Research Methodology

Comprehensive Study Notes

NEP UGCF 2022 | Discipline Specific Elective VI/VII Semester

Mapped from Reference Books:

[1] Thomas, C.G. (2021). Research Methodology and Scientific Writing, 2nd Ed. Springer.
[2] Ghezzi, C. Being a Researcher: An Informatics Perspective. Springer.
[3] Locharoenrat, K. (2018). Research Methodologies for Beginners. PAN Stanford.
[4] Leedy, P.D. & Ormrod, J.E. (2016). Practical Research: Planning and Design, 11th Ed. Pearson.
[5] Thesis Projects: A Guide for Students in Computer Science and Information Systems.
UNIT 1: INTRODUCTION
📚 Source: Thomas [1] Ch.1 (Pg 21-31); Ghezzi [2] Ch.1; Leedy [4] Ch.1 | 6 Hours

1.1 Meaning and Significance of Research

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §1.3, §1.1 | Ghezzi [2] §1.1–1.3
Research is the systematic search for answering questions, solving problems, or gathering information.
It is a meticulous, disciplined inquiry aimed at expanding the boundaries of knowledge. Research is not
merely collecting existing facts but discovering something that has never before been known.

Definition of Research
Research (Thomas): Systematic search for answering a particular question, solving a problem, or
gathering information — involving defining, redefining, and solving problems; formulating and testing
hypotheses; revising theories; and applying findings.
Research (Leedy & Ormrod): Research has one end: the discovery of some sort of 'truth.' Its purpose
is to learn what has never before been known; to ask a significant question for which no conclusive
answer has previously been found.
Research (Ghezzi): Scientific research discovers new knowledge, largely driven by human curiosity. It
is the main driving force that generates progress of human society. Valid research must satisfy three
criteria: originality, rigor, and significance.

Significance of Research
• Expands the frontiers of knowledge in all scientific disciplines.
• Leads to new inventions and discoveries — antibiotics, fertilizers, digital technologies.
• Solves problems affecting society — food security, climate change, disease.
• Drives economic growth through new products, processes, and marketing strategies.
• Improves efficiency and reduces costs through better machines and processes.
• Creates infotainment — information and entertainment — through advanced technologies.
• Required for academic degrees: a thesis or dissertation is mandatory for postgraduate degrees.
• Used as a management and strategic decision-making tool.

Characteristics of Good Research (Thomas [1])

• Based on the work of others — builds upon existing knowledge as a foundation.
• A blend of logic and imagination — guided by inductive/deductive reasoning plus creative
thinking.
• Identifies and avoids bias — in planning, implementation, data collection, and interpretation.
• Repeatable — if repeated, the same results should be obtained.
• Generalizable — findings should apply beyond the original research setting.
• Systematic — structured with specified steps, rejecting mere speculation.
• Generates new questions — an enquiry into a phenomenon opens new avenues.
• Apolitical — undertaken for societal betterment, not for selfish or destructive purposes.

1.2 The Research Cycle

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §1.10 | Leedy [4] Ch.1
The research process starts from identifying a research problem and ends with the publication of
research results. It follows a cyclical, iterative structure — conclusions often generate new questions,
feeding the next research cycle.

Steps in the Research Process (Thomas [1])

• Step 1: Identify a research problem — from an idea, unsolved problem, or gap in existing
knowledge.
• Step 2: Review existing literature — understand what has already been done.
• Step 3: Formulate a hypothesis or research question — a testable, falsifiable conjecture.
• Step 4: Select and apply appropriate research methods — experimental design, data collection.
• Step 5: Collect data — through experiments, surveys, observations, etc.
• Step 6: Analyze and interpret data — using appropriate statistical techniques.
• Step 7: Draw conclusions — accept, modify, or reject the hypothesis.
• Step 8: Publish and disseminate results — through research papers, thesis, presentations.

The Research Cycle (Leedy & Ormrod [4])

Research is described as iterative — new findings often raise new questions, sending the
researcher back to earlier stages. Every word and figure in a research report must ultimately
relate to the research problem. This cyclical nature is what makes research self-correcting
and cumulative over time.

1.3 Research Tools, Methods, and Methodology

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §1.9 | Leedy [4] Ch.1
Research Methods: The specific techniques, procedures, and instruments used to collect and analyze
data — questionnaires, experiments, interviews, statistical analysis.
Research Methodology: The broader science and philosophy behind research methods. The
systematic study of the research process from planning to reporting. It explains which methods are
used and why — the logic behind the selection.
Research Tools: Instruments used in data collection — questionnaires, observation checklists, rating
scales, measurement devices, software for analysis.
Research methods are a part of the wider field of research methodology. Methods are important during
implementation; methodology is relevant from the planning stage itself.

1.4 Types of Research

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §3.4 | Locharoenrat [3] §2.2–2.3 | Ghezzi [2] §1.4 | Leedy [4] §1.4

By Purpose
Basic (Pure / Fundamental) Research: Conducted without thought of immediate practical application.
Aims to expand general knowledge and understand underlying principles. Example: study of DNA
structure.
Applied Research: Uses existing scientific knowledge to solve specific practical problems. Example:
developing a drug to treat a disease; agricultural research to increase crop yields.
By Approach / Method
Quantitative Research: Uses numerical data, statistical analysis, and controlled conditions to test
hypotheses. Emphasizes objectivity and repeatability.
Qualitative Research: Uses non-numerical data — interviews, observations, text. Explores meaning,
experience, and context. Common in social sciences.
Mixed-Methods Research: Combines both quantitative and qualitative approaches in the same study
for a more comprehensive picture.

By Research Design
• Experimental Research — researcher manipulates an independent variable and observes effects
on dependent variable.
• Descriptive Research — describes characteristics of a phenomenon or population without
manipulation.
• Correlational Research — examines relationships between variables without establishing
causation.
• Historical Research — studies past events using primary and secondary sources.
• Case Study Research — intensive, in-depth study of a single individual, group, event, or
phenomenon.
• Action Research — research conducted by practitioners to improve their own practice.
• Longitudinal Study — data collected from the same subjects over an extended time period.
• Cross-Sectional Study — data collected from different subjects at a single point in time.

Locharoenrat [3] on Research Types

Basic Research: generates knowledge for its own sake. Examples — studying how the
immune system works, exploring fundamental laws of physics.
Applied Research: solves identified problems. Examples — developing a vaccine, designing
better solar panels, improving algorithms.
UNIT 2: RESEARCH PROCESS
📚 Source: Thomas [1] Ch.1 (Pg 8-11), §1.6, §1.7, §7.2, §10.2, §10.3; Ghezzi [2] §2.3, §3.4, §3.5 | 10 Hours

2.1 Research Process and Research Output

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §1.10 | Leedy [4] Preface
The research process transforms a problem or question into new knowledge. The output may be a
published paper, a thesis, a patent, a software tool, or a policy recommendation. The key characteristic
is that the output must be original — contributing something that was not previously known.

Research Output Categories (Ghezzi [2])

• Research papers — published in peer-reviewed journals or conference proceedings.
• Books and book chapters — comprehensive treatment of a research area.
• Theses and dissertations — required for doctoral and postgraduate degrees.
• Software artifacts / datasets — increasingly recognized as primary research outputs.
• Patents — protection of inventions arising from applied research.
• Technical reports — documentation of research findings for specific organizations.

2.2 Research Approaches: Induction and Deduction

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §1.6, §1.8 | Ghezzi [2] §2.3

Inductive Reasoning
Induction: Reasoning from specific observations to a general conclusion. Starts with specific data,
detects patterns, formulates a tentative hypothesis, and develops general conclusions (a 'bottom-up'
approach).
Example: After observing that many individual jasmine flowers are scented, you conclude: 'All jasmine
flowers are scented.' The inductive method was championed by Francis Bacon (1561–1626) and has
been widely used in science since the 17th century.
• Starts with observations → detects patterns → forms hypothesis → develops general law/theory.
• Involves generalization from the behavior of a sample to that of a population.
• The probability of the conclusion depends on the number and quality of observations.

Deductive Reasoning
Deduction: Reasoning from a general principle/theory to a specific conclusion. Starts with a known
general rule and applies it to a particular case (a 'top-down' approach).
Example: 'All crows are black (known). This bird is a crow. Therefore, it is black.' Deduction is highly
successful in mathematics but limited in discovering new facts about nature.
• Starts with a general premise (theory, law, principle) → applies to specific case → reaches
conclusion.
• If the premises are true and the reasoning is valid, the conclusion must be true.
• Does not generate new knowledge — only derives what is already implicit in the premises.
Hypothetico-Deductive Method (Scientific Method)
Modern science combines both induction and deduction. Called the hypothetico-deductive method
(coined by William Whewell), it involves:
• Forming a hypothesis through induction from observations.
• Making predictions from the hypothesis through deduction.
• Testing predictions through experiment.
• Accepting, modifying, or rejecting the hypothesis based on results.
This is what is commonly known as the scientific method. Popper's concept of falsification — a good
hypothesis must be capable of being proven false — is an essential part of this method.

Ghezzi [2] on Induction and Deduction

Induction alone cannot guarantee truth — no matter how many white swans are observed, it
doesn't logically rule out the existence of black swans. Deduction, combined with empirical
testing, is what gives science its power of self-correction. A falsified hypothesis advances
science just as much as a confirmed one.

2.3 Scientific Statements: Hypothesis, Theory, Law, Fact

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §1.7

Key Definitions
Conjecture: An unverified assumption or guess with no observational basis.
Hypothesis: A testable proposition formulated based on observation. It is a contention still in the
process of active testing — it may or may not be correct. Must be falsifiable.
Theory: A corroborated hypothesis — an explanation that has been confirmed sufficiently for
acceptance but is less firmly established than a law. Theories are still subject to revision with new
evidence.
Law: A theory that has survived extensive testing and has not been falsified by convincing, repeatable
evidence. Science has highest confidence in laws. Examples: Newton's Laws of Motion, Boyle's Law,
Mendel's Laws of Inheritance.
Fact: Something repeatedly confirmed and accepted as true for practical purposes. An empirically
verifiable observation. Even facts can be revised with new evidence.

Hierarchy: Conjecture → Hypothesis → Theory → Law

Important Distinction (Thomas [1])
In common language, 'theory' is sometimes used dismissively to mean 'just a guess.' In
science, a theory is a well-substantiated explanation supported by extensive evidence. The
Theory of Evolution, for example, has the same scientific standing as the Theory of
Gravitation — calling something a 'theory' does not make it uncertain in scientific terms.

Auxiliary Hypothesis vs. Ad Hoc Hypothesis

Auxiliary Hypothesis: An additional assumption used together with the main hypothesis to derive a
prediction. Must be independently verifiable. Example: The prediction of Neptune's existence as an
auxiliary hypothesis to save Newton's law.
Ad Hoc Hypothesis: A hypothesis added to protect another hypothesis from falsification, without
independent verification. Common in pseudoscience and religion. Not scientifically acceptable.

2.4 Research Ethics

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §23.1–§23.4 | Ghezzi [2] §6.1, §6.2
Research ethics defines the moral principles that guide researchers in the conduct of their work. All
researchers must adhere to ethical standards to protect the integrity of science and the wellbeing of
participants and society.

Core Principles of Research Ethics (Thomas [1])

• Honesty and truthfulness in all phases of research — recording, reporting, and publication.
• Integrity — following established ethical codes and not committing fraud or misconduct.
• Objectivity — avoiding bias in experimental design, data analysis, interpretation, and publication.
• Openness — sharing data, results, and methods so others can verify and build upon the work.
• Confidentiality — protecting the identity and data of research participants.
• Responsible publication — publishing only when results are genuine and significant.
• Respect for participants — obtaining informed consent; protecting from harm.
• Avoidance of plagiarism — acknowledging all sources; never presenting others' work as your
own.

Conflict of Interest (Ghezzi [2])

A conflict of interest arises when a researcher's personal interests (financial, professional, or personal)
could bias or be perceived to bias their research. Conflicts of interest must be declared transparently.
• Financial conflicts: funding from companies with a stake in the research outcome.
• Professional conflicts: reviewing the work of competitors or colleagues.
• Personal conflicts: research involving family members or close associates.

Fraud and Misconduct in Science (Thomas [1] §23.4)

Fabrication: Making up data or results and recording or reporting them.
Falsification: Manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes; changing or omitting data to
misrepresent results.
Plagiarism: Using another's ideas, processes, results, or words without credit — the most common
form of academic misconduct.
Fraud harms the scientific community by polluting the literature, misdirecting future research, and
destroying public trust in science. Whistle-blowing — reporting misconduct — is a moral duty, though it
carries personal risks.

2.5 Identifying a Research Problem

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §7.2 | Leedy [4] Ch.2
Finding a good research problem is the first and most critical step in research. A good research
problem should be significant, feasible, novel, and answerable within available resources and time.

Sources of Research Problems (Thomas [1])

• Unsolved problems in the existing literature — gaps identified during reading.
 • Contradictions or inconsistencies in published results — conflicting findings.
• Practical problems needing solutions — industrial, agricultural, medical, social.
• Theoretical advances suggesting new phenomena to test.
• Extension of previous research by the researcher or others.
• Suggestions from experts, supervisors, or colleagues.

Criteria for a Good Research Problem (Thomas [1] §7.3)

• Researchable — amenable to systematic investigation.
• Significant — contributes meaningfully to knowledge or practice.
• Feasible — doable within available time, budget, and resources.
• Novel — has not been fully investigated before.
• Clearly stated — can be formulated as a specific, answerable question.
• Ethical — does not involve harm to participants, animals, or the environment.

2.6 Literature Review

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §10.2, §10.3 | Leedy [4] Ch.3 | Ghezzi [2] §3.5
A literature review is a critical survey of published work related to a research topic. It establishes the
context for the research, identifies gaps, and justifies the significance and novelty of the proposed work.

Planning a Literature Search (Thomas [1] §10.2)

• Define the scope — topic boundaries, time range, type of publications.
• Identify key terms and synonyms for the topic.
• Select appropriate databases — Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar.
• Use Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT) to refine searches.
• Track all sources systematically using reference management software.

Locating Relevant Literature (Thomas [1] §10.3)

• Primary sources: original research papers, theses, patents, conference papers.
• Secondary sources: review articles, textbooks, encyclopaedias.
• Online databases: Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Google Scholar.
• Grey literature: technical reports, working papers, government documents.

Writing the Literature Review

• Critically analyze — do not merely summarize; evaluate strengths and weaknesses.
• Synthesize — show relationships between different works and identify trends.
• Identify gaps — highlight what is not yet known or contradictory findings.
• Cite properly — use a consistent citation style (APA, CSE, Vancouver, etc.).

2.7 Peer Review Process

📚 Source: Ghezzi [2] §3.4, §3.5 | Thomas [1] §11.6
Peer review is the process by which submitted research manuscripts are evaluated by independent
experts (peers) in the same field before publication. It is the primary quality control mechanism in
science.
The Peer Review Process (Ghezzi [2] §3.4)
• Author submits manuscript to a journal or conference.
• Editor performs initial screening — checks scope, format, and obvious deficiencies.
• Editor assigns 2–3 peer reviewers who are experts in the topic.
• Reviewers evaluate: originality, significance, rigor, clarity, and methodology.
• Reviewers recommend: Accept / Minor Revision / Major Revision / Reject.
• Author revises based on reviewer comments and resubmits.
• Editor makes final decision on acceptance.

Types of Peer Review

Single-blind: Reviewers know the author's identity; authors do not know who reviewed their work.
Double-blind: Neither reviewer nor author knows each other's identity — reduces bias.
Open review: Both identities are known; reviews may be published alongside the paper.

The Publication World (Ghezzi [2] §3.5)

• Journals — the primary venue for research in most fields. Ranked by Impact Factor, CiteScore,
SJR, SNIP.
• Conference proceedings — important in computer science and engineering for rapid
dissemination.
• Preprints — non-peer-reviewed drafts posted on servers (arXiv, bioRxiv) for rapid sharing.
• Open access — research freely available to all readers without subscription.
• Predatory journals — exploit open-access model by charging fees without genuine peer review;
must be avoided.

2.8 International Standards and Professional Research Societies

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §11.3, §11.6 | Locharoenrat [3] §1.2
International standards ensure the quality, transparency, and reproducibility of research. Professional
societies establish codes of conduct and best practices for their disciplines.

Journal Quality Metrics

Impact Factor (JIF): Developed by Eugene Garfield (ISI/Clarivate Analytics). Measures the average
number of citations to articles published in a journal over the preceding 2 years. Calculated as: citations
in year X to articles from years X−1 and X−2, divided by total articles in those 2 years.
CiteScore (Scopus/Elsevier): Measures citations in one year to articles published in the previous 3
years. Wider journal coverage than JIF. Freely available at [Link]/sources.
SCImago Journal Rank (SJR): Accounts for both the number and prestige of citations. Powered by
Scopus data. Freely available.
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP): Adjusts for differences in citation practices across
fields. Enables comparison across disciplines. Calculated from Scopus.
h-index (Author): Proposed by Hirsch (2005). An author has an h-index of h if they have h papers
each cited at least h times. Measures both quantity and quality of research output.
International Standards Bodies
• COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) — sets standards for ethical publishing.
• ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) — guidelines for medical journals.
• CSE (Council of Science Editors) — standards for scientific writing and citation.
• UNESCO — international framework for science education and research ethics.
UNIT 3: RESEARCH PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
📚 Source: Leedy [4] Ch.8, Ch.11 | Thomas [1] Ch.6, Ch.8 | 17 Hours

3.1 Analyzing Quantitative Data

📚 Source: Leedy [4] Ch.8 | Thomas [1] §6.7–6.11
Quantitative data analysis involves transforming raw numerical data into meaningful information
through statistical procedures. Numbers are meaningless unless we can find the patterns beneath
them.

Step 1: Exploring and Organizing Data Sets

• Tabulate raw data — arrange in a logical order; create frequency distributions.
• Check for errors and outliers — values that fall far outside the expected range.
• Create visual summaries — histograms, stem-and-leaf plots, box plots.
• Examine the shape of the distribution — normal, skewed, bimodal.
• Compute preliminary statistics — minimum, maximum, range, mode, median.

Step 2: Choosing Appropriate Statistics

The choice of statistical test depends on: the research question, the level of measurement (nominal,
ordinal, interval, ratio), the number of groups, and whether assumptions of parametric tests are met.
Levels of Measurement (Thomas [1] §6.2)
Nominal: categories with no inherent order (e.g., gender, species)
Ordinal: ranked categories but unequal intervals (e.g., Likert scales, rankings)
Interval: equal intervals but no true zero (e.g., temperature in °C)
Ratio: equal intervals with a true zero (e.g., height, weight, income)

Step 3: Descriptive Statistics

Measures of Central Tendency: Mean (arithmetic average), Median (middle value), Mode (most
frequent value). Each has different uses and robustness to outliers.
Measures of Variability: Range (max−min), Variance (average squared deviation from mean),
Standard Deviation (square root of variance), Interquartile Range (IQR).
Measures of Shape: Skewness (asymmetry of distribution), Kurtosis (peaked-ness). A normal
distribution has skewness = 0 and kurtosis = 3.
• Descriptive statistics summarize data without making inferences about a larger population.
• Use tables, charts, and graphs to present descriptive results clearly.
• Effect size (e.g., Cohen's d) indicates the practical significance of a difference, beyond statistical
significance.

Step 4: Inferential Statistics

Inferential statistics allow researchers to draw conclusions about a population based on a sample. They
estimate population parameters and test hypotheses.
Null Hypothesis (H₀): States no effect, no difference, or no relationship. The researcher attempts to
reject this.
Alternative Hypothesis (H₁): States the expected effect, difference, or relationship. Accepted when
H₀ is rejected.
p-value: Probability of obtaining results at least as extreme as observed, if H₀ is true. Typically p <
0.05 indicates statistical significance.
Type I Error (α): Rejecting H₀ when it is actually true (false positive). Controlled by the significance
level.
Type II Error (β): Failing to reject H₀ when H₁ is true (false negative). Controlled by statistical power.

Common Statistical Tests (Thomas [1] §6.10 | Leedy [4] Ch.8)

• t-test — compares means of 2 groups (independent or paired samples).
• ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) — compares means of 3 or more groups.
• Chi-square test — tests association between categorical variables.
• Pearson correlation — measures linear relationship between 2 continuous variables.
• Regression analysis — predicts the value of one variable from one or more others.
• Mann-Whitney U / Wilcoxon — non-parametric alternatives when normality is violated.
• ANCOVA (Analysis of Covariance) — controls for confounding variables statistically.
• Factor Analysis — identifies underlying factors in a set of observed variables.

Step 5: Testing Hypotheses

• State H₀ and H₁ clearly before collecting data (a priori hypotheses).
• Select appropriate statistical test and significance level (usually α = 0.05).
• Calculate test statistic from the data.
• Determine p-value and compare with α.
• If p < α: reject H₀ and conclude in favor of H₁.
• If p ≥ α: fail to reject H₀ (this does not prove H₀ is true).
• Report effect size alongside p-value to indicate practical significance.

Step 6: Interpreting the Data

• Relate findings back to the original research question and hypothesis.
• Distinguish statistical significance from practical significance.
• Acknowledge limitations — sampling method, measurement error, confounding variables.
• Consider alternative explanations for the observed results.
• Compare findings with previous studies in the literature review.

3.2 Drawing Conclusions and Identifying Future Work

📚 Source: Leedy [4] Ch.11 | Thomas [1] §1.10 | Locharoenrat [3] §3.2

Summarizing Results
• Restate the research problem and objectives.
• Summarize key findings aligned with each research question or hypothesis.
• Present results in logical order — from primary findings to secondary observations.
• Use tables, figures, and statistics to support the narrative.
• Distinguish between expected and unexpected findings.
Process Evaluation (Locharoenrat [3] §3.2)
• Evaluate whether the research methodology was appropriate and rigorously applied.
• Assess the quality and adequacy of the data collected.
• Identify any threats to internal and external validity.
• Reflect on limitations — constraints of the study that affect generalizability.
• Distinguish limitations (things outside the researcher's control) from delimitations (deliberate
choices).

Drawing Conclusions
• Conclusions must be based on evidence — never overgeneralize beyond what the data supports.
• In quantitative research: conclusions typically involve accepting or rejecting hypotheses.
• In qualitative research: conclusions describe patterns, themes, and interpretations.
• State implications — what the findings mean for theory, practice, or policy.
• Unsuccessful experiments still contribute by ruling out possibilities.

Leedy & Ormrod [4] on Conclusions

Researchers sometimes discover unexpected findings that are intriguing and merit analysis.
There is no reason not to examine these findings as well. Conclusions should address: (1)
what was found, (2) what it means, (3) how confident we are in the findings, and (4) what
should be done next.

Identifying Future Work

• List unresolved questions arising from the research.
• Suggest follow-up studies to address limitations of the current work.
• Propose extensions — wider populations, different contexts, additional variables.
• Identify methodological improvements for future research.
• Recommendations for practice or policy based on findings.
UNIT 4: RESEARCH ETHICS AND PUBLICATION
📚 Source: Thomas [1] §23.3, §23.4, §24.1–§24.7, §15.2, §9.5, §9.6; Ghezzi [2] §6.1, §6.2 | 12 Hours

4.1 Research Ethics (Detailed)

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §23.1–§23.8 | Ghezzi [2] §6.1
Research ethics encompasses the moral principles and professional standards that govern the conduct
of research. Ethical research protects participants, ensures integrity of findings, and maintains public
trust in science.

Foundational Ethical Codes

• Nuremberg Code (1947) — first international standard governing research involving human
subjects; requires voluntary informed consent.
• Declaration of Helsinki — ethical guidelines for medical research involving human subjects (World
Medical Association).
• Belmont Report — established three core principles for research with human subjects: Respect
for Persons, Beneficence, Justice.

Core Ethical Principles

Respect for Persons (Autonomy): Participants must give free, informed, and voluntary consent.
Vulnerable populations (children, prisoners) need extra protection.
Beneficence: Maximize benefits and minimize harm to participants and society. Do no harm.
Justice: Fair distribution of research benefits and burdens. Do not exploit vulnerable groups.
Integrity: Conduct and report research honestly. No fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism.

4.2 Conflict of Interest

📚 Source: Ghezzi [2] §6.2 | Thomas [1] §23.2
A conflict of interest exists when a researcher's judgment about research could be influenced by a
secondary interest — financial, professional, or personal. All conflicts must be disclosed.

Types and Management

• Financial conflicts: research funded by organizations with a stake in the outcome. Must be
declared in publications.
• Professional conflicts: reviewing research by competitors or close collaborators; should recuse
when reviewing familiar work.
• Personal conflicts: research involving family members or close associates.
• Institutional conflicts: institution financially benefits from the research outcome.
• Management: transparent declaration, independent oversight, separation of roles.

4.3 Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §23.3
Intellectual property rights protect the creations of the mind — inventions, literary works, symbols,
names, images. In research, IPR includes patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets.
Key IPR Categories
Patent: Exclusive right granted to an inventor for a new, useful, and non-obvious invention. Protects for
20 years from filing date. Requires full public disclosure of the invention.
Copyright: Automatic protection for original creative works — books, articles, software code, data sets.
Protects expression, not ideas.
Trademark: Protects brand names, logos, and slogans that identify a product or service.
Trade Secret: Confidential business information that provides a competitive advantage. Remains
protected as long as it stays secret.

IPR in Research
• Authorship — only those who make substantial intellectual contributions should be listed as
authors.
• Data ownership — data generated in publicly funded research may be subject to open access
requirements.
• Licensing — software and datasets can be shared under open licenses (Creative Commons,
GPL).
• Technology transfer — moving research inventions from laboratory to commercial use through
licensing or spin-offs.

4.4 Fraud and Misconduct in Science

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §23.4 | Ghezzi [2] §6.1

The Three Forms of Research Misconduct (FFP)

FFP: Fabrication, Falsification, Plagiarism
Fabrication: Making up data or results and recording or reporting them.
Falsification: Manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes; changing or
omitting data to misrepresent results. Example: multiplying 100 observations by 4 and
reporting as 400 observations.
Plagiarism: Using another's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate
credit.

Other Improper Practices

• Selective reporting — reporting only favorable results (publication bias).
• Duplicate publication — publishing the same work in multiple journals without disclosure.
• Salami publication — splitting one study into multiple papers to increase publication count.
• Gift authorship — listing someone as author who made no intellectual contribution.
• Ghost authorship — a substantial contributor is not listed as an author.
• Data dredging (p-hacking) — testing many hypotheses and reporting only those with p < 0.05.

4.5 Plagiarism and Plagiarism Checkers

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §24.1–§24.7
Plagiarism: Presenting another person's work, ideas, words, or data as one's own without appropriate
acknowledgment. The word derives from 'plagiarius' — a kidnapper in Latin.

Types of Plagiarism
• Verbatim copying — reproducing text word-for-word without quotation marks or citation.
• Mosaic plagiarism — mixing copied text with original writing without acknowledgment.
• Paraphrase plagiarism — changing words but keeping the same structure and ideas without
citation.
• Idea plagiarism — using another's original concept or argument without attribution.
• Self-plagiarism — reusing one's own published work without disclosure.

How to Avoid Plagiarism (Thomas [1])

• Cite all sources — when using ideas, data, or words from another source.
• Use quotation marks for direct quotations — keep them brief.
• Paraphrase correctly — rewrite in your own words AND cite the source.
• Summarize — capture the essential points in your own words with citation.
• Maintain accurate notes — record sources while reading.
• Use reference management software — Mendeley, Zotero, EndNote.

Plagiarism Checkers (Thomas [1] §24.7)

• Turnitin — most widely used in academic institutions; compares against vast databases.
• iThenticate — used for journal submissions; powered by Turnitin.
• Grammarly — basic plagiarism detection plus writing assistance.
• Copyscape — checks web content.
• PlagScan, Unicheck — other academic checking tools.
A similarity index below 10% (excluding bibliography and quotes) is generally acceptable in most
institutions. The guideline practical requirement: ensure similarity index < 10%.

4.6 Citation and Listing Systems of References

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §15.2, §15.3
Proper citation acknowledges the intellectual contributions of others, allows readers to verify sources,
and demonstrates the depth of the researcher's literature review.

Major Citation Systems (Thomas [1] §15.2)

Name-Year System (Author-Date): Author's surname and year of publication appear in the text in
parentheses. References listed alphabetically. Example: (Smith, 2020). Used in APA, CSE Name-Year
styles.
Numbered Reference System: References cited by numbers in the text (superscript or in brackets).
References listed in order of first citation. Used in Vancouver style (medicine), IEEE (engineering).
Footnote System: Citations appear as footnotes at the bottom of the page. Used in Chicago style and
some humanities disciplines.

Common Documentation Styles

• APA (American Psychological Association) — social sciences, education, psychology.
 • MLA (Modern Language Association) — humanities, literature.
• Chicago/Turabian — history, some social sciences, general academic writing.
• Vancouver (ICMJE) — medical and biomedical sciences.
• IEEE — electrical engineering, computer science.
• CSE (Council of Science Editors) — natural sciences.

Reference Management Software

• Mendeley — free, cloud-based, integrates with Word; also a social network for researchers.
• Zotero — free, open-source, browser extension for saving sources automatically.
• EndNote — industry standard for managing large reference databases; subscription required.
• RefWorks — web-based reference management tool, common in academic libraries.

4.7 Scientometric Analysis: Citation Index and Analysis

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §9.5, §9.6
Scientometrics is the quantitative study of science, technology, and innovation. Citation analysis is a
key tool in scientometrics — measuring the impact of research by counting how many times a paper or
researcher is cited.

Major Citation Databases (Thomas [1] §9.5)

Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics): The oldest and most prestigious citation index. Contains
Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Arts and Humanities
Citation Index (A&HCI), and other specialized databases.
Scopus (Elsevier): Launched in 2004. Interdisciplinary database covering 36,000+ peer-reviewed
journals. Provides CiteScore, SJR, and SNIP metrics. Accessible via subscription.
Google Scholar: Free search engine for academic literature. Broad coverage including grey literature.
Provides 'cited by' links and h-index calculations.
PubMed/MEDLINE: Free database for biomedical and life sciences literature maintained by the US
National Library of Medicine.

Author-Level Metrics (Thomas [1] §9.6)

h-index (Hirsch, 2005): A researcher has an h-index of h if they have at least h papers each cited at
least h times. Example: h-index of 10 means 10 papers each cited at least 10 times. Rewards
consistency of high-impact work. Can be calculated via Web of Science, Scopus, or Google Scholar.
i10-index (Google Scholar): Number of publications with at least 10 citations. Simple metric used by
Google Scholar.
g-index (Egghe, 2006): Gives more weight to highly cited articles than the h-index. A researcher has
g-index of g if their top g papers together received at least g² citations.

Journal-Level Metrics
• Impact Factor (JIF): calculated by Clarivate Analytics annually. Requires journal to be indexed in
Web of Science.
• CiteScore: calculated by Elsevier/Scopus. 4-year window. Freely available.
• SJR: weighted citations — citations from prestigious journals count more.
• SNIP: adjusts for field-specific differences in citation practices.
• Eigenfactor: considers total importance of a journal, weighted by prestige of citing journals.
 • h5-index (Google Scholar): h-index for articles published in the last 5 years.

4.8 Research Paper Writing

📚 Source: Thomas [1] §11.1–§11.4 | Ghezzi [2] §3.3 | Locharoenrat [3] §3.1, §4.1
A research paper is the primary vehicle for communicating original research findings to the scientific
community. It follows a standardized structure and must be written with clarity, precision, and logical
coherence.

The IMRAD Structure (Thomas [1] §11.1)

IMRAD: Introduction, Methods, Results, And Discussion
Introduction: What is the problem? Why is it important? What did others do? What is new in
this paper? Ends with objective/hypothesis.
Methods (Materials & Methods): How was the study done? Enough detail for replication.
Describes experimental design, data collection, and analysis procedures.
Results: What was found? Present data with tables and figures. No interpretation yet.
Discussion: What do the results mean? Compare with other studies. Limitations. Future
work.

Key Sections of a Research Paper

Title: Concise, informative, and specific. Should reflect the content and key terms for searchability.
Avoid abbreviations.
Abstract: A self-contained summary of the entire paper: background, objective, methods, key results,
and conclusions. Usually 150–250 words. Most widely read section of any paper.
Keywords: 5–8 key terms that help index the paper in databases. Choose terms that represent the
topic and appear in databases.
Introduction: Background, significance, gap in literature, objective/hypothesis.
Methods: Detailed description of materials, experimental design, data collection, and analysis
procedures.
Results: Objective presentation of findings without interpretation. Use tables and figures effectively.
Discussion: Interpret findings, compare with literature, address limitations, state conclusions and
future directions.
References: Complete and accurate list of all cited sources in the required citation style.

Principles of Good Scientific Writing (Ghezzi [2] §3.3)

• Be precise — use exact technical language; avoid vague or ambiguous terms.
• Be concise — every word must earn its place; eliminate redundancy.
• Be logical — ideas should flow in a clear logical sequence.
• Be honest — report all results, including negative or unexpected findings.
• Use consistent terminology — define technical terms the first time they are used.
• Use active voice where appropriate — 'We measured...' rather than 'Measurements were made...'
• Write for the reader — know your audience and use appropriate level of detail.

Selecting a Journal (Thomas [1] §11.3)

• Match the scope — ensure the journal covers your research area.
 • Check impact metrics — JIF, CiteScore, SJR for quality assessment.
• Consider audience — who should read your work?
• Check publication charges (APCs) for open access journals.
• Verify the journal is legitimate — not predatory. Check DOAJ, Cabells, Beall's List.
• Use journal finder tools — Springer, Elsevier, and Wiley offer manuscript submission matching
tools.

4.9 Practicals Summary (Capstone Project Guide)

📚 Source: Guidelines Document — Practicals Section

Practical Task 1: Literature Search

• Search research papers using Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science database.
◦ Evaluate journals using: CiteScore, SJR, SNIP (for journals); Core Ranking, CORE Portal (for
conferences).
◦ Summarize reviewed papers in a table: Title | Author(s) | Year | Key Findings | Citation Count.
◦ Manage references using Mendeley, Zotero, or EndNote.

Practical Task 2: Data Analysis

• Practice the statistical analysis techniques covered in class.
• Identify the appropriate statistical technique for your chosen research problem.
• Use software such as R, Python, SPSS, or Excel for analysis.

Practical Task 3: Research Paper Writing

• Select a document writing software (MS Word, LaTeX, Google Docs) per teacher's format.
• Use a plagiarism checker tool (Turnitin, iThenticate); ensure similarity index < 10%.
• Use journal finder tools to identify a suitable journal for manuscript submission.

Quick Reference: Syllabus-to-Book Mapping

Unit / Topic Topic Chapters Ref.
Introduction Meaning, significance, research cycle, Thomas Ch.1 [4]
tools, methods, methodology (Pg 21-31)
Introduction Types of Research Thomas 1.4 / [2]
Locharoenrat
Research Process Research process & output; Approaches; Thomas Ch.1 [1]
Induction & Deduction; Hypothesis, (Pg 8-11),
Theory, Law, Fact; Research ethics §1.6, §1.7

Research Process Identifying a research problem; Literature Thomas §7.2, [2]

review; Peer review; Publication §10.2, §10.3 /
standards; Professional societies Ghezzi §3.4,
§3.5
Research Plan Analyzing quantitative data — exploring, Leedy Ch.8 / [4]
 organizing, descriptive stats, inferential Thomas Ch.6
stats, testing hypotheses, interpreting data
Research Plan Drawing conclusions; Summarizing Leedy [5]
results; Process evaluation; Identifying Ch.11 /
future work Locharoenrat

Ethics & Publication Research ethics; Conflict of interest Ghezzi §6.1, [2]
§6.2
Ethics & Publication IPR; Fraud & Misconduct; Plagiarism & Thomas [1],[3]
Plagiarism checkers §23.3, §23.4,
§24.7
Ethics & Publication Citation & Listing Systems of References Thomas [1]
§15.2
Ethics & Publication Scientometric analysis — citation index & Thomas §9.5, [1]
analysis §9.6
Ethics & Publication Research paper writing Thomas [3]
§11.1–11.4 /
Ghezzi §3.3