Introduction
may be in how these groups select, the aspirations and choices of those selected, the rituals themselves, the emotional responses of those selected, and other problems. What is noteworthy, however, is that at each step we are bringing our caseunder a still wider rubric. We must, then, see which of the relevant aspects of our case we are most interested in, so that our data will be relevant to the proper higher level category. In this case, wehave moved toward the concept, "rituals of status transition," but we need not stop at this point. We could proceed to generalizethis to "rituals of all kinds,"
or "all status changes." Thestill higher levels need not concern us, for we are only noting that our choiceof focus at any level determines which direction our generalizing willtake. To return to our poor freshmen, if we had decided to concentrate upon their emotional responses, we might have generalizedtoward "responses to situations of status ambiguity," or "responses tothe temporary loss of status,"
or (at a higher level) "responses to strain."
Proceeding from the highly general concept tothe more concrete simply challenges the student totranslate his broad notions into concepts (such as Hell Week) that are concrete enough to be observable. From either direction, this operation forces the student to attempt an integration betweentheoretical levels, to locate concrete behavior for possible thservation, to identifywhich conceptual elements are of primary concern,and thereby to have a much clearer notion of howgeneralhis concept is. The result is a more usefuland more sharply defined concept.
56 Research Met hdology
the mass of an object is the number obtained when we go through the operation of weighing the object on a balance. We are not to confuse this meaning with the many other characterisacs we think of when we have the notion of mass in mind
Against this stand, the opposition group has contended that when we think of such a concept, we do not "mean" merely these operations. Rather, they are simply the techniques we have to use in order to get at, or measure, something behind those operationsthe phenomenon itself. Such procedures, then, are useful because we cannot directly observe or measure, say, "social cohesion." However, it is "social cohesion" that we really wish to discuss, not these operations.
At the present stage of sociology, we may find a compromise between these positions, and indeed the debate is taken less seriously
at the present time. Perhaps we may deal with the problem more easily by remembering that a concept is a set of directions, in one major sense: it directs the reader to a particular kind of experience,
one which has to some extent been shared. If it does not do so, communication is difficult. Thus, whether the concept is defined in a literary fashion or by a set of laboratory directions, the definition turns attention to this experience.
Furthermore, it is clear that the physical sciences have laid great emphasis upon the operational type of definition. Relatively few concepts in these fields refer to direct experience, such as weight, length, or color, and even these are defined by a set of operations. Most concepts refer to phenomena that are not measurable or visible to the naked eye. By defining these phenomena through a set of directions, there is greater assurance that scientists from other nations, thinking in other languages, will "mean" the same thing. It seems likely that as sociology develops a more precise and more commonly shared set of research operations, there will bf an increasing development of operational definitions.
It can be easily seen, however, where the possibility of confusion enters. Suppose, for example, the sociologist decides to define "status"
Introduction 57 bymeans of a set of directions which tell the researcher tomark on a standardized list of iterfis whether the family possesses certain objects such as rugs, living-room lamps, or a radio ortelevision set;
whether its members belong to certain organizations such as Camp Fire Girls, Odd Fellows, or Kiwanis; to what extent its members have attended school; etc. The directions may further indicate what weight should be given to each item, so that a fmal "statusscore"
can be'calculated.
So far, there should be no confusion, and any experienced field worker should be able to follow such a set of directions and to obtain the same results for the same families. If we now attempt to analyze "status" on the basis of this research, however, we must not expect to find that our facts will be easily comparable to older analyses of status, for these used different definitions of status.
Our operational definition has given the old concept a new meaning.
In this case, there will be overlap in meaning, but status as traditionally defined does not refer to quite the same set of experiences. The confusion, then, arises because we are likely to use the same term to refer to different phenomena: (1) the data from our newlydefined operations; and (2) the data traditionally associated with"status."
This confusion has occurred widely in discussions of the intelligence quotient, or IQ test, since its results are often treated as relating to an innate complex of factors called "intelligence," whereas the IQ test is rather an operational definition of selected factprs ofintellectual achievement and potential. If we use "IQ" only in the second sense, there is no confusion; if we apply these results to the more common- sense meaning of "intelligence," many unnecessaly problemsarise.
An operational definition, therefore, may define a phenomenon with greater definiteness in that it outlines the directions for having the same experience as other researchers. On the other hand, the redefinition that is the result of such a definition may leave out important elements of an older concept. Furthermore, in order to develop an operational definition, considerable research mustbe done upon the phenomenon to be defined. Consequently, we should not attempt an operational definition merely to be in fashion. We must do so in full consciousness of its problems, knowing thatthe
58 ResearchMethdology traditional tenn (such as "morale," "social cohesion," "social structure") is likely not to refer to exactly the same phenomena as defined by the operations we outline. And, in some cases, an operational definition may be more complex and unwieldy, while less fruitful in its results, than a traditional definition. With respect to some knotty problems
in research, we may have to make a conscious decision as to which we need most-precision or significance. As our research project develops in precision and scope, however, we shall find ways as the recent history of social research clearly shows, to obtain both.
2
RESEARCH As A CONCEPT OF DEVELOPING KNOWLEDGE
Research is a systematic, planned and refined scientific method of employing specialised tools, instruments, and procedures in order to obtain a more adequate solution of a problem than would be possible under ordinary means. It starts with a problem collection of data or facts, analyse them critically, systematically and draws conclusions based on the actual evidences. It involves original work, rather than exercise of personal opinion. F.L. Whitney who writes that all creditable research is in terms of ordered reflective thinking.
Out of more or less definite feeling of need, a problem emerges and takes concrete form. A solution is sought intenns of likely hypothesis, accepted tentatively, examined objectively, evaluated through all evidences obtainable and finally corroborated as the most general conclusion appearing atthattime. This is then, examined for predictions.
One maybe tempted to give the views of libraxy and information scientists on the term research. J.H. Shera writes that research is,
"an intellectual process whereby a problem is perceived, divided into its constituent elements and analysed in the light of certain basic assumptions; valid and relevant data are collected; hypothesis
(if any), are through objective testing rejected, amended, or proved.
The generalizable results of this process, quali1' as principles, laws,
61J R&earch Methodology
or truths, that contribute to man's understanding of himself, his works or his environment". In other words, research is an intellectual, careful, ordered, reflective and a systematic attempt to discover new facts or sets of facts, or new relationships among facts, through the formation of preliminary explanation or hypothesis which is subjected to an appropriate investigation for validation of disproof.
Dr. S.R. Ranganathan writes : "Research is critical and exhaustive investigation to discover new facts, to interpret them in the light of known ideas, laws and theories to revise the current laws and theories in the light of newly discovered facts, and to apply the conclusions to some practical purposes. The findings of research are deposited in the internal memories of individual's and also in the externalized memory of society viz., books, periodicals, and other micro-documents represent".
Best and Kahn defined research "as systematic and objective analysis and recording of controlled observations that may lead to the development as generalizations, principles, or theories, resulting in prediction and possibly ultimate control of events."
The defmitions given above is rather abstract, hence a summary of some important characteristics of research are mentioned below to clarify its spirit and meaning.