There Is No Hope Of Doing Perfect Research (Griffiths, 1998, P97). Do You Agree?
I do not agree with the topic on a number of grounds. The very term “research” indicates that whatever has been “searched” was for some reason “re-searched”. This ‘reason’ in my humble opinion can be ‘hope of doing perfect research’. What I mean by saying this is that, at a particular time when research was being done, under the circumstances which may be level or scope of knowledge, conditions, methodologies, tools & equipment, researcher’s capacities & abilities etc etc. i.e. what ever had been available, must have been utilized to the best possibility. But, since knowledge is never stagnant, with the passage of time, developments & expansions in creative curiosity intrigues seekers to search for more. The never ending “What ifs…….?” & the resulting explorations have always added new dimensions to what earlier may have seemed as a ”perfect research”. Thus it cannot be said that since due to some possible shortcoming in the efforts of the earlier works undertaken, one passes a strong notion that, there is no hope of doing perfect research. For example Literary criticism is the evaluation, analysis, description, or interpretation of literary works1. All works of art are & have been viewed & reviewed countless of times not because there was no hope, on the contrary it is hope that aspires researchers that may be they may be able to do better justice or simply pay their humble tribute to the master or masterpiece. Secondly, acknowledging the natural phenomena of evolution & development, the methods of mixed methodology research2 have been utilized by some enthusiasts to avoid imprisoning their thought in one system2.
The following are some of the variables that can & do affect research & content:
1. Test Validity3
a) Concurrent Validity. Concurrent Validity refers to a measurement device’s ability to vary directly with a measure of the same construct or indirectly with a measure of an opposite construct. It allows you to show that your test is valid by comparing it with an already valid test.
b) Content Validity. Content validity is concerned with a test’s ability to include or represent all of the content of a particular construct. The question “1 + 1 = ___” may be a valid basic addition question. Would it represent all of the content that makes up the study of mathematics? It may be included on a scale of intelligence, but does it represent all of intelligence? The answer to these questions is obviously no. To develop a valid test of intelligence, not only must there be questions on math, but also questions on verbal reasoning, analytical ability, and every other aspect of the construct we call intelligence. There is no easy way to determine content validity aside from expert opinion.
c) Predictive Validity. In order for a test to be a valid screening device for some future behavior, it must have predictive validity. For example tests like SAT, GMAT , LSAT etc., because without it, they would be worthless.
2. Test Reliability. Reliability is synonymous with the consistency of a test, survey, observation, or other measuring device. Imagine stepping on your bathroom scale and weighing 140 pounds only to find that your weight on the same scale changes to 180 pounds an hour later and 100 pounds an hour after that…….Would you consider their results accurate?
a) Test-Retest Reliability. Test-Retest reliability refers to the test’s consistency among different administrations. ……..To determine the coefficient for this type of reliability, the same test is given to a group of subjects on at least two separate occasions. If the test is reliable, the scores that each student receives on the first administration should be similar to the scores on the second. We would expect the relationship between he first and second administration to be a high positive correlation.
One major concern with test-retest reliability is what has been termed the memory effect. This is especially true when the two administrations are close together in time. For example, imagine taking a short 10-question test on vocabulary and then ten minutes later being asked to complete the same test. Most of us will remember our responses and when we begin to answer again, we may just answer the way we did on the first test rather than reading through the questions carefully. This can create an artificially high reliability coefficient as subjects respond from their memory rather than the test itself. When a pre-test and post-test for an experiment is the same, the memory effect can play a role in the results.
b) Parallel Forms Reliability. One way to assure that memory effects do not occur is to use a different pre- and posttest. In order for these two tests to be used in this manner, however, they must be parallel or equal in what they measure. To determine parallel forms reliability, a reliability coefficient is calculated on the scores of the two measures taken by the same group of subjects. Once again, we would expect a high and positive correlation is we are to say the two forms are parallel.
c) Inter-Rater Reliability. Whenever observations of behavior are used as data in research, we want to assure that these observations are reliable. One way to determine this is to have two or more observers rate the same subjects and then correlate their observations…….It does not, however, assure that they are measuring it correctly, only that they are both measuring it the same.
Further in the case of Pieget’s experiments the outcomes lead to further researches. Whereas some of his researches were so “perfect” that these are considered as Piaget’s Legacy: While there are few strict Piagetians, most can appreciate Piaget's influence and legacy. His work generated interest in child development and had an enormous impact on the future of education and developmental psychology4. The following aptly explain some additional variables that can influence or must be considered in researches.
Support for Piaget’s Theory: Piaget's Impact on Education Piaget's focus on qualitative development had an important impact on education. While Piaget did not specifically apply his theory to education, many educational programs are built upon the belief that children should be taught at the level for which they are developmentally prepared.
In addition to this, a number of instructional strategies have been derived from Piaget's work. These strategies include providing a supportive environment, utilizing social interactions and peer teaching, and helping children see fallacies and inconsistencies in their thinking (Driscoll, 1994).
Criticisms of Piaget: Problems With Research Methods:- Much of the criticism of Piaget's work is in regards to his research methods. A major source of inspiration for the theory was Piaget's observations of his own three children. In addition to this, the other children in Piaget's small research sample were all from well-educated professionals of high socio-economic status. Because of this unrepresentative sample, it is difficult to generalize his findings to a larger population.
Problems With Formal Operations: Research has disputed Piaget's argument that all children will automatically move to the next stage of development as they mature. Some data suggests that environmental factors may play a role in the development of formal operations.
Underestimates Children's Abilities: Most researchers agree that children posses many of the abilities at an earlier age than Piaget suspected. Recent research on theory of mind has found that children of 4- or 5-years old have a rather sophisticated understanding of their own mental processes as well as those of other people. For example, children of this age have some ability to take the perspective of another person, meaning they are far less egocentric than Piaget believed.4
Thus in my opinion it is not agreeable to state that "There is no hope of doing perfect research". This applies to all kinds of works be it a literary in nature or scientific or even Psychological. The main fact is that evolution & development in study methods & methodologies are a constant phenomenon. Therefore even trying to consider a research as “perfect” is faulty & will be futile. Furthermore, having “no hope” is a self imposed & limiting obstacle in any area of life, & is an injustice especially to the field of “research”.
Sources:
1 Literary Criticisms
2 Reading Mixed Methods Research: Contexts for Criticism
DawnFreshwater1
Journal of Mixed Methods Research
3 Research Methods
Chapter 7: Variables, Validity, and Reliability
