Paradigm

A research paradigm is a “Cluster of beliefs and dictates which for scientists in a particular discipline influence what should be studied, how research should be done, hoe results should be interpreted” (Bryman, 1988:4)

  • 2 research paradigms

    • Qualitative

    • Quantitative

Underpinned by distinctive epistemological and ontological positions

  • Ontology — What is reality (study of being)

  • Epistemology — What is knowledge? (theory of knowledge)

  • Methodology — How do you go about finding it out?

  1. Ontology: What is reality?

  2. Epistemology: What and how can I know reality/ knowledge?

  3. Theoretical Perspective: What approach can we use to get knowledge?

  4. What procedure can I use to acquire knowledge: What procedure can I use to acquire knowledge?

Ontology

  • The study of the nature of reality or being

  • What exists in society?

Epistemology

  • A theory of knowledge and hoe knowledge is gained

  • How can we have knowledge of reality?

  • Who can be a ‘knower’?

Positive Paradigm

  • An epistemological position that advocates the application of the methods of the natural sciences to the study of social reality and beyond.

  • Associated mainly with QUANTITATIVE methodologies

    • Research largely similar approach of natural science

    • Social world is external, objective (a separate entity) and stable and predictable

    • Knowledge is based on observable, measurable, generalisable evidence

    • Reality is based on universal laws

    • Researchers should be objective and scientific

    • The researcher is independent, and distanced, and separate from research

Interpretivist Paradigm

  • An epistemological position that requires the social scientist to grasp the subjective meaning of social action

  • Associated mainly with QUALITATIVE methodologies

    • The world is socially constructed and subjective

    • Social world is context-dependent; subject to individual understanding, meaning and experiences

    • Reality is relative and multiple; social constructs (products of different experiences and beliefs)

    • The observer is part of what is being observed, researcher as subjective, research as co-produced, emphasise mutuality

Example

Bad behaviour in schools

  • Positive paradigm

    • Behaviour is external, objective and independent of social actors

    • Count examples of agreed definitions of bad behaviour in schools

  • Interpretivist paradigm

    • Behaviour is socially constructed, shaped by interactions and context

    • No agreed definition of bad behaviour in schools, changes overtime

Summary

  • Paradigm as a belief system that informs all aspects of the research process

  • Ontology as the study of the nature of reality or being

  • Epistemology as a theory of knowledge and how knowledge is gained

  • Your ontological and epistemological position informs research topic, design and conduct

  • Including choice of methods: QUANTITATIVE and QUALITATIVE methodologies

Theory and research

  • Deduction vs induction 

Deduction

  • A method of reasoning in which the conclusion is drawn from previously known premises 

  • Research is conducted with reference to a hypothesis or ideas inferred from existing theory 

Deduction study

Tonkin, M., & Woodhams, J. (2017). The feasibility of using crime scene behaviour to detect versatile serial offenders: An empirical test of behavioural consistency, distinctiveness and discrimination accuracy. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 22, 99-115.

Theory: Test whether geographical, temporal and MO crime scene behaviours can support behaviour case linkage 

Findings: Offender behaviour is consistent to use behavioural case linkage in different crime scenes

Induction

  • A method of reasoning that derives generalisations by seeking the common aspects of a number of specific cases 

  • New theory is generated out of research

Inductive study

Davis, C. (2018) ‘Rank Matters: Police leadership and the authority of rank’ Policing & Society 30(4): 446-461

Findings: Police officers’ experiences and understandings of leadership in the police

Theory: Situated Authority Model of Leadership to explain relationship between rank and leadership 

Example

Bad behaviour in schools…

  • Deductive approach

    • Hypothesis: Pupils labelled as ‘high risk’ perform less well in final year exams

    • Theory: Self fulfilling prophecy

  • Inductive approach

    • Explore the reasons why pupils before less well final year exams 

    • Develop a new theoretical model or toolkit to help practitioners prioritise risk areas impacting on pupil performance 

Summary

  • Deduction as hypothesis testing: reasoning in which the conclusion is drawn from previously known premises

  • Induction as theory from research: reasoning that derives generalisations by seeking the common aspects of a number of specific cases

  • Deductive and inductive approaches shape research design and methods

Quantitative vs qualitative data

Quantitative Data:

  • Form: Numbers

Qualitative Data:

  • Form: Words or language, images, objects,

  • Variety:

    • Observations of behaviours with descriptive accounts

    • Personal narratives of experiences (e.g., victim of violent crime)

    • Responses in discussion forums (e.g., opinions on sentencing reforms)

  • Analysis:

    • Influenced by the context and framework of the data

  • Quantitative Data: Uniform in form, straightforward statistical analysis

  • Qualitative Data: Diverse in form, requires context-specific analysis methods =>

  • Thematic analysis, content analysis and discourse analysis are the most used methods to analyse texts.


Qualitative or quantitative or both?

  • Is your research aiming to measure a phenomenon or is trying to analyse people’s experiences?

  • Do your research questions begin with how much/how many/how often or with why/how?

  • Would you like to ask both kind of questions?

  • It is very important to clarify these priorities from the start so that you can identify the best methods and approach to answer your research question.

  • Many research design combine quantitative and qualitative questions and adopt Mixed Methods, which we will discuss in a dedicated Session.


Main Qualitative methods

  • Interviews (semi-structured or unstructured) asking open questions rather than quantifiable YES/NO/HOW OFTEN/HOW MANY questions.

  • Focus groups

  • Ethnography/participant observation

  • Creative Methods (involving the discussion and/or co-creation of pictures, videos, drawings, maps, etc.)

  • Documentary research

  • We will discuss these methods in detail in the rest of the Unit, but it is important to be aware of them when designing your research

Main research designs

  • experimental design,

  • cross-sectional design,

  • longitudinal design,

  • case study design

  • comparative design

Experimental design: Quantitative 

  • Focuses on manipulating one variable to determine its effect on another variable, often in controlled settings.

  • Example: Evaluate a new rehabilitation program for juvenile offenders.

  • Sample: Randomly select juvenile offenders and assign to an experimental group receiving a new program and to a control group receiving the standard program.

  • After the implementation of the respective programs the research will determine programme effectiveness through the comparison of recidivism rates


Cross-sectional design

  • Involves collecting data at a single point in time to analyse relationships between variables.

  • Objective: Explore public perceptions of police-community relations in different neighbourhoods.

  • Sample: Select a diverse range of neighbourhoods with varying crime rates and demographic characteristics.

  • Data Collection: Interviews and focus groups with residents, local business owners, and community leaders in each neighbourhood to discuss experiences and perceptions of police interactions.

  • Analysis: Identify common themes and differences in perceptions across neighbourhoods.

  • Compare how factors such as neighbourhood crime rates and demographic characteristics influence perceptions

Longitudinal design

  • Longitudinal Design: Involves collecting data from the same subjects over an extended period to observe changes and developments

  • Example: Explore the long-term effects of gang involvement on individuals' life trajectories.

  • Sample: Select a group of individuals with a history of gang involvement.

  • Data Collection: Conduct in-depth interviews over several years.

  • Initial Interviews: Background, reasons for joining, early experiences.

  • Follow-up Interviews: Changes in perspectives, life events, exiting the gang.

  • Analysis: Track changes and patterns over time to understand the impact of gang involvement.

Case study design 

  • Case Study Design: in-depth analysis of a single case or a small number of cases, offering detailed contextual insights.

  • Example: Understand the social dynamics and individual factors leading to the rise of organised crime in a specific neighbourhood.

  • Design => Case Selection: Choose a neighbourhood with a known history of organised crime.

  • Data Collection: In-depth interviews with key stakeholders (e.g., law enforcement, community leaders, former gang members). Observation of community interactions and crime hotspots.

  • Analysis: Examine the social, economic, and environmental factors contributing to organised crime

Comparative design

Involves comparing two or more groups or cases to understand similarities and differences.

  • Objective: Assess the impact of different sentencing practices on rehabilitation outcomes for offenders.

  • Design: Select two jurisdictions with different sentencing practices.

    • Jurisdiction A: Implementing restorative justice practices (e.g., victim-offender mediation, community service).

    • Jurisdiction B: Implementing traditional punitive practices (e.g., incarceration).

  • Data Collection: Conduct interviews with offenders, probation officers, and community members to understand experiences and perceptions of the sentencing practices.

  • Analysis:

    • Compare rehabilitation outcomes between the two jurisdictions.

    • Analyse qualitative feedback to understand the perceived effectiveness and challenges of each sentencing practice

How to choose? What do you want to find out?

  • What is it that you want to accomplish? What is it that you want or need to know in order to accomplish that goal?

  • Why do you want to undertake a research on this topic?

  • How will the process and findings impact others?

  • How will they impact yourself?

  • Do you need to discuss the research idea and design with participants?

  • These are key questions to keep in mind when thinking about a research topic and design.

Your role as researcher

  • Students, researchers, development workers, people working for companies or NGOS. Anybody doing research needs to build their ‘research’ skills.

  • ‘Research’ is a wide range of activities. At its most simple, it is about collecting new information in a systematic way. It is needed for policy making, funding, identifying priority issues, comparing best approaches for program design… and many other issues.

  • As a researcher, you are ultimately responsible for the work that you produce and the ethics of its design.

Ethics are everything

  • Ethical concerns should be involved in every aspect of
    design.

  • It’s important to address these concerns in relation to methods, but they are also relevant to your goals, the selection of your research questions, validity concerns, and the critical assessment of your conceptual framework.

Positionality

  • Positionality in social research refers to the recognition of how a researcher's background, identity, and social position (such as race, gender, class, and personal experiences) influence their perspective, the research process, and the interpretation of findings.

  • It emphasises the importance of reflexivity and transparency in acknowledging potential biases and power dynamics in research 

Reflexibility and positionality

  • An appreciation of subjectivity and the personal in research, and the impact of the researcher on the research environment.

  • Reflection on the power relations / dynamics

  • Background, life experiences personal characteristics, insider/outsider status and the predicaments and opportunities this provides

  • Reflection on emotions in the research process

Flexibility and reflexibility

  • In a qualitative study, research design should be a reflexive process operating through every stage.

    • What counts as data and some of the research questions and methods often needs to be reconsidered.

    • You may need to adapt any design decision during the study in response to new developments or to changes in some other aspect of the design.

Other factors influencing research design

  • These include your research skills, the available resources, access to the research setting, the impact of the data and conclusions of the study, safety for yourself and participants, political issues...

  • Although these considerations are not part of the design of a study; they belong to the environment within which the research and its design exist or are products of the research.