The method of research - cene T.doc

approaches to researchwhat is researchresearch is literally everywhere, but there is no consensus in the literature on how it should be defined. this is because that research means different things to different people. however, from many different definitions some agreement can be found: research is a process of enquiry and investigation; it is systematic and methodical; and research increases knowledge. (amaratunga, baldry, sarshar and newton 2002). learning about research is not like learning about anything else. social research is theoretical, meaning that much of it is concerned with developing, exploring or testing the theories or ideas that social researchers have about how the world operates but it is also empirical, meaning that it is based on observations and measurements of reality - on what we perceive of the world around us. (hermes, 1998) the most research is a blending of theoretical term and empirical term. research process research is a process of intellectual discovery. it involves a number of things, such as choice of the research design, the collection of data, the evaluation of results. research process can be described as figure below: the yin-yang map: source: william m.t. research method knowledge basethe left side of the figure refers to the theory of research. the right side of the figure refers to the practice of research. the yin-yang figure in the central links a theoretical introduction to research on the left and to the practical issue of how we formulate research projects on the right. the four arrow links on the left describe the four types of validity in research. the term validity here refers the measures about the quality of different parts of research methodology. the idea of validity provides us with a unifying theory for understanding the criteria for good research. the four arrow links on the right point to the research practice areas that correspond with each validity type. (trochim, 2004 )the research approachesall research projects are conceived in order that some underlying research question may be answered. so the initial stage in the overall process is the identification of what might be termed the research question. in another word, what is the choice of research topic.once the research question identified, the next stage is usually the formulation of the research question as a single scientific hypothesis or set of hypothesises - especially in finance and accounting research- or what is called problem presentation.then what is concerned with next stage of the process is available types of research design and the testing of a statistical hypothesis or set of hypothesis. the following usual stages are measurement, collection of data, sample/respondents, and analysis, completing the report.amaratunga, baldry, sarshar and newton (2002) summarize the list of research approaches according to the general philosophical base underpinning the different research tactics. mainly there are two distinct types of approach: quantitative research and qualitative research.quantitative researchleedy and ormrod (2001) defined that quantitative research is used to answer questions about relationships among measured variables with the purpose of explaining, predicting, controlling and phenomenal. so it is concerned primarily with acquiring and analysing relatively small amounts of data from large numbers of subjects, and the researcher uses a mathematical and statistical treatment to describe, explain, and test relationships. its tools include mass interview studies, questionnaires, experiments, sampling, and statistical techniques.qualitative researchleedy and ormrod (2001) defined that qualitative research is typically used to answer questions about the complex nature of phenomena, often with the purpose of describing and understanding the phenomena from the participants point of view. so it is concerned with acquiring and analysing relatively large amounts of data from a small number of subjects, to investigate experiences, attitudes and opinions. its techniques involve in-depth interviewing, case studies, observation, and action research.the both approaches have their relevant strength and weakness. for instance, the data collected in quantitative research are said to be hard generalisable data because of massive objective. in qualitative research, the collection and analysis of data are time-consuming because many types of data are collected and deep analysis is required. so the combination of methodologies can focus on their relevant strengths. many researchers try to achieve a situation where blending qualitative and quantitative methods of research can produce a final product which can highlight the significant contributions of both (amaratunga, baldry, sarshar and newton 2002) but it is really hard to reach, because balance of choice dose not depend on researchers personal willing, the most researcher believe the choice between approaches or combination of them should primarily be determined by the problem which the research is trying to answer (eldabi, irani and paul, 2002).method and methodologywhat is methodology, it may be simply defined as the approach a researcher uses to investigate a subject. but it is not as simple as what it is defined. in another word, it is not as simple as a method, which is easily confused with methodology. methodology is a way that philosophical ideas are translated into an approach to research within a particular discipline (white 2000). research methodology refers to the procedural framework within which the research is conducted (remenyi et al., 1998). white and remenyi gave out a vision about what methodology really is: it is the complicated body of methods and the branch of philosophy. it can properly refer to the theoretical analysis of the methods appropriate to a field of study. the aim of researchers developing methodology is as what schmierbach(2002) said a methodology is designed to bring about step-function improvements in administrative and support processes using approaches.kaplan (1973) suggests that a well-developed research methodology can provide an understanding of the products and processes of scientific enquiry. the method is the particular techniques or rules used to collect data and information. the method depends on methodology; any inadequacy of either will lead to deficient research. the following paragraph will describe the fundamental research methods. data collection methodsbefore the data collection start planning, the first thing need to do is to identify what data are needed. it is normally base on the decision of how researchers will analyse the data and what data are required to answer the question. initially researchers need decide either a quantitative or qualitative approach. there is fundamental distinction between two types of data: qualitative and quantitative. we call data quantitative if it is in numerical form and qualitative if it is not. compared to quantitative method, qualitative method is flexible and unstructured, and it employs a limited number of observations and tries to explain different aspect of research problem areas. but qualitative and quantitative data are intimately related to each other. all quantitative data is based upon qualitative judgments; and all qualitative data can be described and manipulated numerically (creswell, 1994).then we need to know where are the data located (the source) and the validity of the data. from the data source point of view, data can be classified as primary (generated by the researcher) or secondary (generated by someone else). the most significant secondary data sources include official sources (especially those from government departments) and unofficial sources.the primary data can be collect by observation, interview, surveys (questionnaires).questionnaires are usually paper-and-pencil instruments that the respondent completes. interviews are completed by the interviewer based on the respondent says.the first type of questionnaires is mail survey. you can send the exact same instrument to a wide number of people. they allow the respondent to fill it out at their own convenience. (trochim, 2004 )a second type is the group administered questionnaire. a sample of respondents is brought together and asked to respond to a structured sequence of questions. the researcher could give the questionnaire to those who were present and be fairly sure that there would be a high response rate. (trochim, 2004 )a third type of questionnaire is the household drop-off survey. in this approach, a researcher goes to the respondents home or business and hands the respondent the instrument.interviews are a far more personal form of research than questionnaires. in the personal interview, the interviewer works directly with the respondent. unlike with mail surveys, the interviewer has the opportunity to probe or ask follow-up questions. and, interviews are generally easier for the respondent. (trochim, 2004 )telephone interviews enable a researcher to gather information rapidly. but telephone interviews have to be relatively short or people will feel imposed upon.field research methodthe term field research has a fairly clear definition in the organizational theory literature where it has been most widely applied (mckinnon 1988), but its usage in the accounting literature has varied. for example, in accounting literature, burgstahler and sundem(1987) defined field studies to include all studies that reported investigator involvement with subjects and observation of real task. mckinnon (1988)s list about outstanding features of field studies is very helpful for understanding how to distinguish field studies from other form of research. according to his list, there are the following characteristics in field research studies: (1) the researcher has direct, in-depth contract with organizational participants, particularly in interviews and direct observations of activities, and these contacts provide a primary source of research data.(2) the study focuses on real task or processes, not situations artificially created by the researcher.(3) the research design is not totally structured. it evolves along with the field observations.(4) the presentation of data includes rich descriptions of company contexts and practices.(5) the resulting publications are written to the academic community.the first two characteristics (direct contact, real tasks) are standard identifying characteristics of field research. for example, yin (2002) distinguished field research from other research approaches, in that field research is:an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context; when the boundaries between the phenomenon and context are not clearly evident: and in which multiple sources of evidence are used.these characteristics clearly exclude questionnaire surveys and laboratory experiments from the category of field research. the main field research methods include participant observation, informant and respondent interviewing and document analysis. (burgess et al 1990) there are two constraints on the extent to field research methods on finance and accounting research. the first is that, although field study methods have been a consistent part of research development in sociology and anthropology, they have been used much less frequently in accounting research when compared with laboratory experiments or survey methods.(bruns & kaplan,1987 ). the second constraint is that field researches are frequently subjected to their apparent inability to attend to validity and reliability. the nature of treats to validity and reliability and what can be done about them is generally acknowledged as being less well developed in field study research than in other branches of research.(kirk and miller,1986).case study researchcase study research is remarkably hard, even though case studies have traditionally been considered to be soft research. paradoxically, the softer a research technique, the harder it is to do. (yin, 2002).case studies have become quite common in accounting research, especially in management accounting. in accounting, this could be a study of a single organization or a number of organizations. case study offer the possibility of understanding the nature of accounting in practice; both in terms of the techniques, procedures, systems, etc. for instant, case studies can be use to provide descriptions of accounting practice, to explore the application of new procedures, to explain the determinants of existing practice and even to illustrate the exploitative nature of accounting in advanced capitalism. these various uses of case studies rely on quite different theoretical and methodological perspectives. consequently, the different types of case studies in accounting research are distinguished as: descriptive case studies; illustrative case studies; experimental case studies; exploratory case studies; explanatory case studies. (ryan, scapens, and theobald, 2002)selecting suitable cases to gain validity and generalization is a very critical issue as the first step of case studies. researchers who approach case studies from a traditional methodological perspective may fall into what yin(2002) calls the trap of trying to select a “representative” case or set of case. (kirk, miller, 1986) such researchers will view case studies as a sample which, if correctly selected, may be used to generalize to a larger population, produce statistical generalization. from such a perspective, a case study is a small sample from which it is difficult to make a statistical generalization about the population. it is usually accepted that the case studies can be useful in generating hypotheses far subsequent testing through large studies.(darke, shanks, and broadbent,1998). statistical generalizations are clearly problematic in interpretive research, where the findings of a case study are inherently context specific. in interpretive case study, researchers look for “theoretical generalization”, rather than “statistical generalization”. (walker, olson and chow 1992) the former attempts to generalize theories so that they explain the observations that have been made the steps in case studies should list as below:(1) preparation: specify the research question.(2) collecting evidence: include artefact; questionnaires; interviews; observing actions and meetings; assessing the outcomes of action .(3) assessing evidence(4) identifying and explaining patternsthe nature of hypothesis testinga hypothesis is a specific statement of prediction. it describes in concrete (rather than theoretical) terms what will be expected to happen in study. a hypothesis may be regard as a statement of the empirical relationship between a set of variable.(ryan et al, 2002) setting up and testing hypotheses is an essential part of statistical inference. in order to formulate such a test, usually some theory has been put forward, either because it is believed to be true or because it is to be used as a basis for argument, but has not been proved. (boruch,1975)in each problem considered, the question of interest is simplified into two competing hypotheses between which a choice is made; the null hypothesis, denoted h0, against the alternative hypothesis, denoted h1. these two competing hypotheses are not treated on an equal basis; special consideration is given to the null hypothesis. in studying the relationships between the variables, the null hypothesis is usually set up as stating that there are no relationships between variables. (v. j. easton, j. h. mccoll, 2004) for example, the factory introduce new machinery, the null hypothesis might be the new introduced machinery dose not make difference on cost saving, h1 is the new machinery dose save the cost. so the writing down is: h0: the new machinery makes no change on overhead. easton and mccoll state that the final conclusion once the test has been carried out is always given in terms of the null hypothesis. researchers either reject h0 in favour of h1 or do not reject h0; never conclude reject h1, or even accept h1. if researchers conclude do not reject h0, this does not necessarily mean that the null hypothesis is true, it only suggests that there is not sufficient evidence against h0 in favour of h1; rejecting the null hypothesis then, suggests that the alternative hypothesis may be true. back to the example: if new machinery introduced dose make change on overhead, (h0 is rejected), that dose not definitely mean new machinery save the cost.(h1 may be true not certainly) it maybe increase the cost.in a hypothesis test, a type i error occurs when the null hypothesis is rejected when it is in fact true; that is, h0 is wrongly rejected. a type ii error occurs when the null hypothesis h0, is not rejected when it is in fact false. easton and mccoll draw out a clear matrix:the following table gives a summary of possible results of any hypothesis test: decisionreject h0dont reject h0truthh0type i errorright decisionh1right decisiontype ii error source: statistics glossary v1.1analysis methodsanalysis should finally reach the standard of conclusion validity. conclusion validity is the degree to which conclusions we reach about relationships in our data are reasonable. (trochim, 2004 )trochim conclude in most social research the data analysis involves three major steps, done in roughly this order(1)cleaning and organizing the data for analysis (data prep