Burden of Proof by Jolito Ortizo Padilla

"How do you identify the best research method for your project? Jolito Ortizo Padilla offers some advice"

Many of us who have studied a course might have been required to complete a project, assignment or dissertation that contained an element of primary research as well as a critique of current thinking in that area(i.e. secondary research).

According to some academics you can never empirically or logically determine the best approach when undertaking a piece of research. Baxter (2006) argues that the adopted approach and selected data collection methods will depend on the situation to be studied, your own opinion and the type of the information required. Each style has its own strengths and weaknesses and is suitable for a particular context.

The primary concern of every researcher is to ensure they follow a robust approach to their research and not overburden themselves with the validity of "research paradigms".

Yet it is interesting to consider what other academics believe are some influences over the decision of an appropriate research methodology. The broad idea is that research paradigms exist as an "overall conceptual frameworks within which some researchers work".

They believe a research paradigms has three main parts- ontology, epistemology and methodology. "Ontology" is described by Jankowicz (2003) as a researcher's in built view of the world driven by their background and experiences; a fundamental belief about the nature of being.

Jankowicz describes the concept of "epistemology" as a personal theory of knowledge, when you can count as knowledge and what you count as proof. I describe this as "what do we know and how do we know it?"

Many academics argue that ontological foundations give rise to certain epistemologies  that determine the attractiveness of certain research methodologies.

You might be wondering: " so what is the implication of any of this?" When starting a piece of research you may wish to consider your own ontological position-are you one for quantitative and statistical evidence or does that richness of opinion generated from a qualitative method, such as a focus group, provide a powerful evidence for research purposes?

The completion of a piece of research is not an easy task; as you start to unpick the methodology you might consider if it is a result of your own views of the world or assumption on validity and proof. Or as long as the research methodology follows a logical approach is this justification enough?

Mathematician and academic Hammond (2008) captures the challenge of research. "Great scientists tolerate ambiguity very well. They believe the theory enough to go ahead; they doubt it enough to notice the errors and faults so they can step forward and create the new replacement theory. If you believe too much you'll never notice the flaws; if you doubt too much you won't get started."