1. RESEARCH PROBLEM AND PROBLEM
STATEMENT
Chapter
3

2. WHAT IS A RESEARCH PROBLEM?
A problem does not necessarily mean that some
thing is seriously wrong with a current situation
that needs to be rectify immediately.
“ Define problem as any situation where a gap
exists between the actual and desired ideal state”
 Generally
speaking a research problem is a
situation that needs a solution and for which
there are possible solutions. If a situation has
no possible solutions then it makes little or no
sense expending resources researching it.

3. WHAT IS A RESEARCH PROBLEM?
this statement, “everybody wants to go to
heaven but nobody wants to die”. Dying looks
like a problem that needs a solution yet there is
no possible solution to it. People must die. A
research on how people can live forever makes
little or no sense.
 Take
A
research problem may be described as a
discrepancy between what is and what should to
be. It may be also described as the gap in
knowledge
that
needs
to
be
filled.

4. WHAT IS A PROBLEM STATEMENT?
A problem statement is the description of an issue
currently existing which needs to be addressed. It provides
the context for the research study and generates the
questions which the research aims to answer.
 The area in which you are interested is called the focus of
the inquiry. A good problem statement is just one sentence
(with several paragraphs of elaboration).
For example it could be:
"The
frequency
of
job
dismissals
is
creating
fear, anxiety, and a loss of productivity in middle
management workers."
Systematic research begins with a research problem- begin
with a general topic and then narrow it down to a specific
statement of the research problem.


5. THE PROBLEM: THE HEART OF THE RESEARCH PROCESS
The problem is the centre around which the whole research effort
turns.
Einstein: If I have one hour for solving the problem on which my
life is dependent, than I will devote 40 minutes to study the
problem, 5 minutes to analyse it, and only 5 minutes to solve it.
Well begun is half done --Aristotle, quoting an old proverb
Who is able to formulate problem?
– a person with large and high quality of knowledge
– a creative person able to think, with good memory with
large and deep cultural knowledge and with ability to
persist in research work despite of serious problems.
- a persons with non-conventional thinking

6. RESEARCH QUESTION
A Research Question is a statement that identifies the phenomenon to be
studied. For example, “What resources are helpful to new and minority drug
abuse researchers?”
To develop a strong research question from your ideas, you should ask
yourself these things:
Do
I know the field and its literature well?
What are the important research questions in my field?
What areas need further exploration?
Could my study fill a gap? Lead to greater understanding?
Has a great deal of research already been conducted in this topic area?
Has this study been done before? If so, is there room for improvement?
Would funding sources be interested?
If you are proposing a service program, is the target community interested?
Most importantly, will my study have a significant impact on the field?
Is the timing right for this question to be answered? Is it a hot topic, or is it
becoming obsolete?

7. The step wise process
 Problem statement is a clear, precise, and brief statement of





the question or issue that is to be investigated with the goal of
finding an answer or solution.
Theoretical framework is the foundation on which the entire
research project is based. It is logically developed, described
and elaborated network of associations among the variables
relevant to the problem situation.
A hypothesis is a tentative statement that proposes a possible
explanation to some phenomenon or event A useful
hypothesis is a testable statement which may include a
prediction A hypotheses should not be confused with a theory
Data analysis: the data gathered are statistically analyzed to
see if the hypotheses that were generated have been
supported.
Measurement is the process observing and recording the
observations that are collected as part of a research effort
Deduction is the process of arriving at conclusions by
interpreting the meaning of the data analysis results.

9. RESEARCH PROCESS
A strong research idea should pass the “so what” test.
Think about the potential impact of the research you
are proposing.
 What is the benefit of answering your research
question?
 Who will it help (and how)?
 If you cannot make a ultimate statement about the
purpose of your research, it is unlikely to be
done/funded/granted.


10. RESEARCH PROCESS
A research focus should be narrow, not broad-based.
 For example,
“What can be done to prevent substance abuse?” is too
large a question to answer.
It would be better to begin with a more focused question
such as “What is the relationship between specific early
childhood experiences and subsequent substanceabusing behaviors?”


12. SAMPLE RESEARCH PROCESS CHART:
CREATING RESOURCES FOR DRUG ABUSE
RESEARCHERS




Currently, there are few on-online resources available to new
and minority drug abuse researchers.
Research Question
“What resources would be helpful to new and minority drug
abuse researchers?”
Hypothesis
“A grant writing tutorial would be helpful to new and minority
drug abuse researchers. Those researchers who utilize an online grant writing tutorial will have higher priority scores on
their next grant application than those who do not.”
Specific Aim
“Conduct a rigorous empirical evaluation of the on-line grant
writing tutorial, comparing outcome and process measures
from two groups-those with exposure to the tutorial, and those
without.”

13. SAMPLE RESEARCH PROCESS CHART:
CREATING RESOURCES FOR DRUG ABUSE
RESEARCHERS
A well-thought-out and focused research question
leads directly into your hypotheses. What
predictions would you make about the phenomenon
you are examining? This will be the foundation of
your application.
 Hypotheses are more specific predictions about the
nature and direction of the relationship between two
variables. For example, “Those researchers who
utilize an online grant writing tutorial will have
higher priority scores on their next grant application
than those who do not.”


14. THE RESEARCH PROCESS CHART
As a generic reference, the following process can
be helpful in refining and concretizing your ideas:
 Ask yourself: “Why is this research important? What
have other people done? What have they found?”
 Based on this information, formulate a specific
research question.
 Develop a hypothesis/hypotheses that stems
from your research question.
 Identify the specific aims, that is the steps you are
going to take to test your hypothesis.


15. RESEARCH PROBLEM

Long-Term Goals:





Why are you doing this research?
What are the long-term implications?
What will happen after the grant?
What other avenues are open to explore?
What is the ultimate application or use of the research?

16. RESEARCH PROBLEM
These questions all relate to the long-term goal of
your research, which should be an important for
the proposal. Again, they should be a logical
extension of the research
question, hypotheses, and specific aims.
 It is also helpful to have a long-term plan for your
own career development. Where would you like to
see your career go in the next 5 years? How does
the research you are proposing relate to that plan?


17. RESEARCH PROBLEM

Once you've thought through the key elements of
your research questions, hypotheses, specific
aims, and research design, you have the
ingredients for a concept paper. This is an
important tool to help you to organize your
thoughts, as well as to promote, disseminate, or get
feedback on your ideas

18. RESEARCH PROBLEM
To understand the world around us, the researcher needs
to know and understand the definition of the scientific
method.
 This will be central to the research process and
subsequent conclusions drawn from the experiment.
 Defining a research problem is the fuel that drives the
scientific process, and is the foundation of any research
method and experimental design, from true experiment to
case study.


19. RESEARCH PROBLEM
It is one of the first statements made in any
research paper and, as well as defining the
research area, should include a quick synopsis of
how the hypothesis was arrived at.
 Operationalization is then used to give some
indication of the exact definitions of the
variables, and the type of scientific measurements
used.
 This will lead to the proposal of a viable hypothesis.
As an aside, when scientists are putting forward
proposals for research funds, the quality of their
research problem often makes the difference
between success and failure.


20. RESEARCH PROBLEM
Look at any scientific paper, and you will see the
research problem, written almost like a statement of
intent.
 Defining a research problem is crucial in defining the
quality of the answers, and determines the exact
research method used
 The operational definition is the determining the scalar
properties of the variables.
 For example, intelligence may be measured with IQ and
human responses could be measured with a
questionnaire from „1- strongly disagree‟, to „5 – strongly
agree‟.


21. STAGES OF SCIENTIFIC METHOD
Definition of the "problem”
 Whatever the problem, you must be able to in some
way collect and analyze data to draw conclusions.
 Stating the problem in a way that avoids value
judgments is usually a good place to begin.

22. STAGES OF SCIENTIFIC METHOD

Statement of a hypothesis, question or objective:
A hypothesis simply provides a tentative explanation of
the problem.
 Suggest a hypothesis or objective for one of your
projects


23. STAGES OF SCIENTIFIC METHOD

Research strategy and development of instruments:
What method are you going to use?
 How should your research instrument be designed or
method be structured for your project?
 Are you basing your work on an established theory, are
you replicating the work of others, or what?


24. STAGES OF SCIENTIFIC METHOD
Collecting and analyzing data:
 Determining what results mean.
 Will review in more detail later.

25. STAGES OF SCIENTIFIC METHOD
Confirmation or rejection of the hypothesis:
 Proving or disproving a hypothesis are both equally
valuable and hopefully meaningful findings!
Optionally, could be interpreting and using findings in
design.
 Are your data useful for design or to draw
conclusions about design?

26. STAGES OF SCIENTIFIC METHOD
Reporting
results:
Drawing conclusions
 Summarizing findings
 Defining future avenues of research
 Identifying limitations of your finding


27. LIMITATIONS OF SCIENTIFIC METHOD
How complex your problem is.
 Number of variables, sample size, and
generalizations about conclusions

Difficulties in data collection.
 Influence of researcher bias on data collection and
interpretation.
 Role of subjective or qualitative interpretation in
much of our work.


28. LIMITATIONS OF SCIENTIFIC METHOD
How easy is it to replicate your study?
 Sometimes impossible, others easy with proper
controls.
 Interaction of researcher and the subjects.
 Hawthorne studies as a good example.

Control difficulties.
 Experimental vs. non experimental situations.


29. LIMITATIONS OF SCIENTIFIC METHOD
How to measure?
 Lab experiments vs. instrumentation vs.
observation and natural observation of human
subjects.


30. BASIC VS. APPLIED RESEARCH
If you plan to obtain data that can be used to
formulate, expand, or evaluate theory you will be
doing basic research.
 Discovery of knowledge for the sake of knowledge.
 Applied research solves practical problems.
 Actual problems and the conditions in which they
are found in practice.


31. CATEGORIES OF RESEARCH
Experimental
 Used to determine what maybe
 Uses independent & dependant variables to confirm
or reject a hypothesis.
 Major purpose is to determine what maybe.

32. CATEGORIES OF RESEARCH
Ex post facto:
 Researcher does not directly manipulate the
independent variables.
 Similar to experimental except for issue of
manipulation.

33. CATEGORIES OF RESEARCH
Descriptive:
 Major purpose is to tell what is through description
and interpretation.
Historical:
 Major purpose is to tell what was.
 You test the truthfulness of the reports of others.

34. QUALITATIVE VS. QUANTITATIVE APPROACHES
Qualitative research
 Usually refers to the
meanings, concepts, characteristics, and
descriptions of things.
 For example, how can you describe your feelings
about being in this room?
 One way would be through your five senses;
another through your emotional reactions to
people, objects, and space

35. Quantitative research
 Usually requires measures of things or items
numbers & interpretation of numbers.
 Quantitative evaluation of this room --we might
measure the square footage, the volume, the light
level, noise & sound characteristics, the square foot
per person of capacity.
 Try to relate this information to your perception of
the space using standardized scales.
 How could we use this information to develop
design guidelines or to design something?

36. QUANTITATIVE EXPERIMENTS
A quantitative experimental design uses deductive
reasoning to arrive at a testable hypothesis.
 Qualitative research designs use inductive reasoning to
propose a research statement.
 These experiments are sometimes referred to as true
science, and use traditional mathematical and statistical
means to measure results conclusively.
 Quantitative experiments all use a standard format, with
a few minor inter-disciplinary differences, of generating
a hypothesis to be proved or disproved.


37. QUALITATIVE RESEARCH




This hypothesis must be provable by mathematical and statistical
means, and is the basis around which the whole experiment is
designed.
Qualitative research design is a research method used extensively
by scientists and researchers studying human behavior and habits
It is also very useful for product designers who want to make a
product that will sell.
It is often used to generate possible leads and ideas which can be
used to formulate a realistic and testable hypothesis. This
hypothesis can then be comprehensively tested and
mathematically analyzed, with standard quantitative research
methods.

38. DEDUCTIVE VS. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Deductive reasoning is the opposite process to
inductive reasoning. In general, terms, inductive
reasoning takes a specific example, or
examples, and induces that they can be applied to
a much larger group.
 Deductive reasoning, by contrast, starts with a
general principle and deduces that it applies to a
specific case. Inductive reasoning is used to try to
discover a new piece of information; deductive
reasoning is used to try to prove it.


39. DEDUCTIVE VS. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Deductive Reasoning
 Every day, I get in my car to leave for work, at eight o‟clock. Every
day, the journey takes 45 minutes, and I arrive at work on time. If I
leave for work at eight o‟clock today, I will be on time.
Inductive Reasoning
 Today, I left for work at eight o‟clock, and was on time.
Therefore, every day that I leave the house at eight o‟clock, I will
arrive at work on time. The deductive statement is a perfectly logical
statement, but does rely upon the initial premise being correct.
Perhaps today, there are roadworks, so you will end up being late for
work. This is why any hypothesis can never be completely
proved, because there is always the scope for the initial premise to be
wrong.

40. EVALUATION
Evaluate really means to ascertain the value or
amount associated with your problem.
 From our perspective, evaluation is just as
acceptable as research.
 What is the major difference?
 Evaluation is value judgments based on evidence.
 Evidence can be
design, measurement, analysis, and data reporting.


41. EVALUATION

Evaluation Criteria:






Effectiveness of program or product.
Efficiency of program or product.
Fairness (best applied to social programs)
Justice to all audiences.
Quality of the program or product.
Acceptability of program or product.

42. DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN RESEARCH AND
EVALUATION
The intent and purpose of the investigator.
 Evaluation usually is more comprehensive in scope
and focuses on one program or product.
 Examples: job description evaluation of a
designer, performance evaluation of a product, or of
a special user group.


43. DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN RESEARCH AND
EVALUATION
Origins and motivation for research lies in the need
to know; researcher answerable to colleagues.
 Evaluation is usually by contract and may focus on
need to fix versus need to know.


44. DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN RESEARCH AND EVALUATION
Evaluation most often occurs when a problem
becomes apparent, e.g. the bicycle pedals don't
turn --why?
 “How” to fix it.
 Researcher would address the concept of how a
pedal should function, test alternatives, and draw
conclusions about the hypotheses stated about
pedal design.
 Designer might re-design the pedal.


45. DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN RESEARCH AND
EVALUATION

A scientist may even review a successful
experiment, disagree with the results, the tests
used, or the methodology, and decide to refine the
research process, retesting the hypothesis.

This is called the conceptual definition, and is an
overall view of the problem.

46. EXAMPLES OF DEFINING A RESEARCH
PROBLEM
An anthropologist might find references to a
relatively unknown tribe in Papua New Guinea.
 Through inductive reasoning, she arrives at the
research problem and asks,
 „How do these people live and how does their
culture relate to nearby tribes?‟
 She has found a gap in knowledge, and she seeks
to fill it, using a qualitative case study, without a
hypothesis.


47. EXAMPLES OF DEFINING A RESEARCH
PROBLEM


The Bandura Bobo Doll Experiment is a good example
of using deductive reasoning to arrive at a research
problem and hypothesis.
Anecdotal evidence showed that violent behavior
amongst children was increasing. Bandura believed that
higher levels of violent adult role models on
television, was a contributor to this rise. This was
expanded into a hypothesis, and operationalization of
the variables, and scientific measurement scale, led to a
robust experimental design

48. FINDING RESEARCH PROJECTS
Everywhere
 Whatever arouses interest, tweaks curiosity, raises
questions but no answer or answers exist but
dispute arises on validity
 Extremely important to distinguish between
PERSONAL and RESEARCHABLE problem
 Personal problems are real but not researchable
 Researchable problems fit the requirement of the
scientific method


49. WHERE DOES YOUR INTEREST LIE?
Inspect any volume of Dissertation Abstracts
International under the general heading of your
interest
 All you need to see is your own area of interest in
sharp, clear focus and then enunciate the problem
indigenous to it in precise lucid terms
 Research only begin with an unmistakably clear
statement of the problem


50. DAI

51. PROBLEMS FOR RESEARCH
Two theoretical levels: problems whose aim is to
increase our knowledge and problems whose aim is
to make our life better
 The wise choice of a researchable problem can
lead the researcher into a truly unexpected and
fascinating domain


52. KEEPING THE RESEARCH PROCESS IN FOCUS
Scientific method is a new concept to many
students
 Difficult to formulate an acceptable research
problem
 Lies in their inability to appreciate the struggle
between thinking and doing
 First must learn to distinguish between what it is to
think and what it is to do with respect to data


53. KEEPING IN FOCUS
Very easy to become entranced with action –
making notes, comparing, collating, correlating, …
(discovering facts) – you are convinced of making
progress in research
 And collecting more facts – please slow down and
think objectively
 Remember the first responsibility is to formulate a
problem that is carefully phrased and represent the
single goal of the total research effort


54. KEEPING IN FOCUS
Successful researchers constantly ask themselves:
“What am I doing, and for what purpose am I doing
it?”
 Paramount in disciplining thinking – fact collecting
is to resolve the problem
 Nothing wrong with frenzied data acquisition, but
must monitor constantly and keep in mind the
purpose – problem resolution


55. THE WORDING OF THE PROBLEM
Must indicate that thinking on the part of the
researcher is required – analytical thinking that
squeezes meaning out of the mere accumulation of
facts, called the interpretation of the data
 The world Almanac is a treasury of fact, full of
meanings but remain sterile and frozen upon the
pages
 So no research without any interpretation, no
matter how many facts you have


56. WHAT IS NOT A RESEARCH PROBLEM?

Certain problems are not suitable for research –
because they lack
 the
“interpretation of data”
requirement
 the “mental struggle on the part
of the researcher to force the
facts to reveal their meaning”

Avoid four situations when considering a problem
for research

57. 1. NOT SELF-ENLIGHTENMENT
 Don‟t
use a problem as a ruse for achieving selfenlightenment –
Students may find gathering facts and dissipating their
own informational deficiency gratifying
 But do not confuse with the research process
 Example, “ the problem of this research is to learn more
about the way the SMP system is developed”
 The summit of the fact-finding effort will provide only the
satisfaction having gain more information about SMP not
solution of THE PROBLEM


58. 2. NOT COMPARING DATA
Example “This research project will compare the
increase in the number of women students over 10
years from 1990 to 2000 with the men students
over the same time span.”
 We can do that without any effort, in two lines
1990
2000
Women
1234
2567
Men
1567
1600


59. 3. NOT FINDING COEFFICIENT OF
CORRELATION
Finding correlation between two sets of data to
show relationship is not an acceptable problem
 Basic research is ignored – nobody struggling with
facts
 It is a proposal to perform a statistical operation that
a computer can do faster and more accurately
 In research, correlation coefficient acts as a
signpost to look deeper into the cause of the
relationship that exists between two sets of data


60. 3. NOT FINDING COEFFICIENT OF
CORRELATION
We feel most pompous that two variables are
closely related and trumpeting the world that
“Research has shown that the correlation between
… and … is such-and-such.”
 We are blindly mistaken. Research hasn‟t shown
that. A tool of research has given us this tantalizing
fact. It has suggested a problem for research. To
find the answer to those questions and to isolate
the causal basis for the relationship is research –
need thinking from researcher


61. 4. PROBLEMS THAT RESULT IN A YES OR NO
ANSWER
Example, “ Is homework beneficial to children?”
 No problem for research - give the students
homework and see what happens.
 The researchable issue is wherein the benefit of
homework, if any, lies?

What factual components of homework
are beneficial in the process?
 Which ones are self-defeating?


62. 4. PROBLEMS THAT RESULT IN A YES OR NO
ANSWER
Answers to these questions would enlarge our
wisdom – could structure the homework
assignments with more purpose and greater
intelligence and thereby promote the learning of
children - more effectively than we do now
 But demand full power of the scientific method and
ancillary help of
statistics, computerization, discriminative and
analytical thinking, and creative research
methodology


63. GUIDELINES FOR FINDING A LEGITIMATE
PROBLEM
Appropriate research projects don‟t fall out of trees
and hit you on the head.
 Must be sufficiently knowledgeable about your topic of
interest to know what projects might make important
contributions to the field.
 SIX guidelines to formulate an important and useful
research project are listed below.


64. 1. LOOK AROUND YOU
In many disciplines, questions that need answers –
phenomena that need explanation - are everywhere.
 Example: In 17th. century, Galileo was trying to make
sense of why large bodies of water (but not small
ones) rise and fall in the form of tides twice a day?
 BUT not to suggest that novice researchers should
take on such monumental questions.
 Concentrate on smaller problems – continually ask
questions about what you hear and see.
 Why does such–and–such happen? What makes
such–and–such tick? (The reasons for somebody‟s
behaviour)


65. 2. READ THE LITERATURE


a)
b)
c)
d)
What things are already known – don‟t reinvent the
wheel – also tells what is NOT known in the area – in
other words, what still needs to be done.
Research project might
Address the suggestions for future research that
another researcher has offered
Replicate a research project in a different setting or
with a different population
Consider how various subpopulations might behave
differently in the same situation
Apply an existing perspective or explanation to a new
situation

66. 2. READ THE LITERATURE
e) Explore unexpected or contradictory findings in
previous studies
f) Challenge research findings that seem to
contradict what you know or believe to be true.
Other advantages :
 Provides theoretical base on which to build a
rationale for your study
 Provides potential research methodologies and
methods of measurement
 Help you interpret your results and relate them to
what is already known in the field

67. 3. ATTEND PROFESSIONAL CONFERENCES
Many researchers have great success finding new
research projects at national and regional
conferences.
 Learn “what is hot and what is not” in their field
 Novice researchers can make contacts with experts in
their field, ask questions, share ideas, exchange email addresses with more experienced and
knowledgeable individuals
 Many students are reluctant to approach well-known
scholars at conferences, for fear that these scholars
don‟t have the time or patience to talk with novices –
Quite the opposite is true – They may feel flattered
that you are familiar with their work and that you
would like to extend or apply it in some way.


68. 4. SEEK THE ADVICE OF EXPERTS

a)
b)
c)
Another simple yet highly effective strategy for
identifying a research problem is simply to ask an
expert:
What needs to be done?
What burning questions are still out there?
What previous research findings seemingly don‟t
make sense?

69. 5. CHOOSE A TOPIC THAT INTRIGUES AND
MOTIVATES YOU
Reading literature, attend conferences, talk with
experts, will uncover a number of potential research
problems
 Pick just one, based on what you want to learn more
about
 Must believe that it is worth your time and effort.
 Saying “You‟re going to be married to it, so you might
as well enjoy it.”


70. 6. CHOOSE A TOPIC THAT OTHERS WILL
FIND INTERESTING AND WORTHY OF
ATTENTION
Want to share findings with a larger audience, not
only end with thesis.
 Describe what you have done at a regional or national
conference, publish an article in a professional
journal, or both.
 Future employers, too, are also interested in your
thesis topic if in your research, you are pursuing an
issue of broad scientific or social concern or, more
generally, a hot topic in your field.


71. STATING THE RESEARCH PROBLEM
The heart of any research project is the problem.
 At every step in the process, successful
researchers ask themselves: What am I doing? For
what purpose am I doing it?
 Such questions can help focus your efforts toward
achieving your ultimate purpose for gathering data:
to resolve the problem.
 Researchers get off to a strong start when they
begin with an unmistakably clear statement of the
problem.


72. STATING THE RESEARCH PROBLEM
After identifying a research problem, therefore, you
must articulate it in such a way that it is carefully
phrased and represents the single goal of the total
research effort.
 Following are some general guidelines to help you
do just that:


73. 1. STATE THE PROBLEM CLEARLY
AND COMPLETELY
Always state the problem in one or more
grammatically complete sentences
 Anyone, anywhere in the world could read it,
understand it, and react to it without the benefit of
your presence.
 If the problem is not stated with such clarity, then
you are merely deceiving yourself that you know
what the problem is.
 Such self-deception will cause you difficulty later
on.


74. THE PROBLEM STATEMENT
Bad habits – try to state a research problem by
jotting down meaningless groups of words, verbal
fragments - no help in seeing the problem clearly
 Examples of half-statements, mere verbal blobs
that only hint at the problem but do not state it

A) Software metrics and the quality of software
 B) Subsidise ICT industry
 C) ICT promotes English in school
 D) QoS in computer network


75. THE PROBLEM STATEMENT
The fragments demonstrate that the researcher
either cannot or will not think in terms of
specific, researchable goals
 Must limit the area of study to a manageable size
 Example, metric and quality, must limit what
metrics? which quality attribute? and more
importantly what domain of the software you want
to investigate? By specifying the domain you are
narrowing down the metric and the quality attribute


76. EXAMPLE: METRIC AND QUALITY
What effect does module size has on the
understandability of program for a Science subject
educational software?
 The metric: module size
 The quality attribute: understandability
 The domain: program, Science subject, educational
software


77. 2. THINK THROUGH THE FEASIBILITY
OF THE PROJECT THAT THE
PROBLEM IMPLIES
Don‟t rush into problem without thinking through its
implications.
 “This study proposes to study the effect of
information and communication technology (ICT) in
teaching mathematics and science in Malaysian
standard one schools”.
 How many primary schools all over Malaysia? How
to contact? Personal visit? What is the financial
outlay? Mail survey? Printing and postage cost?


78. 3. SAY PRECISELY WHAT YOU MEAN
Correct the problem statement right up front, no
place for evasion (trying to avoid something),
equivocation (having a doubtful or double
meaning), or mental reservation in research
 Must mean what you say, cannot assume others
will know what is in your mind, they will take your
words at their face value: You mean what you say.
That‟s it.
 Your failure to be careful with your words can have
grave (serious) results for your status as a scholar
and a researcher


79. BASIC RULE
Absolute honesty and integrity are assumed in
every statement a scholar makes
 No double talk, limit study to specific geographical
area or to a student population within certain
designated limits
 It would have preserved your reputation as a
researcher of INTEGRITY (honesty and goodness)
and PRECISION (exactness and accuracy)


80. BASIC RULE
If a researcher cannot be responsible for the
statement, one might question whether such
researcher is likely to be any more responsible in
gathering and interpreting the data
 It is very serious and can be a brutal blow, for it
reflects on the basic integrity of the whole research
effort
 THREE common difficulties




Fragmentary and meaningless splutter (speak (words) in a
quick confused way, eg. because of excitement)
Irresponsible and extravagant (unnecessary and
unreasonable) wording
Generalized discussion that ends in foggy focus

81. GENERALIZED AND FOGGY
Occasionally, announce intention to make
statement, from that point the discussion becomes
foggier
 This researcher talks about the problem but never
actually states what the problem is.
 Under the excuse that the problem needs an
introduction or needs to be seen against a
background, the researcher launches into a
generalized discussion, continually obscuring (not
easily seen or understood) the problem, never
clearly articulating (able to express his/her opinions
clearly in words) it


82. FOGGY PROBLEM STATEMENT

The upsurge of interest in reading and learning disabilities
found among both children and adults has focused the
attention of educators, psychologists, and linguists on the
language syndrome. In order to understand how language is
learned, it is necessary to understand what a language is.
Language acquisition is a normal developmental aspect of
every individual, but it has not been studied in sufficient depth.
To provide us with the necessary background information to
understand the anomaly of language deficiency implies a
knowledge of the developmental process of language as
these relate to the individual from infancy to maturity.
Grammar, also an aspect of language learning, is acquired
through pragmatic language usage. Phonology, syntax, and
semantics are all intimately involved in the study of any
language disability.

83. WHERE IS THE PROBLEM STATEMENT?
None, that is articulated with sufficient clarity
 No orientation essay
 The problem is stated in the very first words of an
abstract in DAI, e.g “The purpose of this study is to
…”
 No mistaking it
 No background buildup necessary
 Straightforward plunge into the business at hand


84. 4. EDIT YOUR WORK
Difficulties can be avoided by carefully editing your
words. Editing is sharpening a thought to a gemlike
point, and eliminating useless verbiage (wordiness).
By choosing words precisely will clarify your writing
 Editing improves your thinking and your prose
(ordinary written or spoken language). Many
students think that any words that approximately
express a thought are adequate to be conveyed to
others
 Approximation is never precision
 Need to be rigorous (careful and detailed) with the
words


85. 4. EDIT YOUR WORK





Punctuation will help
Cliches (idea or expression that is used so often that it
no longer has any meaning), colloquialisms (word or
phrase suitable for normal conversation: not formal or
literary), slang (words, phrases, etc. used in very
informal conversation, not suitable for formal
situations), jargon (special or technical words used by a
particular group of people), and the gibberish
(meaningless talk; nonsense) of any group obscure (not
easily seen or understood) thought
Jargon shows lazy mind
They feel impressive or add importance
Thought is clearest when clothed in simple
words, concrete nouns, and active, expressive verbs

86. BASIC GUIDELINES FOR CLEAR WRITING
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Express thought fully with least words possible
Use a thesaurus: help find the exact word
Economize on syllable
Keep the sentence short
Look critically at each thought. Do the words say
exactly what you want them to say? Read
carefully phrase by phrase. Throw out
superfluous (more than is needed and wanted)
and unnecessary words
6. Misplaced phrases and clauses can create havoc

87. SUBPROBLEMS VERSUS PSEUDOSUBPROBLEMS
Subproblems are the subparts of the main problem
 The researcher must distinguish subproblems that
are an integral part of the main problem from things
that look like problems but are nothing more than
procedural issues
 The latter, which are called pseudosubproblems, involve decisions the researcher
must make before he or she can resolve the
research problem and its subproblems
 Pseudo-subproblems are not researchable
problems
 Procedural indecisions – decision that researcher
must resolve
 Problems for researcher BUT not part of the
research problem


88. SUBPROBLEMS VERSUS PSEUDOSUBPROBLEMS
Consider the following as examples:
 What is the best way to choose a sample?
 How large should a representative sample of a
population be?
 What instruments or methods should be used to
gather the data?
 What statistical procedures should be used to
analyse the data?
 How do I find the subproblems within the main
problem?

89. SUBPROBLEMS VERSUS PSEUDOSUBPROBLEMS
Deal with pseudo-subproblems forthrightly by
making a firm decision about them and then get on
with the solution of the research problem.
 To deal with pseudo-subproblems, you must decide
whether (a) a little common sense and some
creative thinking might help in solving your
“problem” or (b) you simply lack the knowledge to
address the difficulty.


90. CHARACTERISTICS OF SUBPROBLEMS
There are four key characteristics of subproblems:
1) Each subproblem should be a completely researchable unit
 A subproblem should constitute a logical subarea of the larger
research undertaking.
 Each subproblem might be researched as a separate
subproject within the larger research goal
 The solutions to the subproblems, taken together, combine to
resolve the main problem
 It is essential that each subproblem be stated clearly and
succinctly (expressed briefly and clearly)
 Often, a subproblem is stated in the form of a question
because it tends to focus the researcher‟s attention more
directly on the research target of the subproblem than does a
declarative statement
 After all, an interrogative attitude is what marks a true
researcher

91. CHARACTERISTICS OF SUBPROBLEMS
2)Each subproblem must be clearly tied to the
interpretation of the data
 At some point in the statement of the subproblem –
as within the main problem – the fact that data will
be interpreted must be clearly evident
 This fact may be expressed as a part of each
subproblem statement, or it may occupy an entirely
separate subproblem

92. CHARACTERISTICS OF SUBPROBLEMS
3) The subproblems must add up to the totality of
the problem

After the subproblems have been stated, check
them against the statement of the main problem
to see that
a)
nothing in excess of the coverage of the main
problem is included and that
b)
all significant areas of the main problem are
covered by the subproblems

93. CHARACTERISTICS OF SUBPROBLEMS
4) Subproblems should be small in number
 If the main problem is carefully stated and properly limited to a
feasible research effort, the researcher will find that it usually
contains two to six subproblems
 Sometimes, the inexperienced researcher will come up with
as many as 10, 15, or 20 subproblems
 If this happens, it may fall into one of the following:
 Some are actually procedural issues (pseudosubproblems);
 Some might reasonably be combined into larger
subproblems; or
 The main problem is more complex than you originally
believed.
If the last of these is true, you may want to reconsider
whether the solution to the overall research problem is
actually achievable given the time and resources you have

94. IDENTIFYING SUBPROBLEMS
Beware of unrealistic goals
 Start with the problem itself – if it is correctly written, it is easy to
detect the subproblem areas that may be isolated for further study
Paper-and-Pencil Approach
Using this approach, write the problem on a piece of paper and then
box off the subproblem areas. Follow these steps:
 Copy the problem onto a clean sheet of paper, leaving considerable
space between the lines
 Read the problem critically to discover the areas that should receive
in-depth treatment before the problem can be resolved
 Make sure every subproblem contains a word that indicates the
necessity to interpret the data within that particular subproblem
(e.g., analyse, discover, compare). Underline this word
 Arrange the entire problem, which will now have the subproblems
boxed off, into a skeletal plan that shows the research structure of
the problem. You now have a structure of the whole research design


95. EVERY PROBLEM NEEDS FURTHER
DELINEATION

To comprehend fully the meaning of the problem, the
researcher should eliminate any possibility of
misunderstanding by
 Stating the hypotheses and/or research questions:
Describing the specific hypotheses being tested or
questions being asked.
 Delimiting the research: Fully disclosing what the
researcher intends to do and, conversely, does not intend
to do.
 Defining the terms: Giving the meanings of all terms in the
statements of the problem and subproblems that have any
possibility of being misunderstood.
 Stating the assumptions: Presenting a clear statement of
all assumptions on which the research will rest.

These matters facilitate understanding of the research – called
the setting of the problem