Research = Conversation

"I think of research as a conversation, and it really is very much like a conversation. No single person dominates it, but what does happen is when you interject something, when you contribute something to a conversation, you want to be understood, you want to be heard, you would like people to pay attention, you would like it to have some influence on the way the conversation goes. You don't control it." — Daniel Kahneman

I particularly like how researchers (see Anne Huff, 1999; McMillen & Hill, 2004) liken research to an unending conversation. Because conversation is such a familiar activity that takes place on a daily basis,  it has enabled me to better understand the processes involved when doing research.

Perhaps the most important and striking similarity between both is that they are interactive processes. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines conversation as an "oral exchange of sentiments, observations, opinions, or ideas". In other words, it is a bi-directional flow of opinions and ideas, such that all parties involved in the conservation bring something to the table, discuss and deliberate on the opinions and ideas provided, reach an agreement or consensus (this might not happen), and after which, gain something from the conversation that occurred. Anne Hull (1999) considered conversation the essence of society, citing the Oxford English Dictionary which defined conversation as "the action of living or having one's being in a place or among persons."

Many novice researchers, like myself, find it hard (initially) to picture research as a conversation — after all, our first impression of research is that it is a solitary self-discovery journey where researchers read up on their research topics/areas, proceed to carry out surveys/questionnaires/experiments, and finally, pen their research reports or theses. It seems as though we, under the guidance of our supervisors, are the only ones who are trying to make sense of the information out there, with the ultimate aim of presenting and sharing our findings to our research communities.

Little did we know that every available information out there — the facts, opinions, and findings in journal articles, books, or even artefacts — is the result of multiple, never-ending conversations among researchers. Research is built on conversation and interaction, it requires both elements, and at the same time, it is the product of both elements. The paragraphs of words that we encounter in research journals, books, and so on — were, more often than not, carefully chosen to convey the right message to the right audience. The citations and references made in journal articles to ascertain, challenge, or support the researcher's arguments are fundamentally scholarly dialogues, which help to shape the boundaries, define the key issues, and deepen understanding in various academic disciplines.

In the article "Why teach 'research as a conversation' in freshman composition courses? A metaphor to help librarians and composition instructors develop a shared model", McMillen & Hill (2004) proposed several features that are common to both research and conversation. Essentially, they pointed out that research and conversation are both:

• interactive and recursive processes;
• context-sensitive and -situated; and
• avenues through which people construct meaning. 

They also added that learning how to research is equivalent to learning how to converse in a second language, and because conversation is such a familiar day-to-day activity, they came out with a teaching model based on the idea of a conversation to introduce students to research. An inherent assumption underlying the teaching model is that it is much easier to understand what conversation entails than to comprehend the formal structure of academic discourse embodied in research.

Getting started with research — joining the conversation

How do you get enough background information on the topic so that you can participate in the conversation?

How can researchers join the conversation?

A researcher, no matter how experienced or skilful he/she is, would need to make sense of the research conversations that are taking place in that discipline, before deciding where and how his/her ideas fit into the pool of conversations. Most researchers usually do this by reading up extensively on the topic. They then proceed to write a literature review, which reveals a research gap in current literature. When analysing each journal article or book, the researcher annotates the information presented. Essentially, he/she determines where the author is coming from, examines the author's arguments, as well as the author's area of expertise. With an in-depth understanding of the research area, the researcher can then proceed to critique other researchers' work in the same area, and put forth his own arguments and findings through a research problem/research questions. That is when the researcher enters the conversation.

What is the researcher's role?

The researcher's role throughout the conversation (or research) is to keep the bi-directional flow of ideas, opinions, suggestions, and arguments going. He/she could choose to either explore (breadth) or focus (depth) in a particular area, and this will be done through continuous readings. As he/she keeps the conversation going, he/she may agree or disagree with certain sources of information. Slowly but surely, trends and patterns will start to appear. Coupled with the researcher's own ideas, all these bi-directional dialogues will be compiled and put into place. This ultimately paves the way for the final research project/thesis/presentation.

References:

Huff, A. S. 1999. Writing for scholarly publication. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.

McMillen, P. S., & Hill, E. 2004. Why teach “research as a conversation” in freshman composition courses? A metaphor to help librarians and composition instructors develop a shared model. Research Strategies, 20(1): 3-22.