MODULE 1 Flashcards
- Explain objectives engineering research. (CO1, L2
The purpose of research is to discover answers to questions through the application of scientific
procedures. The main aim of research is to find out the truth which is hidden and which has not
been discovered as yet. Though each research study has its own specific purpose, we may think
of research objectives as falling into a number of following broad groupings:
1. Exploratory or Formulative research studies: To gain familiarity with a phenomenon or to
achieve new insights into it
2. Descriptive research studies: To portray accurately the characteristics of a particular
individual, situation or a group
3. Diagnostic research studies: To determine the frequency with which something occurs or
with which it is associated with something else
4. Hypothesis-testing research studies: To test a hypothesis of a causal relationship between
variables
The objective of engineering research is
To solve new and important problems, and since the conclusion at the end of one‘s
research outcome has to be new, but when one starts, the conclusion is unknown.
Research objectives can sometimes be convoluted and difficult to follow. Knowing where
and how to find different types of information helps one solve engineering problems, in
both academic and professional career.
Lack of investigation into engineering guidelines, standards, and best practices result in
failures with severe repercussions. As an engineer, the ability to conduct thorough and
accurate research while clearly communicating the results is extremely important in
decision making.
The main aim of the research is to apply scientific approaches to seek answers to open
questions, and although each research study is particularly suited for a certain approach
The objectives of engineering research should be to develop new theoretical or applied
knowledge and not necessarily limited to obtaining abilities to obtain the desired result.
The objectives should be framed such that in the event of not being able to achieve the
desired result that is being sought, one can fall back to understanding why it is not
possible, because that is also a contribution toward ongoing research in solving that
problem.
- Outline motivation engineering research
The possible motives may be the result of one or more of the following desires:
Studies have shown that intrinsic motivations like interest, challenge, learning, meaning,
purpose, are linked to strong creative performance;
Extrinsic motivating factors like rewards for good work include money, fame, awards,
praise, and status are very strong motivators, but may block creativity. For example:
Research outcome may enable obtaining a patent which is a good way to become rich and
famous.
Influences from others like competition, collaboration, commitment, and encouragement
are also motivating factors in research. For example: my friends are all doing research
and so should I, or, a person that I dislike is doing well and I want to do better.
Personal motivation in solving unsolved problems, intellectual joy, service to community,
and respectability are all driving factors.
The following factors would be a mix of extrinsic and intrinsic aspects:
Wanting to do better than what has been achieved in the world
Improve the state of the art in technology
Contribute to the improvement of society
Fulfillment of the historical legacy in the immediate socio-cultural context.
Several other factors like government directives, funding opportunities in certain areas, and
terms of employment, can motivate people to get involved in engineering research.
- Compare different types of engineering research on your own perspective
TYPES OF ENGINEERING RESEARCH
Descriptive versus Analytical:
Descriptive research includes comparative and co relational methods, and fact-finding
inquiries, to effectively describe the present state of art. The researcher holds no control
over the variables; rather only reports as it is.
Descriptive research also includes attempts to determine causes even though the variables
cannot be controlled.
On the contrary, in analytical research, already available facts for analysis and critical
evaluation are utilized. Some research studies can be both descriptive and analytical
Applied versus Fundamental:
Research can either be applied research or fundamental (basic or pure) research.
https://vtucode.in
RM& IPR– BRMK557
Page 4
Applied research seeks to solve an immediate problem facing the organization, whereas
fundamental research is concerned with generalizations and formulation of a theory.
Research concerning natural phenomena or relating to pure mathematics are examples of
fundamental research.
Research to identify social or economic trends, or those that find out whether certain
communications will be read and understood are examples of applied research.
The primary objective of applied research is to determine a solution for compelling
problems in actual practice, while basic research is aimed at seeking information which
could have a broad base of applications in the medium to long term.
Quantitative versus Qualitative:
Quantitative research uses statistical observations of a sufficiently large number of
representative cases to draw any conclusions
While qualitative researchers rely on a few non representative cases or verbal narrative in
behavioral studies such as clustering effect in intersections in Transportation engineering
to make a proposition.
Conceptual vs. Empirical
Conceptual research is that related to some abstract idea(s) or theory.
It is generally used by philosophers and thinkers to develop new concepts or to reinterpret
existing ones.
On the other hand, empirical research relies on experience or observation alone, often
without due regard for system and theory.
It is data-based research, coming up with conclusions which are capable of being verified
by observation or experiment. We can also call it as experimental type of research.
In such a research it is necessary to get at facts firsthand, at their source, and actively to
go about doing certain things to stimulate the production of desired information.
In such a research, the researcher must first provide himself with a working hypothesis or
guess as to the probable results. He then works to get enough facts (data) to prove or
disprove his hypothesis.
https://vtucode.in
RM& IPR– BRMK557
Page 5
He then sets up experimental designs which he thinks will manipulate the persons or the
materials concerned so as to bring forth the desired information.
Such research is thus characterized by the experimenter‘s control over the variables under
study and his deliberate manipulation of one of them to study its effects.
Empirical research is appropriate when proof is sought that certain variables affect other
variables in some way. Evidence gathered through experiments or empirical studies is
today considered to be the most powerful support possible for a given hypothesis.
- Describe the steps involved in solving engineering research problems
FINDING AND SOLVING A WORTHWHILE PROBLEM
A researcher may start out with the research problems stated by the Supervisor or posed
by others that are yet to be solved. Alternately, it may involve rethinking of a basic
theory, or need to be formulated or put together from the information provided in a group
of papers suggested by the Supervisor.
Research scholars are faced with the task of finding an appropriate problem on which to
begin their research. Skills needed to accomplish such a task at the outset, while taking
care of possible implications are critically important but often not taught
https://vtucode.in
RM& IPR– BRMK557
Page 9
Once the problem is vaguely identified, the process of literature survey and technical
reading would take place for more certainty of the worthiness of the intended problem.
However, an initial spark is ideally required before the process of literature survey may
duly begin.
Sometimes, an oral presentation by somebody which is followed by asking questions or
introspection provides this perspective which reading papers do not.
At other times, a development in another subject may have produced a tool or a result
which has direct implications to the researcher‘s subject and may lead to problem
identification.
A worthwhile research problem would have one or more attributes.
It could be non-intuitive/counterintuitive even to someone who knows the area,
something that the research community had been expecting for some time, a major
simplification of a central part of the theory, a new result which would start off a new
subject or an area, provides a new method or improves upon known methods of doing
something which has practical applications, or a result which stops further work in an
area.
The researcher has to be convinced that the problem is worthwhile before beginning to
tackle it because best efforts come when the work is worth doing, and the problem and/or
solution has a better chance of being accepted by the research community.
Not all problems that one solves will be great, and sometimes major advancements are
made through solutions to small problems dealt with effectively. Some problems are
universally considered hard and open, and have deep implications and connections to
different concepts.
The reality is that most researchers in their lifetime do not get into such problems.
However, hard problems get solved only because people tackle them.
The question a researcher has to grapple with whether the time investment is worth it
given that the likely outcome is negative, and so it is a difficult personal decision to
make.
At the same time, even in the case of failure to solve the intended hard problem, there
may be partial/side results that serve the immediate need of producing some results for
https://vtucode.in
RM& IPR– BRMK557
Page 10
the dissertation. George Pólya (1887–1985) suggested a 4-step procedure for
mathematical problem-solving, which is relevant to engineering researchers as well.
The recommended steps to solve a research problem are
Understand the problem, restate it as if it‘s your own, visualize the problem by drawing
figures, and determine if something more is needed.
One must start somewhere and systematically explore possible strategies to solve the
problem or a simpler version of it while looking for patterns.
Execute the plan to see if it works, and if it does not then start over with another
approach. Having delved into the problem and returned to it multiple times, one might
have a flash of insight or a new idea to solve the problem.
Looking back and reflecting helps in understanding and assimilating the strategy, and is a
sort of investment into the future
- In Market Research, what is the similarity between qualitative and quantitative research?
In market research, qualitative and quantitative research methods serve distinct purposes, but they share several similarities that enhance the overall understanding of consumer behavior and market trends. Here are the key similarities:
Objective of Understanding: Both qualitative and quantitative research aim to gather insights into consumer preferences, behaviors, and market dynamics. They help researchers understand the factors influencing consumer decisions.
Data Collection: Both methods involve systematic data collection processes. Whether through surveys, interviews, or observational studies, both approaches require careful planning to ensure the data collected is relevant and reliable.
Contribution to Decision-Making: Both qualitative and quantitative research inform business strategies and decision-making. Insights gained from either approach can guide marketing campaigns, product development, and customer engagement strategies.
Analysis and Interpretation: Both types of research require analysis to derive meaningful conclusions. While the techniques differ (statistical analysis for quantitative and thematic analysis for qualitative), both involve interpreting data to generate insights.
Use of Research Tools: Both qualitative and quantitative research can utilize various research tools, such as questionnaires, focus groups, interviews, and data analytics software, to gather and analyze data.
Iterative Process: Both approaches can be part of an iterative research process. Insights from qualitative research can lead to the development of quantitative surveys, and quantitative findings can uncover areas for deeper qualitative exploration.
Integration in Mixed-Methods Research: In many cases, qualitative and quantitative research methods are used together in a mixed-methods approach. This integration allows for a comprehensive understanding of the market by leveraging the strengths of both methodologies.
Conclusion
While qualitative and quantitative research have distinct characteristics and methods, their shared goals of understanding consumer behavior and informing business strategies make them complementary in market research. By leveraging both approaches, researchers can achieve a more holistic view of the market landscape.
- Describe tricky issue of authorship in research
Academic authorship involves communicating scholarly work, establishing priority for
their discoveries, and building peer-reputation, and comes with intrinsic burden of
acceptance of the responsibility for the contents of the work. It is the primary basis of
evaluation for employment, promotion, and other honors.
There is several important research conduct and ethics related issues connected to
authorship of research papers and are summarized herewith in the context of engineering
research.
Credit for research contributions is attributed in three major ways in research
publications: by authorship (of the intended publication), citation (of previously
https://vtucode.in
RM& IPR– BRMK557
Page 15
published or formally presented work), and through a written acknowledgment (of some
inputs to the present research).
Authorship establishes both accountability and gives due credit. A person is expected to
be listed as an author only when associated as a significant contributor in research design,
data interpretation, or writing of the paper. Including ―guest‖ or ―gift‖ (co-authorship
bestowed on someone with little or no contribution to the work) authors dilutes the
contribution of those who actually did the work, inappropriately inflates credentials of the
listed authors, and is ethically a red flag highlighting research misconduct.
- Explain ethics in authorship and co-authorship.
Sometimes, the primary author dubiously bestows co-authorship on a junior faculty or a
student to boost their chances of employment or promotion, which can be termed as
Career-boost authorship.
There is also an unfortunate malpractice of co-authorship that can be described as
―Career-preservation authorship‖ wherein a head of the department, a dean, a provost, or
other administrators are added as Coauthors because of quid pro quo arrangement
wherein the principal author benefits from a ―good relation‖ with the superiors and the
administrator benefits from authorship without doing the required work for it.
Sometimes, an actual contributor abstains from the list of authors due to no disclosed
conflict of interest within the organization. Such co-authorships can be termed as ghost
co-authorship. Full disclosure of all those involved in the research is important so that
evaluation can happen both on the basis of findings, and also whether there was influence
from the conflicts.
In another type of questionable authorship, some researchers list one another as coauthors
as a reciprocal gesture with no real collaboration except minimal reading and editing,
without truly reviewing the work threadbare.
Some authors, in trying to acquire a sole-authored work, despite relying on significant
contribution to the research work from others, recognize that effort only by an
acknowledgment, thereby misrepresenting the contributions of the listed authors.
The unrecognized ―author‖ is as a consequence, unavailable to readers for elaboration.
All listed authors have the full obligation of all contents of a research article, and so
naturally, they should also be made aware of a journal submission by the corresponding
author.
https://vtucode.in
RM& IPR– BRMK557
Page 16
It is imperative that their consent is sought with respect to the content and that they be
agreeable to the submission.
In case of misconduct like inappropriate authorship, while the perpetrator is easier to
find, the degree of appropriate accountability of the coauthors is not always obvious.
Being able to quantify the contributions so as to appropriately recognize and ascertain the
degree of associated accountability of each coauthor, is appealing.
Double submission is an important ethical issue related to authorship, which involves
submission of a paper to two forums simultaneously. The motivation is to increase
publication possibility and possibly decrease time to publication. Reputed journals want
to publish original papers, i.e., papers which have not appeared elsewhere, and strongly
discourage double submission.
- Discuss how technological developments affect the ethics in research.
Technological developments raise a whole range of ethical concerns such as privacy
issues and data related to surveillance systems, and so engineering researchers need to
make ethical decisions and are answerable for the repercussions borne out of their
research as outcomes.
The reason that ethics matter in data used in engineering research is usually because there
is impact on humans. Certain practices may be acceptable to certain people in certain
situations, and the reasons for unacceptability may be perfectly valid.
We have unprecedented access to data today, and unprecedented options for analysis of
these data and consequences in engineering research related to such data. Are there things
that are possible to do with this data, that we agree we should not do?
Engineering ethics gives us the rule book; tells us, how to decide what is okay to do and
what is not. Engineering research is not work in isolation to the technological
development taking place.
Researchers make many choices that matter from an ethical perspective and influence the
effects of technology in many different ways:
o By setting the ethically right requirements at the very outset, engineering
researchers can ultimately influence the effects of the developed technology.
https://vtucode.in
RM& IPR– BRMK557
Page 12
o Influence may also be applied by researchers through design (a process that
translates the requirements into a blueprint to fulfill those requirements). During
the design process, decision is to be made about the priority in importance of the
requirements taking ethical aspects into consideration.
o Thirdly, engineering researchers have to choose between different alternatives
fulfilling similar functions.
Research outcomes often have unintended and undesirable side effects. It is a vital ethical
responsibility of researchers to ensure that hazards/risks associated with the technologies
that they develop, are minimized and alternative safer mechanisms are considered.
If possible, the designs should be made inherently safe such that they avoid dangers, or
come with safety factors, and multiple independent safety barriers, or if possible a
supervisory mechanism to take control if the primary process fails.
- Summarize different types of research misconduct
Research integrity is a cornerstone of scientific inquiry, ensuring that findings are credible and can be built upon by future research. Misconduct undermines this integrity and can have far-reaching consequences in engineering and other fields. Here’s an expanded overview of the main types of research misconduct:
Fabrication:
Definition: Fabrication involves the complete invention of data or results that do not exist. This often occurs when researchers feel pressured to produce findings within a tight timeline.
Example: A researcher may create fake experimental results to meet publication deadlines or fulfill grant requirements, believing that the fabricated data will lead to desired conclusions.
Consequences: Fabrication can lead to false conclusions, wasted resources, and a loss of trust in the research community. It can also hinder progress in the field by propagating incorrect information.
Falsification:
Definition: Falsification is the deliberate alteration or misrepresentation of research data. This may involve manipulating experimental procedures or selectively reporting data to support a particular hypothesis.
Example: A scientist might change the results of an experiment by excluding outliers that contradict their hypothesis or by adjusting measurements to fit expected outcomes.
Consequences: Like fabrication, falsification can lead to the dissemination of misleading information, undermining the validity of the research and potentially causing harm if the findings are applied in real-world contexts.
Plagiarism:
Definition: Plagiarism is the unethical practice of using someone else’s work, ideas, or expressions without proper attribution, presenting them as one’s own.
Forms:
Verbatim Copying: Directly copying text, data, figures, or illustrations from another source without citation.
Self-Plagiarism: Reusing one’s previously published work without acknowledgment, misleading readers about the novelty of the research.
Detection: Tools for detecting plagiarism provide similarity scores, indicating how much of the content matches previously published works. However, a similarity score alone is not sufficient; human judgment is necessary to determine whether proper attribution has been made.
Consequences: Plagiarism can lead to severe penalties, including retraction of published papers, damage to professional reputation, and loss of credibility within the academic community.
Other Aspects of Research Misconduct:
Deception and Damage: Research misconduct that involves both deceptive practices and harmful outcomes is classified as fraud. Such actions can lead to significant ethical violations and consequences for all parties involved.
Simultaneous Submission: Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals at the same time is considered unethical because it can mislead publishers and reviewers, resulting in duplicate publications.
Failure to Report Errors: When researchers discover errors or inaccuracies in published work, not addressing them can perpetuate misinformation. Ethical guidelines encourage researchers to correct their findings transparently to maintain the integrity of the research record.
Poor Experimental Design: Research misconduct can also arise from poorly designed experiments or inappropriate measurement techniques that yield misleading results, even if not intentional. Such practices can lead to conclusions that lack scientific validity.
Conclusion
Research misconduct encompasses a variety of unethical practices that can severely compromise the credibility and integrity of scientific inquiry. The implications of such misconduct extend beyond individual researchers, affecting the broader research community and public trust in scientific findings. Upholding ethical standards in research is essential to ensure honesty, transparency, and accountability, fostering an environment where genuine inquiry and innovation can thrive. Researchers must remain vigilant and committed to ethical conduct, recognizing that the integrity of their work not only reflects on them but also contributes to the advancement of knowledge and technology.
- Discuss Plagiarism in research with example.
Plagiarism (Taking other’s work sans attribution): Plagiarism takes place when
someone uses or reuses the work (including portions) of others (text, data, tables, figures,
illustrations or concepts) as if it were his/her own without explicit acknowledgement.
Verbatim copying or reusing one‘s own published work is termed as self-plagiarism and
is also an unacceptable practice in scientific literature.
The increasing availability of scientific content on the internet seems to encourage
plagiarism in certain cases, but also enables detection of such practices through
automated software packages. How are supervisors, reviewers or editors alerted to
plagiarism?
(i) Original author comes to know and informs everyone concerned.
(ii) Sometimes a reviewer finds out about it during the review process.
(iii) Or, readers who come across the article or book, while doing research.
Although there are many free tools and also paid tools available that one can procure
institutional license of, one cannot conclusively identify plagiarism, but can only get a
similarity score which is a metric that provides a score of the amount of similarity
between already published content and the unpublished content under scrutiny.
However, a low similarity score does not guarantee that the document is plagiarism free.
It takes a human eye to ascertain whether the content has been plagiarized or not.
It is important to see the individual scores of the sources, not just the overall similarity
index. Setting a standard of a maximum allowable similarity index is inadequate usage of
the tool. Patchwork plagiarism is more difficult to evaluate.
There are simple and ethical ways to avoid a high similarity count on an about to be
submitted manuscript. Sometimes, certain published content is perfect for one‘s research
paper, perhaps in making a connection or fortifying the argument presented. The
published material is available for the purpose of being used fairly.
https://vtucode.in
RM& IPR– BRMK557
Page 14
One is not expected to churn out research outcomes in thin air.
However, whatever is relevant can be reported by paraphrasing in one‘s own words, that
is, without verbatim copy.
One can also summarize the relevant content and naturally, the summary invariably
would use one‘s own words. In all these cases, citing the original source is important.
However, merely because one has cited a source, it does not mean that one can copy
sentences (or paragraphs) of the original content verbatim.
A researcher should practice writing in such a way that the reader can recognize the
difference between the ideas or results of the authors and those that are from other
sources. Such a practice enables one to judge whether one is disproportionately using or
relying on content from existing literature
- Summarize the categories of knowledge required for the research. (CO1, L2)
- Explain the components of research title with example 3. Discuss research flow with diagram
The chart indicates that the research process consists of a number of closely related activities, as
shown through I to VII. But such activities overlap continuously rather than following a strictly
prescribed sequence
1. Formulating the research problem: There are two types of research problems, viz.,
those which relate to states of nature and those which relate to relationships between
https://vtucode.in
RM& IPR– BRMK557
Page 6
variables. At the very outset the researcher must single out the problem he wants to study,
i.e., he must decide the general area of interest or aspect of a subject-matter that he would
like to inquire into.
2. Extensive literature survey: Once the problem is formulated, a brief summary of it
should be written down. It is compulsory for a research worker writing a thesis for a
Ph.D. degree to write a synopsis of the topic and submit it to the necessary Committee or
the Research Board for approval. At this juncture the researcher should undertake
extensive literature survey connected with the problem.
3. Development of working hypotheses: After extensive literature survey, researcher
should state in clear terms the working hypothesis or hypotheses. Working hypothesis is
tentative assumption made in order to draw out and test its logical or empirical
consequences.
Hypothesis should be very specific and limited to the piece of research in hand because it
has to be tested. The role of the hypothesis is to guide the researcher by delimiting the
area of research and to keep him on the right track. It sharpens his thinking and focuses
attention on the more important facets of the problem.
4. Preparing the research design: The research problem having been formulated in clear
cut terms, the researcher will be required to prepare a research design, i.e., he will have to
state the conceptual structure within which research would be conducted. The preparation
of such a design facilitates research to be as efficient as possible yielding maximal
information. In other words, the function of research design is to provide for the
collection of relevant evidence with minimal expenditure of effort, time and money.
5. Determining sample design: The researcher must decide the way of selecting a sample
or what is popularly known as the sample design. In other words, a sample design is a
definite plan determined before any data are actually collected for obtaining a sample
from a given population. Sampling can be done choosing a particular unit, random unit
selection, systematic pattern, homogenous group (stratified sampling), quota, cluster or
area, multi stages and sequential.
6. Collecting the data: In dealing with any real life problem it is often found that data at
hand are inadequate, and hence, it becomes necessary to collect data that are appropriate.
There are several ways of collecting the appropriate data which differ considerably in
https://vtucode.in
RM& IPR– BRMK557
Page 7
context of money costs, time and other resources at the disposal of the researcher.
Primary data can be collected either through experiment or through survey. If the
researcher conducts an experiment, he observes some quantitative measurements, or the
data, with the help of which he examines the truth contained in his hypothesis. But in the
case of a survey, data can be collected by any one or more of the following ways by
observation, through personal interview, through telephonic interview, by mailing the
questionnaire etc
7. Execution of the project: It is a very important step in the research process. If the
execution of the project proceeds on correct lines, the data to be collected would be
adequate and dependable. The researcher should see that the project is executed in a
systematic manner and in time. A careful watch should be kept for unanticipated factors
in order to keep the survey as much realistic as possible.
8. Analysis of data: After the data have been collected, the researcher turns to the task of
analyzing them. The analysis of data requires a number of closely related operations such
as establishment of categories, the application of these categories to raw data through
coding, tabulation and then drawing statistical inferences. The unwieldy data should
necessarily be condensed into a few manageable groups and tables for further analysis.
Thus, researcher should classify the raw data into some purposeful and usable categories.
9. Hypothesis-testing: After analyzing the data as stated above, the researcher is in a
position to test the hypotheses, if any, he had formulated earlier. Do the facts support the
hypotheses or they happen to be contrary? This is the usual question which should be
answered while testing hypotheses. Various tests, such as Chi square test, t-test, F-test,
have been developed by statisticians for the purpose. The hypotheses may be tested
through the use of one or more of such tests, depending upon the nature and object of
research inquiry. Hypothesis-testing will result in either accepting the hypothesis or in
rejecting it.
10. Generalizations and interpretation: If a hypothesis is tested and upheld several times, it
may be possible for the researcher to arrive at generalization, i.e., to build a theory. As a
matter of fact, the real value of research lies in its ability to arrive at certain
generalizations
https://vtucode.in
RM& IPR– BRMK557
Page 8
11. Preparation of the report or the thesis: Finally, the researcher has to prepare the report
of what has been done by him. Writing of report must be done with great care keeping in
view the following:
The layout of the report should be as follows: (i) the preliminary pages; (ii) the main text,
and (iii) the end matter.
In its preliminary pages the report should carry title and date followed by
acknowledgements and foreword. Then there should be a table of contents followed by a
list of tables and list of graphs and charts, if any, given in the report.
The main text of the report should have the following parts:
(a) Introduction: It should contain a clear statement of the objective of the research and
an explanation of the methodology adopted in accomplishing the research. The scope of
the study along with various limitations should as well be stated in this part.
(b) Summary of findings: After introduction there would appear a statement of findings
and recommendations in non-technical language. If the findings are extensive, they
should be summarized.
(c) Main report: The main body of the report should be presented in logical sequence and
broken-down into readily identifiable sections.
(d) Conclusion: Towards the end of the main text, researcher should again put down the
results of his research clearly and precisely. In fact, it is the final summing up.
At the end of the report, appendices should be enlisted in respect of all technical data.
Bibliography, i.e., list of books, journals, reports, etc., consulted, should also be given in
the end. Index should also be given specially in a published research report.
