What is good research?

Professor Jacobs stated that a good research is fundamentally a good argument based on evidence, and has nothing to do with the "truth". He joked that if one would like to seek the "truth", carrying out research would not be a good idea. Rather, studying theology would be a better option.

I pondered over this statement and decided that I will first make a comparison between research and argument.

The word "argument" is derived from Latin "argumentum", where "arguere" means to "make clear, prove, or accuse". In our daily lives, we might encounter an argument with another person owing to some disagreement. During the argument, each of us might attempt to use evidence and/or facts to support our own viewpoint. In school, we might also have been tasked with writing an argumentative essay, where we take a stand regarding an issue and use evidence to support our stance, in the hopes of persuading and convincing our readers to agree with our point of view. However, in doing so, we must not be one-sided and should address both sides of the argument in a fair and balanced manner as this helps to strengthen the points that we make.

What about a research paper?

A research paper is somewhat similar to an argumentative essay, in that a claim (which could be a proposed explanation, an opinion, a proposal, and so on) is made within an academic discipline, and the claim is subsequently justified using evidence (which could be in the form of data, responses from surveys, questionnaires, interviews, and so on). The goal of the research thesis is to inform and/or explain to the target audience about the research findings backed up by evidence, and hopefully to convince them that the claim is true and has made a useful contribution to that particular academic discipline.

As shown, a research and an argument have the same purpose and both strive to achieve the same outcome. The difference is that research papers are often subjected to more stringent requirements as they are eventually published in the form of a journal article, book or thesis. Though the quality and standards vary from one academic discipline to another, one journal to another, and one publisher to another, most research papers usually need to undergo peer review and the editorial-referee system before they can be published.




What are the rules of the game for good research? 

If a research is similar to an argument, it follows that a good research is fundamentally a good argument. But what qualifies as a good research or argument?

We were introduced to the three modes of persuasion - ethos (credibility), pathos (emotional), and logos (logical), as described by Greek philosopher Aristotle in his book "Rhetoric": 

Of the modes of persuasion furnished by the spoken word there are three kinds. [...] Persuasion is achieved by the speaker's personal character when the speech is so spoken as to make us think him credible. [...] Secondly, persuasion may come through the hearers, when the speech stirs their emotions. [...] Thirdly, persuasion is effected through the speech itself when we have proved a truth or an apparent truth by means of the persuasive arguments suitable to the case in question.

This short video, entitled "The 3 Pillars of Persuasion", provides a brief history of ethos, pathos and logos:

In-class Example: People should not have alcohol until they are 18. Discuss.

Ethos (meaning "character" in Greek) - ethical appeal

Professor Jacobs' argument: "... because the law says so."

The impact of ethos is often referred to as the argument's 'ethical appeal' or the 'appeal from credibility'. In other words, the extent to which the presenter convinces his/her audience that he/she is qualified, credible, knowledgeable and/or ethical to present on the particular topic.

Pathos (meaning "suffering" or "experience" in Greek) - emotional appeal

Professor Jacobs' argument: "... because my sister was killed by a 17-year-old drunk driver in a road accident." 

Pathos is an appeal to the audience's emotions, in particular, the audience's sympathy, imagination, hopes and sometimes, fear. A successful appeal to pathos should cause an audience not just to respond emotionally but to identify with the writer's point of view, and this usually happens when the presenter agrees with the underlying values of his/her audience.

Logos (meaning "word" in Greek) - logical appeal

Professor Jacobs' argument: "... because alcohol affects the developing brain of adolescents profoundly."

Logos refers to the consistency of a persuasion, an argument or a claim, emphasising on the clarity, the logic behind the reasoning, and the effectiveness of the supporting evidence. It is normally used to describe the data, facts and information that support the presenter's claim. Academic research is primarily based on logos, although researchers might bring in some elements of ethos and pathos. Logos also happens to be Aristotle's favourite method of persuasion as he believed that providing reasons is the gist of an argument.

Professor Kerry Jacobs' rules for good research

This table was presented to us in class:



Professor Jacobs added that a good research paper should explore a problem/an issue that readers do not understand, and therefore the research findings should be something new to them. It should also be clearly presented, well-articulated and well-argued.

In addition to the points mentioned, I think that a good research is essentially one that is well-organised from the start to the end. Before the research project is carried out, it is essential that prior readings have been done and/or a pilot study carried out to find out what is already known or lacking in that area of research. I am not sure if this should apply to all types of research, but I think a clear time frame should also be drafted at the start of the research project to help the researcher manage and gauge his/her progress throughout the research process. Furthermore, in order for the research to be current and relevant, it should be completed within a period of time, otherwise it will be hard to keep up with changes or advances within that academic discipline. 

In "Picking a Research Problem - The Critical Decision", author C. Ronald Kahn listed two important features which he thought made a research project "outstanding". As shown in the paragraph below, I found them highly insightful and straight-to-the-point:

First, it must ask important questions. If the question is not important, then it is likely that no matter how carefully the study is performed, how accurately the results are tabulated, or how well the work is reported, this will not be viewed as an outstanding piece of work. Second, if possible, the project should have the potential to yield a “seminal” observation - one that creates truly new knowledge, leads to new ways of thinking, and lays the foundation for further research in the field. We often recognise a seminal observation as the first major publication in an area, which sets the stage for subsequent work and will be followed by many reports from the same and other laboratories extending and developing the point and expanding it to related areas.

The issue with "seminal" observation is that what qualifies as "seminal" is often subjective and usually involves a fair amount of skepticism at the start of the research project. Kahn suggests that for researchers who are facing this problem, it is best to discuss with trusted colleagues/confidants and determine if the research is able to yield real importance at the end of the day.

Having an idea of what constitutes good research, I will proceed to blog about picking a good research project/topic next week. As usual, I welcome any comments, suggestions and feedback. Many thanks to those who have been to my blog and left your comments, I really appreciate it.