'Hallmarks of Scientific Research Essay\r'

' successful managerial decisions be seldom made on hunches or on trail and error rule. The earph sensation and effective decisions argon unceasingly made on the basis of scientific search. scientific seek foc riding habits on solving problems in a footf only _by _step logical, unionized and besotted manner in individually step of question viz., identifying problem, gathering entropy, analyzing it and in arriving at a valid conclusion. Organizations may non always be involved in the scientific look into due to various reasons like †simple problems which faeces lick with previous experience, time contingency, lack of experience, resource constraints etc., provided the scientific seek per excogitateed in a compressed and systematic way leads to repeatable and comparable question findings. It excessively enables the enquiryers to arrive at accurate, dependable and essential findings. The h onlymarks or distinguishing characteristic features of scientific question argon as follows:\r\nPurposiveness\r\nThe query is conducted with a occasion. It has a focus. The purpose of the research should be distinctly mentivirtuosod in an comprehensible and unambiguous manner. The verbalizement of the decision problem should acknowledge its scope, its limitations and the hairsplitting meaning of both words and basis signifi squirtt to the research. Failure to mention the purpose clearly leave al hotshot raise doubts in the school principals of stakeholders of the research as to whether the researcher has sufficient understanding of the problem.\r\n roughness\r\nRigor means deliberateness, scrupulousness and the degree of exactness in research investigation. In order to make a meaningful and worth time contribution to the field of knowledge, research must be carried out rigorously. Conducting a rigorous research requires a good theoretical knowledge and a clearly laid out orderology. This will eliminate the bias; facilitate proper selec tive asseverateation collection and analysis, which in turn would lead to go and reliable research findings.\r\nTestability\r\nResearch should be found on testable assumptions/hypotheses developed after a c arful discipline of the problems involved. The scientific research should enable the examination of logically developed hypotheses to see whether or non the data collected support the hypotheses developed.\r\nReplicability\r\nResearch findings would see more faith and credence if the identical results are evolved on different behave of data. The results of the test hypothesis should be back up again and again when the corresponding type of research is repeated in separate akin circumstances. This will ensures the scientific nature of the research conducted and more sureness could be placed in the research findings. It besides eliminates the doubt that the hypotheses are supported by chance and ensures that the findings smooth the true state of affairs.\r\nprecisen ess and self-reliance\r\nIn management research the findings are seldom definitive due to the particular that the universe of items, events or population are non taken as much(prenominal) but base on sample drawn from universe. in that respect is a probability that the sample may not reflect the universe. Measurement errors and other problems are bound to record an element of error in the findings. However the research design should ensure that the findings are as destination to the historicality as potential so that one can have trustingness in the findings.\r\nPrecision refers to the closeness of the finding to ‘reality’ based on sample. It reflects the degree of accuracy or exactitude of the results on the basis of the sample to what exactly is in the universe. The confidence interval in statistics is referred here as precision.\r\nConfidence refers to the probability that the estimation made in the research findings are correct. It is not enough if the res ults are precise but it is also important to claim that 95% of the time the results would be true and there is exclusively a 5% chance of the results being wrong. This is cognise as confidence level. If the precision and confidence levels of the research findings are higher thusly the findings of the research study would be more scientific and multipurpose. Precision and confidence can be attained done earmark scientific sampling design.\r\nObjectivity\r\nResearch finding should be f substantial, databased and free from bias. The conclusion drawn should be based on the facts of the findings derived form the actual data and not on the basis of subjective or emotional values. Business organizations will suffer a great extent of damage if a non-data-based or mis jumper lead conclusion drawn from the research is implemented. Scientific approach ensures objectivity of research.\r\nGeneralizability\r\nIt refers to the scope of applying the research findings of one organizational se tting to other settings of almost similar nature. The research will be more useful if the solutions are applicable to a wider range. The more generlizable the research, the greater will be its usefulness and value. However it is not always possible to publicize the research findings to all other settings, situations or organizations. For achieving genaralizability the sampling design has to be logically developed and data collection method needs to be very sound. This may plus the cost of conducting the research. In most of the cases though the research findings would be based on scientific methods it is applicable only to a particular organization, settings or situations.\r\n compactness\r\nResearch needs to be conducted in a parsimonious i.e. simple and stintingal manner. Simplicity in rationaliseing the problems and usualizing solutions for the problems is preferred to a complex research framework. miserliness in research models can be achieved by way of considering less nu mber of variables leading to greater variance rather than considering more number of variables leading to less variance. Clear understanding regarding the problem and the factors influencing the same will lead to parsimony in research activities. The sound understanding can be achieved through structured and unstructured interview with the concerned peck and by undertaking a study of colligate literature in the problem area.\r\nThe scientific research in management area cannot fulfill all the above-discussed hallmarks to the fullest extent. In management research it is not always possible to conduct investigations that are 100% scientific like in physical science as it is difficult to collect and measure the data regarding the feelings, emotions, attitudes and perception. It is also difficult to obtain representative sample; these aspects suppress the generlizability of the findings. Though it is not possible to meet all the above said characteristics of the scientific research, t o the extent possible the research activities should be pursued in the scientific manner.\r\nReason is the tool by which the military man mind comes to understand the world. There are two processes by which reason tries to understand events: deductive reasoning, based on generally veritable principles, and inductive reasoning, in which general principles are formed from discovered events. The field of economic science has deductive and inductive sides, which are complementary to each other.\r\nRead more: inductance Vs. conclusion economic science | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_5427109_ stimulus generalization-vs- discount rate- economic science.html#ixzz2KoG5qmEy\r\nDeduction in economics\r\n• Deductive economics starts with a set of axioms about economies and how they work, and relies on these principles to explain individual cases or events. Supply and demand analysis, a staple in any introductory economics course, is an example of deductive reasoning becaus e it involves a set of generally accepted principles about demand and supply. To summarize, proof in economics starts with a generally accepted principle and proceeds to the specific. elicitation in economics\r\n• Inductive reasoning in economics does the black eye of deductive reasoning; namely, it begins with an individual problem or question and proceeds to form a general principle based on the evidence observed in the real world of economic activity. For example, an economic expert who asks if a government program of public plant life spending will stimulate a neighbourhood’s economy will proceed to research the issue, collect and analyze data, and based on conclusions, form a general theory about the economic impact of fiscal policies.\r\nRead more: Induction Vs. Deduction Economics | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_5427109_induction-vs- implication-economics.html#ixzz2KoGFvGGU\r\nInduction-Deduction Link\r\n• Although deduction and induction repres ent two differing approaches to understanding economic phenomena, the nineteenth century American economist Henry George observed that they are related. George noted that induction involves the use of human reason to investigate facts, while deduction is the differential coefficient of the former.\r\nEffects\r\n• Applying George’s insight on deduction and induction in economics, deduction involves the use of economic principles and theories that have been empirically verified through observation, research, and scathing analysis. Generally accepted principles of supply and demand, for example, can inform our understanding of economic transactions only if they are based on empirical evidence, collected and examine through the inductive process.\r\nFeatures\r\n• Induction in economics requires rigorous use of the methodology of economic research. This includes use of the mathematical modeling and statistical processes used in econometrics, or economic measurement. Findings from inductive reasoning past form economic theories used in deductive analysis.\r\nRead more: Induction Vs. Deduction Economics | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_5427109_induction-vs-deduction-economics.html#ixzz2KoGNpTEs\r\nLogical arguments are usually classified as either ‘deductive’ or ‘inductive’. Deduction: In the process of deduction, you begin with some statements, called ‘ exposit’, that are assumed to be true, you then jog what else would have to be true if the premises are true. For example, you can begin by assuming that paragon exists, and is good, and then determine what would logically follow from such an assumption. You can begin by assuming that if you think, then you must exist, and work from there. In mathematics you can begin with some axioms and then determine what you can prove to be true assumption those axioms. With deduction you can provide absolute proof of your conclusions, given up that your premi ses are correct. The premises themselves, however, remain unverified and unprovable, they must be accepted on grimace value, or by faith, or for the purpose of exploration.\r\nInduction: In the process of induction, you begin with some data, and then determine what general conclusion(s) can logically be derived from those data. In other words, you determine what theory or theories could explain the data. For example, you note that the probability of becoming schizophrenic is greatly increased if at least one fire is schizophrenic, and from that you leave off that schizophrenic disorder may be inherited. That is certainly a reasonable hypothesis given the data. Note, however, that induction does not prove that the theory is correct. There are often alternative theories that are also supported by the data.\r\nFor example, the behavior of the schizophrenic parent may cause the child to be schizophrenic, not the genes. What is important in induction is that the theory does so offe r a logical explanation of the data. To conclude that the parents have no effect on the schizophrenia of the children is not supportable given the data, and would not be a logical conclusion. Deduction and induction by themselves are inadequate for a scientific approach. duration deduction gives absolute proof, it never makes contact with the real world, there is no place for observation or experimentation, no way to test the validity of the premises. And, while induction is driven by observation, it never approaches actual proof of a theory. The development of the scientific method involved a gradual synthesis of these two logical approaches.\r\n'