The process of writing research

1. The process of writing research Radhika Viruru, Ph.D Department of Psychological Sciences Qatar University

2. The importance of writing • Writing is our “academic currency” yet few of us have received formal instruction in it. • Often left to “figure it out” • Ideas to be expressed are complex: yet not supposed to “use too many big words”

4. Roadblocks to writing • Writer’s block • Fear of permanence • Writing in the age of computers • ???

5. Writing as inquiry • We often think of writing “as a mechanical activity used to document what we already know” (Olson, 1996). • “Writing is not simply what we “do,” but also how we become better writers and scholars” • Writing is a symbolic system which articulates what we know, but it is also a tool whereby we come to these understandings; in other words, writing is product and process, noun and verb. (Colyar 2009)

6. Writing as inquiry (contd). • Styles of writing are neither fixed nor neutral (Richardson & St. Pierre, 2005). • Meaning is not “portable property” (Spivak, 1974). Words themselves are not inherently meaningful. • Postmodern qualitative research asks questions such as “what else might writing do except mean?” (Richardson & St. Pierre, 2005).

7. Writing as inquiry (contd). • Writing employs three kinds of learning: • Learning by doing • Visual learning • Symbolic learning • Provides access to one’s own thoughts

8. Exercise

9. In five minutes: • Describe what you see in this photo. Describe what you don't see-- the interior. Describe the person who comes out of the place. What does the person do?

10. Writing and research • The written word is THE symbolic tool of research • Writing encourages self-reflexivity which makes us better researchers • Can help in “producing different knowledge and producing knowledge differently” (St. Pierre, 1997)

11. Writing as research method • Writing as a method of data collection: the writing of thoughts. • Writing as data analysis: using writing to think, as opposed to thinking first and then writing.

12. Writing a literature review • Writing a good review is often seen as a “precondition” for doing good research. • Cannot do good research without knowing what has been done previously and how it was done. • Can be easier is well defined research communities.

13. Objectives of literature reviews • Sets the broad context of the study, clearly demarcates what is and what is not within the scope of the investigation, and justifies those decisions. • Not only reports existing literature but also examine critically the research methods used to better understand whether the claims are warranted.

14. Objectives of literature reviews • Can identify what has been learned and accomplished and what still needs to be learned and accomplished. • Allows author to synthesize ways that permit a new perspective which improves the quality and usefulness of subsequent research. • Source: Boote & Baile, 2005.

15. Criterion for evaluating a literature review • Coverage: • Finding and including relevant works • How search was conducted • Clear criteria for how works were included. • Synthesis: • distinguished what has been done in the field from what needs to be done • placed the research in the historical context of the field, • acquired and enhanced the subject vocabulary, • synthesized and gained a new perspective on the literature.

16. Criterion for evaluating a literature review • Methodology: How well has the author identified methodologies and research techniques that have been used in the field, and analyzed their advantages and disadvantages • Significance: what is the practical and scholarly significance of the problem analysed • Rhetoric: does the lit. review have a clear and coherent structure. *Based on Hart (1999) and Boote and Baile (2005)

17. When to write a literature review for publication • “There are two points in a scholar’s life that lend themselves naturally to writing a literature review. First, those who have completed or made substantial progress on a stream of research are well positioned to tell their colleagues what they have learned and where the field can most fruitfully direct its attention. • Second, scholars who have completed a literature review prior to embarking on a project and have developed some theoretical models derived from this review are also potential authors” *Webster & Watson, 2002

18. Organization: Introduction • Clear introduction that defines the boundaries of the topic • State the scope of your review • Any implicit assumptions

19. Search tips • The major contributions are likely to be in the leading journals. It makes sense, therefore, to start with them. Also examine selected conference proceedings. • (2) Go backward by reviewing the citations for the articles identified in step 1 to determine prior articles you should consider. • (3) Go forward to identify articles citing the key articles

20. Ways of organization

21. Other writing guidelines • Tone: avoid being overly critical. All research has flaws. • Tense: recommended to use the present tense, except when there are a longitudinal set of articles. • Identify knowledge gaps and relationships between sources. • Present conclusions

22. References • Boote, D.N. & Baile, P. (2005) Scholars Before Researchers: On the Centrality of the Dissertation Literature Review in Research Preparation Educational Researcher, Vol. 34, No. 6, pp. 3–15 • Colyar, J. (2009). Becoming Writing, Becoming Writers. Qualitative Inquiry Volume 15 Number 2 February 2009 421-436. • Hart, C. (1999). Doing a literature review: Releasing the social science research imagination. London: SAGE. • Olson, D. R. (1996). Towards a psychology of literacy: On the relations between speech and writing. Cognition, 60, 83-104. • Richardson, L. & St. Pierre, E. (2005). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research (Vol. 3). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. • Spivak, G. C. (1974) Translator’s preface. In J. Derrida, Of grammatology. (G.C. Spivak, Trans., pp. ix-xc). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. • St. Pierre, E. (1997). Circling the text: nomadic writing practices. Qualitative Inquiry, 3, 403-417 • Webster, J. & Watson, R.T (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. xiii-xxiii