Week5 Flashcards
Discussion consists of 5 elements
conclusion
contribution to theory
contribution to practice
limitations
suggestions
Results is meant for…
discussing the outcomes of the analysis
Qualitative data uses the term … for the results, while quantitative uses …
Findings -> because it needs rich and detailed interpretations
Results -> is frequently presented in a rather ‘dry’ analysis
Things to keep in mind while writing results:
- use only the most relevant data because you probably have way too much
- don’t overuse citations
- findings must completely cover the research objective, research questions and hypotheses
what should be done with the most important information?
it should be visualized and it should be mentioned first.
Requirements for the recommendation section
They should tie back to the managerial problem
and they should support the findings and their interpretation
+be specific to which departments or teams, etc. your recommendation is for.
what not to place next to a figure, graph or table
a text column
CIMO statement
How the outcomes of the research support decision making by managers.
C - Context
I - Intervention
M - Mechanism
O - Outcome
From this research we learn that in context … , if you do intervention…., Mechanism …. will help to achieve outcome ….
Common limitations
-very specific context
- the way concepts are measured -> only look at one part, so you can’t capture all moderating and mediating variables
- small sample
dimensions of working in a critical way
look for agreements and disagreements
investigate authority and quality and bias
reflect on whose voice is amplified and whose voice is muted
scientific writing is composed of 3 main elements
Message, Structure, Language
3 key elements for structure
Order, Flow, Pace
2 main philosophical views on ethics
Deontology (plichtethiek)
Kernidee: Sommige handelingen zijn altijd goed of fout, ongeacht de uitkomst.
Sleutelprincipe: “Rules are rules.”
Moreel kompas: Wat zegt de regel of morele plicht?
Voorbeeld: Je mag niet liegen, ook niet om iemands gevoelens te sparen.
➡️ Zwart-wit denken: Als iets verkeerd is, is het altijd verkeerd.
Teleology (gevolgenethiek)
Kernidee: De juistheid van een handeling hangt af van de gevolgen.
Sleutelprincipe: “Het doel heiligt de middelen.”
Moreel kompas: Wat levert het meeste goede op?
Voorbeeld: Liegen mag, als het uiteindelijk meer mensen helpt of schade voorkomt.
➡️ Grijstinten denken: Wat goed is, hangt af van de context en gevolgen.
best practices of ethical empirical research for quantitative studies
formulating hypotheses prior
Be transparant about how and why data points are excluded (Een data point = één meting of waarneming.)
include all variables that possibly confound the relationship of interest.
best practices of ethical empirical research for qualitative studies
define measurements prior to data (same as quantitative)
describe ways for maximizing objectivity
Be transparant about how and why data points are excluded (Een data point = één meting of waarneming.)
some examples of questionable research practices
Questionable research practices
Deception: not giving information on certain attributes of the study
→ Bijv. deelnemers niet vertellen dat hun gedrag wordt gefilmd.
Speculation: claiming things that are not supported by your data
→ Bijv. zeggen dat therapie A beter werkt, terwijl de data dat niet aantoont.
Neglect: not acknowledging the limitations of your study
→ Bijv. verzwijgen dat je steekproef alleen uit studenten bestaat.
HARKing: making a hypothesis after you found the results
→ Bijv. eerst analyseren en dan doen alsof je de uitkomst vooraf voorspelde.
P-hacking: searching for data long enough so that p < 0.05
→ Bijv. steeds subgroepen testen tot je een significant resultaat vindt.
Biased sampling: purposely selecting certain groups of respondents that are desirable
→ Bijv. alleen enthousiaste klanten ondervragen over klanttevredenheid.
Design deficiencies: major design flaws, such as a lack of control groups
→ Bijv. een effect meten zonder een groep die géén behandeling krijgt.
some examples of scientific fraud
fabrication -> making up data and results
falsification -> changing results and deleting them
plagiarism
