Research Assignment #16: ‘Pursue the
elusive Holy Grail of the Historical account that neither exterminates angel of
depravity nor exterminates angel of morality’ for the Departments of English
& Media Studies by Prof Dr Sohail Ansari
A vexing question that nettles: The historical account that
exterminates angel of depravity is purple. The historical account that is
afflicted by paranoia, xenophobia and
buttressed by inflating rhetoric exterminates angel of morality and is tainted as it
taints the true pursuit of truth.
The historical account that is not liberally sprinkled with
the influence and interpretation of over blown metaphors and not exciting
because of the overuse of melodramatic and fanciful descriptions and not
saturated by the florid rhetorical devices and
unusually over ripe unusual words is
the Holy Grail.
The historical account that is uncharacterized by deeply held
ethnocentric assumptions, untempered by patriotic priorities and the dictates
of local circumstances, freed from parochial focus, reflective with no
constraints is the Holy Grail.
Research or
study
We insist that our work be research than study because study is the accumulation of existing knowledge and
research is study up to the boundary of what is in existence today, then synthesize new
knowledge to push the boundary further. The word research itself explains this:
re-search, you “search again”.
· We study counter narrative up to
the boundary and then re-search its meanings and application.
Study is learning something which came
out of a research.
Study is to gain knowledge about
something.
Research is working on inventing
something new for studying.
Research is to gain knowledge about
something to do something innovative.
· We gain knowledge about counter
narrative and then apply our research to innovative contribution to its
meanings and application.
Our
Research for capturing the elusive Holy Grail:
We decide
to pursue Holy Grail in a way that is different but guarantees the construction
of consensual historical account.
We,
hence, are limited to the description of a way we tap narrative and counter
narrative and to the explanation of a way historical account is woven from
narratives and counter narratives.
Through
our definition we overcome the theoretical
differences those pit narrative against counter narrative so that both
narratives become a matter of emphasis within a structural symbiosis.
Our central thesis of both narratives echoes in
exercise so that a sense of this aspect of symbiosis is hammered into students.
The
method/pattern of gathering contents from both narratives
Passages from both narratives are to be systemically gathered
to help evaluate contents of both narratives those have overlapping
meanings or similar description of a same event or a person as they go on to
justify their authenticity than the parts those have no overlapping or no
similar meanings.
.We are, hence, restricted to reading
both narratives and select parts/lines from them.
Choice of a tool for evaluation and discussion for its
justification is not the part of this article; however we follow content analysis but in
a limited way.
Exercise
requires students to apply content analysis but in restricted sense.
· Content
analysis as a research tool should be used to determine the presence of similar
lines or lines explaining similar things in both narratives.
· Content
analysis as a research tool should not be used to quantify and
analyze the presence, meanings and relationships of words and concepts, then
make inferences about the messages within the texts, the writer(s), the
audience, and even the culture and time of which these are a part.
· Students are not required to
conduct a content analysis on narrative and counter narrative for coding, or
breaking down both narratives into manageable categories on a variety of
levels--word, word sense, phrase, sentence, or theme--and then examine using
one of content analysis' basic methods: conceptual analysis or relational
analysis.
Research
scope
The scope of this research is limited to redefining counter
analysis.
Our research, hence does not include methodology as there
is no need of hypotheses to our research, thus no need for the discussion of
the main distinctive points among different research
approaches for the reason
for deciding the right research.
As this article is in the form of an assignment; therefore
students are required to gather corroborating passages or lines from both
narratives with no tendency to tie them to the broad application of a tool of
analysis. Students are required to do analysis and discussion of passages or
lines. Students as well are to write abstract followed by key words and have to
do literature review of narrative and counter narrative as a counter narrative
antithesis to a narrative
Limitations and delimitations
‘The limitations and delimitations sections
of research describe situations and circumstances that
may affect or restrict methods and analysis of research data.
Delimitations are boundaries that are set by
the researcher in order to control the range of a study. They are created
before any investigations are carried out in order to reduce the amount of time
or effort spent in certain unnecessary, and perhaps even unrelated, areas to
the overall study.
Delimitations are choices made by the researcher which should
be mentioned. They describe the boundaries that a researcher has set for the
study. This is the place to explain:
1. The things that a researcher is not doing (and why
you have chosen not to do them).
2. The section or part a researcher will not review or
read (and why not).
A researcher limits his delimitations to the things
that a reader might reasonably expect him to do but that a researcher, for
clearly explained reasons, has decided not to do.
On the other hand, limitation refers
to challenges faced by the researcher beyond his control.
Limitations are influences that the researcher
cannot control. They are the shortcomings, conditions or influences that cannot
be controlled by the researcher that place restrictions on your methodology and
conclusions. Any limitations that might influence the results should be
mentioned.’
The
Delimitations of our Research
A
narrative is absolutely valid if and only if there is no counter-narrative to
it; but every narrative has counter-narrative that generates the counter-example to arguments being evaluated; and
provides alternative points of view.
We do not
embrace the counter-narrative because of its generation of counter-examples.
We
embrace the counter-narrative because of its generation of examples those
substantiate a narrative.
Hence, we
conclude: a narrative is valid if and only if there is counter-narrative that
does not generate the counter-examples to arguments being evaluated; and does
not provide alternative points of view.
We do not embrace the potential of narratives as the means to paint everything in a
rosy corner thus exterminates angel of
depravity
We do not embrace the potential of counter-narratives as the
means to de-sanitize or invalidate and debunk narratives.
We embrace
the potential of counter-narratives as the means to improve the understanding
of narratives.
We are not concerned with difference but with
similarities in meanings both narratives attribute to events or persons or
in other words
We are concerned with similarities between two
narratives those make them similar than with differences those make them
different.
We are not concerned with difference but with
similarities in meanings both narratives attribute to events or persons or
in other words
We are concerned with similarities between two
narratives those make them similar than with differences those make them
different.
Thus we
embrace narratives and counter narrative to have authentic historical account
in a sense it emanates from similarities.
We do not
recognize the alienation (despite
it exists) between narratives and counter
narratives.
We recognize narratives and counter narratives adduced as
mutually reinforcing evidences to explain the situation not as the
counterbalance to each other for the literal qualification or symbolical
neutralization
We are not concerned with the question:
· Which narrative is truer or true
version between two partially different or partially similar or absolutely
different narratives?
Therefore we are concerned with discourse analysis
because:
We do not need to apply discourse
analysis as a tool for studying the intentions of authors that inform
written text.
We do not need to apply discourse
analysis for establishing the context to know how the context informs the
argument and how it fits into the big picture.
We do not need to apply discourse
analysis to know the social
and historical context in which sources ware produced.
We do not need to apply discourse
analysis to know who
wrote it (and when), and who published it
(and when).
We do not need to apply discourse
analysis to know responses
of writers to any major event, that whether they tied it into
broader debates.
Hence, we set the boundaries of our research but
also to reduce efforts spent in areas to control not only the range unrelated
to our purpose.
Limitation of
research:
There is no limitation to our study as there is no
challenge beyond the control.
Analysis of
definitions:
We need to form
the definition of counter narrative; therefore, we examine various definitions
to choose the one that best serves our purpose.
Theoretical definition
A theoretical
definition defines a term in an academic discipline, functioning as a
proposal to see a phenomenon in a certain way. A theoretical definition is a
proposed way of thinking about potentially related events. Theoretical
definitions contain built-in theories; they cannot be simply
reduced to describing a set of observations.
The
definition may contain implicit inductions and deductive consequences that are part
of the theory. A theoretical definition of a term can change, over time,
based on the methods in the field that created it.
We cannot have the theoretical
definition because:
We are
not corresponding to the theoretical definition of narrative by some test to
specify it thus resolve conflict and determine its meaning through test
We cannot have the operational
definition because:
For our
research operational definition could not be possible because our operational
definition would then correspond to the theoretical definition of counter
narrative
We cannot
have the theoretical definition because we cannot, for our purpose, form
a theoretical definition. Our definition does function as a
proposal to see a phenomenon in a certain way and it does propose the way of
thinking about counter narrative but it does not contain built-in theories;
nor does it assume both knowledge and acceptance of the theories that it
depends on.
"Conceptual definition" and "operational
definition
A
conceptual definition tells what a concept means in abstract or theoretical
terms. An operational definition links a concept to the concrete world by
telling how to observe and / or measure the concept.
Example - high self esteem might be conceptually defined as a
person demonstrating a high degree of self worth. Operationally, you
might define it as scoring above a certain number of a self-esteem scale.
Conceptual
means how
you would like it to be defined. For example, “Happiness means never having to
say you are sorry.” For a research study, however, never could
take a long time. Maybe you could use an operational definition that “happiness
means not saying you are sorry for ten minutes”? So you have turned “never”
into “ten minutes” by means of an operational definition.
A
conceptual definition describes a thing in terms of its abstract characteristics and
relationships to other conceptual entities. For instance, “a sales
administrator ensures that management has up-to-date information that
accurately reflects the performance of the sales department by processing sales
orders in a timely fashion.” In this case, the concepts are “management”,
“performance”, “timely fashion”, and so on.
An operational definition describes a thing in terms
of the actual physical actions it takes, almost like a recipe. For instance, “a
sales administrator reviews each sales order when it is submitted to ensure it
is complete and then assigns it to the proper sales account based on the
product or service sold according to the current product account listing. The
sales administrator reviews and processes each order by the end of the day it
was submitted.”
Conceptual definitions are useful in understanding
how a thing relates to and works with other things. Operational definitions
tell exactly what it does. Operational definitions are particularly important
when one is are managing, measuring, and improving a particular activity.
In
short a conceptual definition tells what the
concept means, while an operational definition only tells how
to measure it.
A conceptual
definition tells what your
constructs are by explaining how they are related to other constructs.
Our
definition cannot be a conceptual definition because:
Though we
have defined our concept of counter narrative in abstract or theoretical terms
but as we have given new meanings to it or redefined it so our definition
cannot be the conceptual definition in letter and spirit.
Our
definition cannot be an operational
definition because:
Though we
have tied our research, in this part, to research tool but in a qualified
sense, further students, as the part of assignment, are to form any operational
definition to links a concept to the concrete world by telling how to observe
and / or measure the concept.
An operational definition can,
when operationalized to a greater degree, besides the procedure needed to bring
something into existence, include also measuring the
stuff, time sequences at which every step should be done, and the duration of
each step.
Example: Simply
stating that a peanut
butter sandwich might be "the result of putting
peanut butter on a slice of bread with a butter knife and laying a second
equally sized slice of vegan milk on top" is only operationalized to a
degree
Example: A researcher measuring
happiness and depression in college students decides to use a ten-question
happiness scale to measure positive outlook in her subjects. In other words, her operational
definition of happiness in this case is a given subject's score on the
test.
Differing theoretical
definitions of "thinking" have caused conflict. Some
philosophers might call "thought" merely
"having the ability to
convince another person that you can think".
An operational definition corresponding
to this theoretical definition could be a simple conversation test (e.g. Turing
test). Others believe that better theoretical and operational
definitions are required.
Our
definition cannot be an operational
definition because:
Our definition cannot be directed to resolve conflict by
suggesting some measures; therefore, no operational definition.
The term scientific
theory is reserved for concepts that are widely accepted.
A scientific law often
refers to regularities that can be expressed by a mathematical statement.
However, there is no consensus about the distinction between these
terms. Every scientific concept must have an operational definition, however the
operational definition can use both direct observations and latent
variables.
Our
definition cannot be an operational
definition because:
We are not concerned with distinction between widely accepted
definitions of counter narratives; therefore no need for an operational
definition.
A stipulative
definition is a type of definition in which a new or
currently-existing term is given a new specific meaning for the purposes
of argument or discussion in a given context. When the term already exists,
this definition may, but does not necessarily, contradict the dictionary (lexical) definition of the term. Because of this, a stipulative definition
cannot be "correct" or "incorrect"; it can only differ from
other definitions, but it can be useful for its intended purpose.
For
example, in the riddle of induction by Nelson Goodman, "grue"
was stipulated to be "a property of an object that makes it
appears green if observed before some future time, and blue if observed
afterward". "Grue" has no meaning in standard English;
therefore, Goodman created the new term and gave it a stipulative
definition.
Many
holders of controversial and highly charged opinions use stipulative
definitions in order to attach the emotional or other connotations of a word to the meaning
they would like to give it.
Example,
defining "murder" as "the killing of any living thing for any
reason". The other side of such an argument is likely to use a different
stipulative definition for the same term: "the unlawful killing of a human
being with malice aforethought" or "the premeditated killing of a
human being". The lexical definition in such a case is likely to fall
somewhere in between.
When a
stipulative definition is confused with a lexical definition within an argument
there is a risk of equivocation.
Our definition is to be a stipulative
definition because:
We
choose for our purpose a stipulative definition because we are
to give a new specific meaning to a currently-existing term that is counter
narrative through our definition for our purposes of developing
the consensual account.
Exercise:
· What changes you suggest in an
article so that either theoretical definition or Conceptual definition or
operational definition is possible
The
definitions of the term counter narrative those already exist:
· Counter narrative: A narrative
that goes against another narrative.
· A counter-narrative is
a message that offers a positive alternative to extremist propaganda, or
alternatively aims to deconstruct or delegitimise extremist narratives.
· Counter-narratives
only make sense in relation to something else, that which they are countering.
The very name identifies it as a positional category, in tension with another
category. But what is dominant and what is resistant are not, of course, static
questions, but rather are forever shifting placements. The discussion of
counter-narratives is ultimately a consideration of multiple layers of
positioning. The fluidity of these relational categories is what lies at the
center of the concept of counter narrative that cannot be comprehended in a
full breadth without being discussed from a number of diverse vantage points’
· The concept of creating
counter-narratives in order to push back against extremist recruitment and
propaganda has become well established in recent years. In practice, however,
it has proven difficult to curate this content in a systematic way, target it
toward at risk audiences, and - most importantly - measure constructive impact
on their behavior The aim of counter narrative is to increase the capacity of
organizations to undertake counter narrative campaigns designed and delivered
for a target audience
A curious paradox
Our research employs narrative and counter narrative as the
method of inquiry. This research works through a curious paradox as it
capitalizes on counter narrative for not the counter but for the endorsement.
Indian history has two separate versions; one is
written by victors (narrative) and other by losers (counter-narrative)
To us
Counter-narrative refers to:
The
narratives that arise from the vantage point of Muslims of India those are
being marginalized since British rule.
The narratives that arise from the vantage point of
Hindus during the Muslim rule.
The
Narrative of majority can be a counter narrative
Narrative is not to be necessarily in the
mainstreams to be dominant as Muslim narrative during Muslim rule despite
Muslims were in minority.
British narrative during British rule was dominant
despite British were in the mainstream of neither minority groups nor of
society as a whole.
Narrative is in the mainstreams to be dominant as
Hindu narrative during Hindu/BJP rule as Hindus are in majority.
Our Stipulative definition of counter narrative for our
research:
Counter-narratives only make sense in relation to something
else, that which they are not countering. The very name does identify it as a
positional category, but for us it is not in tension with another category.
What is dominant, of course, static question as we do not deal with what is
resistant; therefore we are not concerned with forever shifting placements. For
us the discussion of counter-narratives is not ultimately a consideration of
multiple layers of positioning but a position that is well vindicated.
There is no fluidity of these relational categories as both
narratives are to ensure convergence to ensure consensual narrative. Hence, no
diverse vantage points’.
We do not subscribe for the sake of our research to the
concept of creating counter narrative in order to push back a narrative in a
way that not only is the narrative dulled, but the appetite for the generation
of narratives is also dulled.
We do not subscribe for the sake of our research to the
concept of creating counter narrative in order to push back narrative in a way
that it cushions or blunts the impact of a hostile narrative.
We do not
subscribe for the sake of our research to the concept of creating counter
narrative in order to repel, repulse, and spurn narrative.
We do not
subscribe for the sake of our research to the concept of creating counter
narrative in order to defang the narrative and reinscribes the narrative of
people on the periphery.
In short, we are not concerned with a question:
What is
counter narrative how and for what it is used? Therefore, we are not in the
search of the contents of counter narratives those were curated to salve anger
so that opposition of dominant group can be mollified and soothed; hence
we are not concerned with the capacity of subjugated segments for undertaking
counter narrative campaigns designed and delivered for a target audience.
Hence our
definition does not include the concern for curating the content of counter
narrative for its constructive impact on risk audiences.
Importance of embracing the
potential of counter-narratives:
‘Inter-religion
dialogue must consider the stories and voices of different communities and
societies, especially those still marginalized. If the goal of intercultural
dialogue is to reach better levels of mutual understanding, participants need
to hear the points of view of communities typically ignored. While there is a
heightened interest in counternarratives in today’s socio-political contexts,
researchers worldwide need to embrace the potential of counter-narratives as
the means to improve our collective understanding and even as a precursor to
conflict resolution. Only if we create the conditions where all those involved
in social interactions have a space to tell their stories in their own terms
will we find effective ways to engage in empowering dialogue leading to
sustainable solutions to today’s crises’.
Embrace
the potential of counter-narratives:
Exercise:
· Embrace the potential of
counter-narratives as a precursor to conflict resolution: the conflict that is
being created between Hindu and Muslims to reap electoral dividends.
· Harness counter-narratives to
endorse that there was no pattern of iconoclasm or desecration or pogrom or
shoah or sacrilege in any true or in a proper sense of the term in the reigns
of Muslim rulers.
Suggest possible ways to embrace
the potential of counter-narratives:
· Suggest ways to embrace the
potential of narratives and counter-narratives as the means to create the
conditions where Muslims and Hindus involved in social and political
interactions have a space to tell their stories in their own terms
· The Muslim of India must have the
opportunities to voice their views and initiate actions. Suggest the forum
that provides a platform for the stories and voices of Muslims of India to
reach better levels of mutual understanding as non Muslims hear the points of
view of the Muslim community typically ignored in BJP India, thus this
engagement empowers dialogue and limits the ability of BJP to exploit
democratic openings to foment political unrest.
· Suggest the ways for the creation
of the conditions where Muslims and Hindus involved in social interactions have
a space to tell their stories in their own terms, thus they can find effective
ways to engage in empowering dialogue leading to sustainable solutions to
today’s crises in India that springs from no engagement.
Exercise
requires students to apply content analysis but in restricted sense therefore:
· Content analysis as a research
tool should be used to determine the presence of similar lines or lines
explaining similar things in both narratives.
· Content
analysis as a research tool should not be used to quantify and
analyze the presence, meanings and relationships of words and concepts, then
make inferences about the messages within the texts, the writer(s), the
audience, and even the culture and time of which these are a part.
· Students are not required to
conduct a content analysis on narrative and counter narrative for coding, or
breaking down both narratives into manageable categories on a variety of
levels--word, word sense, phrase, sentence, or theme--and then examine using one
of content analysis' basic methods: conceptual analysis or relational analysis.
Exercise:
· Apply content analysis to find
out: Can counter narratives produced in the reign of Muslim rules be embraced
in a way that the assertions of BJP sit uncomfortably with their own emphasis
on Muslim ‘colonialism’s central role in subverting the meaningsHinduism ascribe to objects and sabotaging the basis
of Hindu culture and flouting its institutions.
Non-research article
· An article
prepared by student for its certain task including only his/her general
knowledge is this type of article. Similarly, most of poem, drama, essay etc
also come under this type. This type of non-research article does not include
any factual information and does not follow any traditional methods of
research. It only gives the understanding view of author and can be or not
generalized and taken as reference.
· A non-research
based article is based on the opinion and individual experience of the author. It
will not cite references to other authors on the topic.
· A non-research based article is
based on the opinion and individual experience of the author. ... A non-
research article is an article from the author point of
view . It include his/her opinion and his/her beliefs . It doesn't include
experiments , analysis ,procedures , conclusion & results .
· Non-Academic articles are
written for the mass public. They are published quickly and can be written by
anyone. Their language is informal, casual and may contain slang. The author
may not be provided and will not have any credentials listed. There will be no
reference list. Non-Academic articles can be found in periodicals similar
to Time, Newsweek or Rolling Stone.
As a
general rule religious texts and newspapers are not considered academic
sources. Do not use Wikipedia for an academic source. This website
can be altered by anyone and so any information found within its pages cannot
be considered credible or academic.
· Academic articles are
written by professionals in a given field. They are edited by the authors'
peers and often take years to publish. Their language is formal and will
contain words and terms typical to the field. The authors name will be present,
as will their credentials. There will be a list of references that indicate
where the author obtained the information s/he is using in the article.
Academic
articles can be found in periodicals similar to the Journal of Psychology,
Childhood Education or The American Journal of Public Health.
Article
is considered academic if the language is very formal and genre
specific, most importantly there is a list of references.
Most research articles have common elements and organization,
including:
- Introduction
that includes the problem, question(s), and research objectives
- Literature
review: a description of what other scholars have written about the problem
- Methods
or Approach
- Results
- Discussion
- References
- Article text
will describe and analyze the problem, experiment or study.
Dialogue:
A: I do
not think we can call this article a research article.
B: What makes you say that?
A: This
article is limited as it has no analysis and discussion.
B: I guess you define a research
article by its capability for data-generation.
A: Yes, and it must include as
well literature review and oh, yes method for gathering and coding material;
and yes abstract as well.
B: First of all, it is debatable
that research article can only be defined by its incorporation of data and its
analysis. This article searches again the meaning of a counter narrative and
thus it push the boundary further, hence does research. Literature review is
possible if literature exists but as this article searches again the meaning of
counter narrative or in other words gives new meaning to it, hence there is no
literature in existence that discusses that meaning. Literature that discusses
the prevalent concept of a narrative and a counter narrative is to be reviewed
by students as the part of an exercise; and students as well have to write an
abstract. The scope of this article clearly indicates all these things.
A: This article does not search
again the meaning as it does not change the meaning of counter narrative;
therefore you cannot say it pushes the boundary further.
B: Yes true, but it changes the
way counter narrative has always been employed; and thus it changes the meaning
of counter narrative in a sense that counter narrative means different thing to
researchers now as they can apply it in a different way. We, therefore, can say
if it does not push further, it definitely pushes it in a different direction.
Exercise:
· Read the above
material and dialogue and then classify this article and justify your
categorization.
Difference
as such between a research article and a research paper
There is
no difference as such between a research article and a research paper and both
involve original research with findings.
And both
require critical analysis, inquiry, insight, and demonstration of some special
skills.
Exercise:
· Do you think this article meets
any of the requirements such as critical analysis for example?
· Do you think this article
describe and analyze the problem, if so tell what problem and how?
‘What do
you do when you are a scientist or a scholar and have arrived at a solution to
a problem or have made a discovery that you want to share with the world? Well,
one of the best ways to let the world know about your piece of wisdom or
knowledge is through a research article. This is a piece of writing
that contains an original research idea with the relevant data and findings’
Exercise:
· Does this article contain an
original research ideal? Does it have the relevant data and finding or
something other things to substantiate its original idea in case it has?
A
Research article is a paper or writing that informs people of a path breaking
research.
Exercise:
· Can this mean informing people of
path breaking research conducted by a researcher other than the writer of a
research article?
· Do you think this article
contains any innovative; pioneering or ground
breaking idea?
· Is it always necessary that
research article is defined by the path breaking research?
The
essential component of scholarly research is the investigation a researcher
proposes to conduct in any scenario.
Exercise:
· What investigation and scenario
this article proposes?
Research
article must help students improve research skills from a scholarly
perspective.
Exercise:
· Do you think this article help
you? And if it does, so how?
Beth A. Fischer and Michael J. Zigmond
writes in ‘COMPONENTS OF A RESEARCH ARTICLE’
‘To attract
readers interested in this field of study. The importance of
the title cannot be overstated as it is
a major determinant of whether the paper will be read.
Content:
The title should indicate the focus of the
paper, and should contain enough relevant “keywords”
Style:
There are two types of titles:
1.
Descriptive titles, which states the focus of the study:
The effect of heat on ice.
2. Conclusion
titles, which provide the authors’ main conclusion from their study.
Heat melts ice.
For
research articles, we prefer a descriptive title. It “lets
the data speak for themselves” (an important concept
in research) and allows the author to provide the necessary
restrictions on the conclusions, restrictions that usually cannot
be accommodated in a title.
(For
example, that heat melts ice only as long as sufficient
time is provided to allow the ice molecules to
reach the melting point of water, which is 0°C for
pure water at sea level.)
There is
another reason for
preferring descriptive titles: Should evidence
later come to light that indicates the authors’ conclusion
is incorrect,
A
title should be short yet provide enough keywords so
that individuals will be able to grip the content of an
article.
Analyze
the tile of this article in the light of the observation of
Beth A. Fischer and Michael J. Zigmond
‘Introduction Purpose:
To provide the reader with background on
the research described in the paper.
Content:
The introduction consists primarily of the following types
of information, generally provided in this order:
1. Why the study was
undertaken: What gap in the knowledge of
the field were the authors trying to fill by
undertaking this study?
2. What problem
were the authors trying to address?
3. The nature of
the work performed: The variables that were investigated and the
methods that were used.
4. The state of the
problem at the end of the study: A brief
statement of the major findings presented in the paper,
and implications of the study æ for example, how the work contributes
to “the big picture,” questions left unanswered, new
questions that have emerged.
Note: whereas
the information from #1 and #2 are essential components of
an introduction, some individuals believe that the information
from #3 is optional.
We
strongly recommend including this information as it helps
the reader to evaluate more accurately what they
are reading in the sections that follow. This point helps
to highlight one of the everything is done
to avoid mystery or suspense’.
Exercise:
· Analyze the introduction
of this article in the light of the observation of
Beth A. Fischer and Michael J. Zigmond
Hypothesis is
a hyponym of concept.
Hyponym
is a word of more specific meaning than a
general or superordinate term applicable to it. For example, spoon is a hyponym of cutlery.
Cutlery includes knives, forks, and spoons used for eating or
serving food; and fork is a specific meaning
than a general term that is cutlery.
Therefore, we can say that hypothesis is more specific
meaning than a general term that is concept.
Hypothesis vs Concept - What's the difference?
The difference between hypothesis and concept
is that hypothesis is (sciences) used loosely, a tentative conjecture
explaining an observation, phenomenon or scientific problem that can be tested
by further observation, investigation and/or experimentation as a scientific
term of art,
While concept is an understanding retained in the mind, from
experience, reasoning and/or imagination; a generalization (generic, basic
form), or abstraction (mental impression), of a particular set of instances or
occurrences (specific, though different, recorded manifestations of the
concept).
Hypothesis
vs Concept - What's the difference?
To
understand and communicate information about} objects
and events, there must be a common ground on which to do it. Concepts serve
this purpose. A concept is a generally accepted collection of meanings or
characteristics associated with certain events, objects, conditions,
situations, and behaviors. Classifying and categorizing objects or events that
have common characteristics beyond any single observation creates concepts. We
abstract such meanings from our experiences and use words as labels to
designate them. For example, we see a man passing and identify that he is
running, walking, skipping, crawling, or hopping. These movements all represent
concepts. We also have abstracted certain visual elements by which we identify
that the moving object is an adult male, rather than an adult female or a truck
or a horse.
What for
are concepts in research? We design hypotheses using concepts. We
devise measurement concepts} by which to test these
hypothetical statements. We gather data using these measurement concepts. The
success of research hinges on (1) how clearly we conceptualize and (2) how well
others understand the concepts we use. For example, when we survey people on
the question of customer loyalty, the questions we use need to tap faithfully
the attitudes of the participants. Attitudes are abstract, yet we must attempt
to measure them using carefully selected concepts. The challenge is
to develop concepts that others will clearly understand. We} might, for example, ask participants for an estimate of their
family’s total income. This may seem to be a simple, unambiguous concept, but
we will receive varying and confusing answers unless we restrict or narrow the
concept by specifying: • Time period, such as weekl}
Before or
after income taxes. • For head of family only or for all family
members.} • For salary and wages only or also for
dividends, interest, and capital gains.} •
Income in kind, such as free rent, employee discounts, or food stamps.}
Exercise:
· Analyze the way
this research defines counter narrative and classify it as either hypothesis or
concept and give reasons for it.
The difference between a theory and a concept?
A concept is any idea. For instance, you can have a
concept of a unicorn. A concept of math. A concept of how to clean your room.
It’s quite vague—just any general thought is a concept.
A theory in its strictest sense is an underlying
explanation of how something works.
Possible outcome
In science, a theory is a tested,
well-substantiated, unifying explanation for a set of verified, proven factors.
A theory is always backed by evidence; a hypothesis is only
a suggested, and is testable and falsifiable. ... Scientific laws explain
things, but they do not describe them.
Definition.
Theories are formulated to explain, predict, and
understand phenomena and, in many cases, to challenge and extend existing
knowledge within the limits of critical bounding assumptions.
The theoretical framework is the structure that can hold or support
a theory of a research study.
A theory presents a systematic way of understanding events,
behaviors and/or situations. A theory is a set of interrelated
concepts, definitions, and propositions that explains or predicts events or
situations by specifying relations among variables.
Why do we use theory in research?
Specifically,
testing theory allows the researcher to provide evidence to
support or refute the theoretical propositions tested. It also
helps the researcher make sense of the findings in a way that will help us
predict relationships and outcomes and to determine resources and services.
THEORY AND RESEARCH
The purpose of science concerns the expansion of knowledge,
the discovery of truth and to
make predictions. Theory building is
the means by which the basic researchers hope
to achieve this purpose.
A scientist poses questions like:
What produces inflation?
Does student-teacher interaction influence
students' performance?
In both these questions there is the
element of prediction i.e. that if we do such
and such, then so and so will happen.
In fact we are looking for explanation for the issue that has been
raised in these questions.
Underlying the explanation is
the whole process through which the
phenomenon emerges, and we would like to understand
the process to reach prediction.
Prediction and understanding are the two purposes of theory. Accomplishing the first goal allows the
theorist to predict the behavior or characteristics of
one phenomenon from the knowledge of another phenomenon's
characteristics. A business researcher may theorize that older investors tend to
be more
interested in investment income
than younger investors.
This theory, once verified, should allow
researchers to predict the importance of
expected dividend yield on the basis of investors' age. The
researcher would also like to understand
the process. In most of the situations prediction and
understanding the process go hand in
hand i.e. to predict the phenomenon, we must have
an explanation of why variables behave as they
do.
Theories provide these explanations.
Theory
As such theory is
a systematic and general attempt to explain
something like: Why do people commit
crimes? How do the
media affect us? Why do some people believe in God? Why do people get
married? Why do kids play truant from school? How is our identity shaped by culture? Each of these
questions contains a reference to some observed phenomenon.
A suggested explanation for the observed
phenomenon
is theory. More formally, a theory is a
coherent set of general propositions, used as
principles of explanations of the
apparent relationship of certain observed phenomena.
A key element
in this definition is the
term proposition.
Concepts
Theory development is essentially a process of describing phenomena at increasingly higher levels of
abstraction. A concept (or construct) is a
generalized idea about a class of
objects, attributes, occurrences,
or processes that has been given a name.
Such names are created or developed or
constructed for the identification of the phenomenon, be
it physical or non-physical. All these may be
considered as empirical realities e.g.leadership, productivity, morale, motivation, inflation, happiness banana.
Exercise:
· Analyze the way this article
redefine counter narrative and classify it as theory or concept.
· If it is theory then change it
into a concept and if a concept then change it in a theory.
