Proposal Development

1. Proposal Development MIS773 Research Seminar in IS Jerry Chang

2. Research • Plan of research - research proposal • Describes research question within the domain of study, the importance of that question, plan of study, and competency of the investigator • Conduct of research - methods and analysis • Helps the investigator test the research question • Outcome of research - publications • Disseminates study findings and results to appropriate audience

3. Your proposal must: be clear and concise not exceed 5000 words be written in non-technical language cite all sources used include a bibliography following appropriate format (MISQ, APA etc.) be submitted early as a draft for feedback propose a faculty advisor and describe why that advisor is suitable for the project

4. Your proposal must: identify general problem domain provide a review of the literature for that problem domain define specific research question(s)to be investigated describe the method(s)to be used and why those methods are appropriate describe the expected outcome for the research project give a projected timetable to carry out the research

5. Proposal content • Flow is important in communicating ideas • In general, proposal must have a beginning, a middle part, and an ending • The introduction and background make up the beginning • Literature review, research hypotheses, supporting arguments, and methods make up the middle part • Discussion, conclusion, and suggested limitations from expected findings for the study make up the ending • Resource (funding) requirements should be outlined and included

6. Introduction • The topic is important; what is its theoretical and/or practical significance • Improve something • Understand something • Personal and professional reasons • Quickly answers “why?” & “so what” questions • What we know about the topic; who has done what, what the literature says • What we don’t know about the topic; what has not been done or done incorrectly • What the proposed study intends to do; based on #3; in most cases as research question(s)

7. Literature review • Reinforce importance of the topic through recognition of past research in the area • Demonstrate thoroughness in understanding of the topic • Describe the important constructs and key variables involved in the study • Describe known relationships between constructs; dependent and independent variables, diagram and schema • Identify areas of weaknesses or omissions in the literature; leading to necessity for the proposed study Always record and organize citations

8. Research development • Summarize what is know and what is missing • Develop research hypotheses; what’s to be tested • Synthesis of literature that leads to new insights from the current study • Addition or modification to existing understanding of constructs and their relationships • Logical justifications and/or arguments for each hypothesis • Aided by developed research model(s) when appropriate

9. Notes: • Distinguish between research question or proposition and research hypothesis • Research question or proposition is more exploratory, has tentative literature support, and is more difficult to formulate • Research hypothesis is more definitive, supported more clearly by literature; and tested for a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer • Both research question and research hypothesis must be stated clearly in a single testable statement

10. Research hypotheses Hypothesis testing is primarily used in quantitative research In hypothesis testing a null hypothesis and an alternative hypothesis are formulated and tested In developing hypotheses, the emphasis should be on the intent of what the researcher hopes to prove A hypothesis must relate to one specific research question to avoid confusion in testing and interpretation

11. Method • Description of research method • Justification of the chosen method • Positivist approach • Survey • Experiment • Content analysis • Secondary data • Interviews • Observation • Interpretive approach • Tentative subjects and questions • Focus may change as study unfolds • Interviews • Observation

12. Positivist approach Step-by-step research methodology With an eye to replication Testable hypotheses Operationalization of constructs Identification of appropriate research subjects Psychometric tools and analysis Pilot study

13. Discussion & conclusion Discussion, conclusion, and limitations Interpret results and findings within the context of literature described earlier Describe implications for research and practice Describe limitations of the study and how they might influence results Future research and what others should consider when replicating the study

14. Resource requirement • Describe required resource for the study • Project timetable • Human resource • Funds • Yourself, staff, consultant, etc. • Supplies and equipments • Travel cost • Indirect cost • Research support • Others

16. Ethics in research • No compromises, no evasions, no shortcuts, no excuses and no saving face • Consequences for many years to come • Institutions and faculty need to socialize students into ethical norms • Self study, informal discussions, workshops and symposia on ethics

17. Ethics and the research process • National Academy of Science (NAS) define scientific misconduct. • Three Broad Categories • Scientific misconduct (falsifying data, plagiarism) • Questionable Research procedures (keeping inadequate records, careless data collection) • Other misconduct (Violation of Govt. regulations, sexual harassment, etc)

18. Protection of human subjects All universities receiving Federal funding must have a mandatory review of research proposals Understand the guidelines before preparing your proposal Determine if you are subject to additional ethical guidelines Humane treatment of human beings is far easier to build in than to add on Right to protection begins with the right of free and informed choice Every human has the right not to be used by other people People asked to participate have a right to know what they are getting into and the right to give or withhold their cooperation

19. UNLV ORI (IRB) • Informed, voluntary, benefits > risks, equality, privacy, and confidentiality • Research Protocol Proposal • Exempted, excluded • Faculty PI with CITI • Informed consent • Online submission • Board review when necessary • Web site: http://www.unlv.edu/research/ORI-HSR

20. The ethics of writing • Plagiarism • Ideas and words = Valuables of scholarship • Grand theft • Failure to use quotation marks • Omitting citations • Carelessness in preparing list of references • Failure to obtain permission for use of figures, tables, illustrations from another document • Providing all the facts • All relevant facts vs. favorable facts • Deliberate omission of information • Accidental omission of information • Manufacturing the facts • Fabricating data • Falsifying data

21. Ethics in publishing Pay attention to names to appear, what order, who to be acknowledged? Follow rules established by Universities, Journals, Govt. Agencies, etc. Duplicate submissions are absolutely prohibited. Never submit an abstract until the research is finished. Never pad your resume.

22. Personal and professional relationships • Relationships with faculty mentors • Pressure to go beyond the expected academic or professional relationship • Pressure from faculty to perform tasks not part of the academic program • Discovery and obligation • Protect yourself from involvement or reprisal • Any institution receiving federal funding has procedures for investigating violations of research ethics

24. Style and form in writing the proposal • Writing • The most important factor in conveying your ideas • Presentation of the idea: • Clear • Straightforward • Concise • The research proposal should address • Exact nature of the matter to be investigated • Detailed account of the methods to be employed • Stick to the topic • No need to praise the importance of the field • Do not manipulate the opinions of the readers • “Does the reader really need to consider this point in order to judge the adequacy of my thinking?”

25. Title • Title is the first contact • Communicate a concise, thorough, and unambiguous picture of the content • Use similar terms as other researchers – keywords • Include: • Dependent and independent variables, performance component, administrated treatment, underlying model, purpose of study and any unusual contribution of the study • Don’t include • Population, research design, instrumentation • Two line title is long enough. • Avoid redundancy

26. Quotation • Number of citations doesn’t add to the weight of the argument • Have all the citations needed? Enough! • Non-selective references: inability to differentiate between important and trivial • Direct quotation: Be careful • Nobody will read “a lengthy quotation” • “who said it” or “how it was said” is critically important • Otherwise, paraphrase • Less distracting • Speak directly to the reader • Prevents unintentional plagiarism

27. Clarity and precision • Common language vs. language of research • Common language • Acquired gradually, unsystematically and mostly unconsciously • Language of research • In a system, each word should mean one thing for both writer and reader • Don’t invent new words, if there is one out there • Define the word, if there is doubt about the meaning • Use system meanings of words, that’s what reader expects • Use footnotes to clear the real meaning • Import new words very carefully

28. Editing • Examine the proposal for clarity and grammar • Each sentence should fit with the surrounding sentences • Review by colleagues and/or copy editor • Strictly avoid: • Mechanical errors • Irritating confusion • Shoddy formatting • Double spacing, margins, headings • Charts • Appendix • High quality print

30. Master thesis • Originality • All studies deliberately employed to test the accuracy of results or the applicability of conclusions developed in previous studies. • Replication • Direct – students must not only correctly identify all the critical variables in the original study but also create equivalent conditions for the conduct of their own study. • Revised – a student may repeat an interesting study considered to have been defective in sample, method, analysis, or interpretation. • Advisor selection – competence, interest, energy, time, interaction • Thesis committee – usually between 3 – 6 faculty members • Formatting guideline from the Graduate College

31. Search for funding Locate the nearest grant library National or Regional conferences Institutional retrieval systems Federal and State funding Foundations and charities Commercial search services Business UNLV OSP Web site: http://research.unlv.edu/osp/ Apply early and often Apply to multiple places - You can accept them Money does not make good research - good researchers do DO NOT SELF-FUND - This can erode your quality of life