Research Methodology

ByReaz Uddin, Ph. D.

Dr. Panjwani Center for Molecular Medicine and Drug Research, International Center for Chemical and Biological Sciences,University of KarachiResearch Methodology ASR7021Course ContentsPublic Safety (Dr. Raza Shah) (2 classes)Lab Safety (Dr. Raza Shah) (2 classes)Environment conservations (Dr. Raza Shah) (2 classes)Scientific Record Keeping (Dr. Hina Siddiqui) (2 classes)Handling of Research Material (Dr. Hina Siddiqui) (2 classes)Research Misconduct (Dr. Hina Siddiqui) (2 classes)Critical Evaluation of Research (Dr. Hina Siddiqui) (2 classes)Ownership of Data (Dr. Hina Siddiqui) (2 classes)Research Ethics (Dr. Reaz Uddin) (2 classes)Scientific Integrity (Dr. Reaz Uddin) (2 classes)Effective use of computers and internet (Dr. Reaz Uddin) (2 classes)Publication (Dr. Reaz Uddin) (2 classes)Communication of Science (Dr. Reaz Uddin) (2 classes)Students Presentations (Dr. Hina Siddiqui and Dr. Reaz) (10 classes)Biostatistics (Mr. Yaseen Menai) (9 classes)

2PUBLICATIONS3Publication Types4Original research ArticleLetter Resource (presents a large dataset of broad usefulness, interest and significance) Brief Communicationor Technical ReportReviewing research Progressarticles (highly topical, short reviews)Insights(themed collections of several review articles) and occasionally,Analysis(meta-analysis of existing data)

Publication Types5PerspectivesandHistorical Perspectives.Perspectivesdiscuss models and ideas from a personalbut balanced viewpoint. They areintended to stimulate discussion and new experimental approaches. News and Views: short, accessible articles focused on one scientific advance independent of the author's own research. Opinion and commentEditorials: opinion articles written by theeditors about topicalissues of the day concerning science, particularly its interface with wider societyshort correspondence or longer, more rounded Opinion articles (commissioned by the editors)Commentary, Opinion or CorrespondenceScience and CultureBooks

Scholarly Article6By writing a scholarly article you are contributing to a community of thought on a particular topic. A scholarly article allows you to communicate your research with your peers. It should provide complete information about a particular piece of research. Frequently, publishing a scholarly article is a time-intensive process. The highest caliber journals are generally peer-reviewed, and getting your research reviewed can take a while. To get your research out to the world faster, try publishing a conference article!

The key to finding scholarly articles is using scholarly databases or browsing scholarly journals.

LetterA letter is shorter than a scholarly article and does not present a full explanation of research the way a scholarly article does. It is usually an explanation of work that has been done, either a design or research, without all the data presented. You would write a letter if you just wanted to summarize your work in a brief document without presenting all your research. Letters are often used to get the word out quickly about research, and then followed up by complete journal articles. Many journals are devoted to letters alone, for example: IEEE Computer Architecture Letters and Electronic Letters on Computer Vision and Image Analysis.7Conference PaperA conference article is similar to a scholarly article insofar as it is academic. Naturally, you need to find a conference appropriate to your subject area where you can present the paper. One great thing about conference articles is that they are published more quickly than scholarly articles. You can get your research to your community much faster via conferences than journals. Many conference publications are peer-reviewed, especially in computer science. You can find conference papers in many of the same places as scholarly articles. 8Review ArticleA review article summarizes a particular field of study and places the recent research in context.

It provides an overview and is an excellent introduction to a subject area. The references used in a review article are helpful as they lead to more in-depth research.

You might want to write a review article to summarize progress in a field you've been working on. 9Writing Scientific Manuscripts

10Copyright 2005, Journal of Young Investigators, Inc.10Table of ContentsIntroduction Part I: Publication & Peer ReviewDeciding to Publish Submitting Your PaperAfter Submission Overview of Peer Review Purpose of Peer Review How It WorksThe Role of Editor Limitations and Issues11Table of Contents ContdPart II: Writing a Scientific Manuscript The Scientific ManuscriptWord ChoiceThe AbstractThe Introduction The Methods & Materials SectionThe Results Section The Discussion Section Figures, Tables, Equations, and References

12Copyright 2005, Journal of Young Investigators, Inc.12Part I: Publication & Peer Review

13Deciding to Publish andSubmitting Your PaperWhat to publish?abstract vs. full reportChoosing your forum Which type of journal is best for you?What audience are you targeting?Research the journalPublication guidelinesArticle style

14After SubmissionPublication Procedure (6-12 months)Author submitsEditor is assigned to manuscript Editor assigns reviewers (associate editors) to inspect Reviewers decide on whether to review paperSeveral reviewers inspect and editEditor decides on accuracy of revisions and whether to accept paperIf accepted, editor sends paper back to author with revisionsAuthor revises paper and sends it backPossibility of second review processPublication!15What is Peer Review?Review process for scientists by scientistsPurposeTo filter what is published as scienceTo provide researchers with perspectiveWhere is peer review used?Scientific publicationGrant reviewTenure promotion16Slow Conflicting viewsConfronting theory biasPersonal viewsObjective vs. personal editsFraud Data manipulation and inventionEditors and scientists portray peer review as a quasi-sacred process that helps to make science our most objective truth teller. But we know that the system of peer review is biased, unjust, unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usually ignorant, occasionally foolish, and frequently wrong.-- Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet,Constraints of Peer Review17Scientific MisconductGift AuthorshipRedundant PublicationPlagiarismFabricationFalsificationConflict of Interest18Part II: Writing a Scientific Manuscript

19Writing Style and AudienceChecklist:Void of anecdotes or storiesReports facts not outlandish conclusionsNo misspellingsGrammatical accuracyMeets formatting guidelinesAvoids using the first personWhos the audience?Write for your target audience

20Word ChoiceExamine vs. Analyze Activity to gain knowledge vs. Describing the analysis of that knowledgeBlooms TaxonomyKnowledgeComprehensionApplicationAnalysisSynthesisEvaluation21Word ChoiceBlooms TaxonomyKnowledge: Recitation of factFound, identified, labeledComprehension: State a problem or interpret factDiscuss, predict, compareApplication: Apply old information to solve new problemsSolve, show, examine, classifyAnalysis: Used to explain patterns or meaningAnalyze, investigate, compare, contrast Synthesis: Making predictions or discussing possibilitiesPredict, plan, devise, proposeEvaluation: Drawing conclusions, making recommendationsJustify, verify, argue, recommend, determine22Manuscript Structure AbstractIntroductionBody of ArticleResultsDiscussion and ConclusionsAcknowledgementsReferencesFigures and Tables

23AbstractSummary of Manuscript (200-300 Words)Problem investigatedPurpose of ResearchMethodsResults Conclusion24AbstractCommon MistakesToo much background or methods informationFigures or imagesReferences to other literature, figures or imagesAbbreviations or acronyms25IntroductionBroad information on topicPrevious researchNarrower background informationNeed for studyFocus of paperHypothesisSummary of problem (selling point)Overall 300-500 words

26IntroductionCommon MistakesToo much or not enough informationUnclear purposeLists Confusing structureFirst-Person anecdotes

27Methods and MaterialsProvides instruction on exactly how to repeat experimentSubjectsSample preparation techniquesSample originsField site descriptionData collection protocolData analysis techniquesAny computer programs usedDescription of equipment and its use28Methods and MaterialsCommon MistakesToo little informationInformation from IntroductionVerbosityResults/ sources of error reported29Results Objective presentation of experiment results Summary of dataNOT a Discussion!

30Results Common mistakesRaw dataRedundancyDiscussion and interpretation of dataNo figures or tables Methods/materials reported31DiscussionInterpret results Did the study confirm/deny the hypothesis?If not, did the results provide an alternative hypothesis? What interpretation can be made?Do results agree with other research? Sources of error/anomalous data?Implications of study for fieldSuggestions for improvement and future research?Relate to previous research

32DiscussionCommon MistakesCombined with ResultsNew results discussed Broad statementsIncorrectly discussing inconclusive resultsAmbiguous data sourcesMissing information

33Figures and Tables Tables Presents lists of numbers/ text in columnsFigures Visual representation of results or illustration of concepts/methods (graphs, images, diagrams, etc.) CaptionsMust be stand-alone34Figures and Tables Guidelines for Figures and TablesHigh resolutionNeat, legible labelsSimpleClearly formattedIndicate errorDetailed captions

35References Check specific referencing style of journalShould reference:Peer-reviewed journal articles, abstracts, booksShould not reference:Non-peer-reviewed works, textbooks, personal communications36References Common MistakesFormat, Format, Format(Figures & Tables, Equations, and References)Redundant InformationText, Figures, Tables, and CaptionsType of Reference37