ADVERTISEMENTS:
After reading this article you will learn about the design for exploratory and descriptive studies used for controlling problems faced in research.
Design for Exploratory Studies:
Exploratory studies have, in the main, the purpose of formulating a problem for more precise and structured investigation or of developing hypotheses. An exploratory study may, however, have other functions too, e.g., increasing the investigator’s familiarity with the phenomena he wishes to study in a subsequent, more structured investigation or with the setting in which he plans to carry out such an investigation.
An exploratory study may also serve as a basis for clarifying concepts, establishing priorities for further research, gathering information about practical possibilities for carrying out research, data gathering in research in specific real-life setting, etc.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
“Exploratory studies,” says Katz, “represent the earlier stage of science.” From its findings may emanate the knowledge that helps the research in formulating a problem for research or in developing hypotheses to be tested subsequently.
Let us try to understand to some satisfactory extent the nature of an exploratory study by an analogy. A doctor who is called upon to attend to a patient whose malady he is totally unfamiliar with, will ask him various questions concerning his complaints, will examine the various parts of the patient’s body using different instrument at his disposal and peruse the patient’s pathological reports or records (if any) and so on.
On the basis of this exploration, the doctor may find himself in a position to pose a question like, “could it be typhoid?” One of his hypotheses relating to the above question may be, ‘it is typhoid.’ The doctor’s subsequent treatment in the nature of antibiotics will constitute a test of the hypothesis.
If the patient responds favorably to the treatment there is room for believing that the typhoid hypothesis is tenable. If the post-treatment observations suggest unfavorable response, the typhoid hypothesis is falsified. Such a test of hypothesis does not belong to the realm of exploratory studies.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The above example illustrates the nature of an exploratory study and also how it differs from the problem-solving and hypothesis testing studies.
In the initial stage when the doctor was asking the patient all manner of questions and was examining him, using various instruments and scrutinizing various reports, the doctor was simply exploring, i.e., conducting some sort of an exploration study. The end-result of this exploration was the question (problem) that suggested itself to him.
After this phase of exploration, the doctor proceeded to test his proposed hypothesis by resorting to a more controlled or structured method of investigation. This second phase was the hypothesis testing phase of the inquiry.
The exploratory study may thus be considered an earlier step consisting in problem finding or hypothesis formulation, to be followed by other steps aimed at problem-solving or hypothesis-testing, on a continuum of research’ processes.
The flexible nature of the research design characteristic of exploratory studies should be clear from the above example. The doctor’s questions to the patient were neither pre-determined nor was his use of certain instruments.
The doctor was continually accommodating newer facts as they were becoming known to him, changing in effect, his tentative and formative idea about the nature of disease from time to time till finally he could put forth his tentative diagnosis (hypothesis).
The relative youth of social science and researches in the realm of social science make it inevitable that much of social science research, for a time to come, will be of an exploratory nature. Few well-trodden paths exist for the investigator of social life to follow. Most existing theories in social sciences are either too general or too specific to provide any clear guidance for empirical research.
Under the circumstances, exploratory research is necessary to obtain experience that will be helpful, in formulating worthwhile hypothesis for more definitive investigations. For a general area of problems about which little knowledge is available and a general state of ignorance prevails, an exploratory study is most appropriate.
Quite often we see a tendency to undermine the importance of exploratory research and to regard only experimental research as more scientific. But if experimental work is to have any theoretical or practical value, it must be relevant to issues that are much more broader than those posed in the concrete confines of the experiment.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Such relevance can result only from adequate explorations of the dimensions of the problem with which the research it attempting to solve.
Path-breaking explorations or formulative researches are particularly complex affairs. One starts from a scratch, without guide-posts or yard sticks. Any intellectual framework and categories within which to classify, what one sees, are absent.
The researcher’s only resource is whatever concepts he can borrow from other fields or from the common language. He needs to create his own guide-post and scheme of classification. He must decide what to look for, and what to ignore, what to record and what not, which clues to follow and which to abandon, what is of consequence and what is trivial. The explorer has great freedom but the same can so often be terrifying.
More appropriately the exploratory study should be considered an initial step in a continuous research process rather than an exercise in isolation. The most careful methods during the later stages of enquiry are of little worth if an incorrect or irrelevant start was made.
Adequate exploration ensures against such an eventuality. Selltiz, Jahoda, Deutsch and Cook suggest that the following methods are likely to be very fruitful in exploratory research directed toward the search for meaningful hypotheses.
(a) A review of related social science and other pertinent literature.
(b) A survey of people who have had practical experience of the broad problem area to be investigated.
Most exploratory researches utilize these methods. These methods to be used must, of course, be flexible. As the initial vaguely defined problem gets transformed gradually into one with more precise meaning and reference, frequent changes in the research procedures become necessary in order to provide for the gathering of data relevant to the evolving hypothesis.
a. Survey of Literature:
Frequently, an exploratory study is concerned with an area of subject-matter in which explicit hypotheses have not yet been formulated. The researcher’s task then is to review the available material with an eye on the possibilities of developing hypotheses from it. In some areas of the subject-matter, hypotheses may have been stated by previous research workers.
The researcher has to take stock of these various hypotheses with a view to evaluating their usefulness for further research and to consider whether they suggest any new hypotheses.
A researcher working in the field of sociology will find that such publications as the Sociological Journals, Economic Reviews, the Bulletin of Abstracts of Current Social Science Research, Directory of doctoral dissertations accepted by Universities, etc. afford a rich store of valuable clues.
In addition to these general sources, some governmental agencies and voluntary organizations publish listings or summaries of research in their special fields of concern and service.
Professional organizations, research groups and voluntary organizations are a constant source of information about unpublished works in their special fields. It could be too narrow an outlook, however, to restrict one’s bibliographical survey to studies that are directly relevant to one’s area of interest.
The most fruitful means of developing hypotheses is the attempt to apply to the area in which one is working, concepts and theories developed in quite different research contexts.
Thus, the theory of perception developed in the area of psychological problems may provide stimulating clues for researchers desiring to work on the problems of group morale or group tensions. The sensitive descriptions to be found in the works of creative writers or novelists may also provide a fertile ground for the generation of hypotheses.
b. The Experience Survey:
Some people in the course of their day-to-day experience, by virtue of their peculiar placement as officials, social workers, professionals, etc. are in a position to observe the effects of different policy actions and to relate these to problem of human welfare.
The block development officer and his village level workers, for example, are likely to develop certain rare insights into the characteristics of the rural people and the estimated effectiveness of various approaches to their welfare.
The professionals too may acquire rich insights in respect of the relevant categories of clients. The administrators are typically very advantageously positioned to obtain fruitful insights into what really works in a practical situation.
The specialists acquire in the routine of their work, a rich fund of experience that can be of tremendous value in helping social scientists to develop awareness about the important influences operating in a situation they may be called upon to study. It is the purpose of the experience survey to gather and synthesize such experience.
Since the aim of experience survey is to obtain insights into the nature of the problem and useful leads or clues to the possible hypotheses and since the experience surveyor is looking for provocative ideas and useful insights, the cases are chosen on the basis of the likelihood that they will be able to contribute such ideas and insights.
It is indeed a waste of time in an experience survey to interview people who have little competence, relevant experience and communicability. The best method of selecting informants may be to ask strategically placed administrators working in the field one desires to study, to point out the most experienced and informative people.
Efforts are made to select informants so as to ensure a representation of different types of experience. Variations in the points of view also need to be given adequate representation in the sample of respondents selected.
Thus, in an experience survey of factors likely to resist, say, planned rural development, it may prove advantageous to interview the officials charged with plan-implementation as well as the village leaders. It would be ideal to interview people at different levels in each group.
In an experience survey, the best way to determine the sample size to identify the point during the process of interviewing after which additional interviews do not provide new insights and answers seem to fall into the pattern which has already emerged from the earlier interviews.
Before any systemic attempt is made to collect the insights of experienced persons, it is, of course, necessary to have some preliminary idea of the important issues in the general area of the subject-matter. In the systematic interviewing of the informants, it is necessary to maintain a considerable degree of flexibility.
The formulative or the discovery aspects of the experience survey require that the interviewer allow the respondent to raise issues and questions the investigator has not previously thought of.
Even at the cost of repetition, it must be stated that the problem before a person undertaking an exploratory study is that he has no clearly formulated problem; at the best, he may have a vaguely or dimly felt ‘originating question.’
His exploration is directed toward problem-finding. Naturally, the researcher does not have any clear-cut idea as to what specific, predetermined set of question he should put to the informants to be able to get the ‘relevant’ information or answers. Since he has no specific problem, every information is relevant, every information, irrelevant.
Hence, the investigator cannot frame definite questions in advance of the actual questioning of the informants. He thus casts his net wide; asks the informant all manner of general, flexible questions, viz., “what would you say about the people of this area?”
On picking up a clue in the course of conversation, for which maximum opportunity and freedom is allowed to the informant, the investigator slowly tightens the net, i.e., asks the respondent more pointed questions. If this leads to the strengthening of the hunch initiated by the earlier clue, he tightens his net further still, asking definite and pertinent questions.
The culmination of this process, if all goes well, is the discovery of the problem and/or meaningful hypotheses. Thus in an experience survey, it is the ‘non-structured’ flexible methods of data collection that are generally used. Of course, as the clues start maturing and insights begin developing, the information-seeking devices also shift toward greater pertinence and structuredness.
An experience survey, in addition to being a source of hypotheses, can also provide information about the practical possibilities for doing different types of research, e.g., where can the possibilities for the research be obtained? Which factors can be controlled and which not, in the situation intended for study?
How ready are the agencies or citizens to co-operate in study of the problem in question? In addition, the experience survey may provide information about the problems considered urgent by personnel working in a given area.
This information may prove to be useful in establishing priorities in specific research programme. The report of an experience survey also provides a consolidated summary of knowledge of skilled practitioners about the effectiveness of various methods and procedures for achieving specific goals.
Design for Descriptive and Diagnostic Studies:
We have already stated that the descriptive studies are the ones that aim at describing accurately the characteristics of a group, community or a group of people. A researcher may be interested in studying the people of a community, their age composition, sex composition, caste-wise distribution, occupational distribution and so on.
A researcher may be concerned with estimating the proportion of people in a particular population who hold certain views or attitudes. How many favour lowering the age of voting? How many students favour student representation on university bodies?
Quite a few other researchers, may be concerned with specific predictions. What percentage of people will vote for a particular party candidate? What will be the volume of unemployment within a decade?
It is understandable that when one does not know anything at all about a problem, he must attempt to understand it in a general way before beginning to make specific the Various aspects of the subject. Explorers and missionaries write such descriptions of many exotic lands.
They chose to describe what they thought to be important and interesting unconcerned with any rigid rules of scientific proof. Even such reports had their importance, for anthropologists subsequently rushed to study these ‘natives’ who were only hinted at in the explorer’s reports.
Descriptive studies often provide a jumping pad for the study of new areas in social sciences. It is worthy of mention that Freud’s compilation of case histories of patients laid the foundation for clinical psychology. Freud remarked “the true beginning of scientific activity consists in describing phenomena and (only) then, in proceeding to group, clarify and correlate them….”
Most anthropological research may be characterized as descriptive in as much as the thrust is on portraying a rounded picture of a total culture or some aspect of it. In more mature social sciences, sophisticated theories and statistical techniques of description may also be used. A general picture helps one grasp the essence of the problem.
It may not be very useful to conceive of descriptive research only as a phase on the evolutionary continuum of researches. This is so, firstly, because a piece of descriptive research may be of important scientific value in itself, although it cannot be generalized to apply to other situations.
It can provide information which is of value in policy formulation and secondly, because the notion of stage assumes that we have knowledge about the various stages in the supposed continuum. There is hardly any firm evidence to substantiate such an evolutionary view of scientific research.
Another class of researches called diagnostic, may be concerned with discovering and testing whether certain variables are associated, e. g., do more villagers than city dwellers vote for a particular party?
Are people who have co-educational background better adjusted to married life than those who did not have this background? As was indicated earlier, both descriptive as well ‘as diagnostic studies share common requirements in regard to the study design.
So we may group those two kinds of research interests as descriptive and diagnostic, together, since from the point of view of research procedure both these studies share certain important characteristics.
It should be noted that in contrast to the problem (of problem finding) which forms the basis for exploratory studies, the research questions characteristic of the descriptive and diagnostic studies demand much prior knowledge of the problem to be investigated. Here the researcher must be able to define clearly what he wants to measure and must identify adequate methods for measurement.
In addition, the researcher must be able to specify who are to be included in the definition of the given population with reference to which conclusions are to be drawn. In collecting evidence for studies of this type, what is needed is not so much the flexibility (as for exploratory studies) as a clear formulation of what is to be measured and the techniques to be adopted for precise, valid and reliable measurements.
The procedures to be used in descriptive/diagnostic study must be carefully planned since here the aim is to obtain complete and accurate information. The research design for these studies must make a much greater provision for protection against bias.
Because of the amount of work involved in descriptive/diagnostic studies, concerned with economy (of time, money and labour) in the course of research is extremely important. Considerations of economy and protection against bias permeate every stage of the research process.
Let us now turn to consider some of the ways in which economy and protection against bias are taken into account in the design of a descriptive/diagnostic study.
The first step in a descriptive/diagnostic study, is to define the question, that is to be answered. Unless the questions are formulated with sufficient precision to ensure relevance of the data collected to the questions raised, the study will be fruitless.
It is necessary to formally define the concepts entering into the question and also to indicate how the concept is to be measured. Considerations of economy would need to be entertained at the stage of specifying the research questions. This restricts the area of the study to bounds of manageability.
After the problem has been formulated specifically enough to indicate what data would be required, the methods by which data can be obtained must be selected. Tools for collecting the information must be devised if no suitable ones already exist.
Each of the various methods of data collection observation, interview, questionnaire etc. — has its peculiar advantages and limitations. The researcher would have to consider the nature of the problem, the scope of the study, the nature of respondents, type of information needed, the degree of accuracy needed, etc., and in view of these, balancing the gains and losses, should select one or more methods of data collection.
The stage of developing the data-collection procedures is one of the major points at which safeguards against bias and unreliability would need to be introduced.
Questions to be asked to the respondents must be carefully examined for the possibility that their wording may suggest one answer rather than another. Interviewers must be instructed not to ask leading questions, observers need to be trained so that all the observers involved in the study record their observations uniformly.
Once the data collection instruments are constructed, they must be pre-tested. Pre-testing the data-collection instruments before they are used in the study proper, greatly minimizes difficulties of comprehension, ambiguousness and sterility of questions.
In many descriptive/diagnostic studies, the researcher wants to make statements about some specific class of people or objects. However, it is rarely necessary to study all the people comprising the group in order to provide an accurate and reliable description of certain characteristics of its members.
Quite often a sample or a fragment of the population about which inferences are to be drawn, affords an adequate basis for making such statements.
Much work has been done on the problem of designing the sample in a manner that it would yield accurate information with a minimum amount of expenses and research effort. It is important that the study findings based on the sample (a part of the population under study) should be reasonable accurate indicators of the state of affairs in the total group (population).
This means that the sample should be selected in such a way that findings based on it are likely to correspond closely to those that would be obtained if the ‘population’ were studied.
The researcher must select his sample in full consideration of the relative advantages and limitations of different methods of sampling and adopt the one (or a combination of two or more) that will provide the most accurate estimate of the population it represents, with maximum economy.
With a view to obtaining consistent data free from the errors introduced by different interviewers, observers and others working with the project, it is necessary to supervise the staff of field workers closely as they collect and record information.
Effective checks must be set up to ensure that the interviewers continue to be honest and that the data they collect are unbiased. As the data are being collected, they should be examined for completeness, comprehensibility, consistency and reliability.
The process of analyzing the data after these are in, involves coding the responses, i.e., placing each item in the appropriate category, tabulating the data and performing statistical computations. Here, we may simply note that both the considerations, i.e., of economy and need for safeguards against error, enter into each of these steps.
The considerations of economy indicate that analysis be planned in detail to the extent possible, before work on it is started. Of course, complete and intricate planning of analysis is neither always possible nor desirable. But excepting exploratory studies, it is generally feasible and advisable to work out in advance the basic outlines of analysis.
Safeguards against errors in coding ordinarily take the form of checking the reliability of coders through continual supervision. Decision needs to be taken on whether the tabulation is to be done by hand or by machine. But machine tabulation while more efficient, may prove prohibitive in cost if the responses to be tabulated are not large in number.
Accuracy of tabulation must be checked. Statistical computation’s, e.g., averages, dispersions, correlations etc. would need to be computed (as and when needed). Statistical operations of another sort are needed to be introduced for the purpose of safeguarding against drawing unjustified conclusions from the findings.
These involve such procedures as estimating from the sample-findings the probable occurrence of some characteristic in the population which the sample purports to represent and estimating the probability that difference found between the sample sub-groups represent the true differences between the two sub-groups in the total population, etc.
The following table attempts to show the salient points of difference between the exploratory and the descriptive/diagnostic study designs. A note of caution, however, is warranted. The table-represents only an ‘ideal-typical’ formulation, i.e., exploratory studies have been considered as an ideal type; so also the descriptive studies.
The points of difference highlighted in the table must, therefore, be understood as those between the two ‘ideal models’ of studies. In practical situations, these differences may not be found in such a clear-cut form.
