Isn’t it ironic that we wanted to shed light on our research journey, yet we are taking a non-aligned path?
Often, this – leads us to a different destination.
It can be that there is no serious problem with this. But, in some cases, these deviations will not contribute to the high impact of your research.
It is because you just found an answer to a question you did not ask.
It is impressive and, at the same time, frustrating that most researchers are now more concerned about what research design to use. This creates excellent impressions on their ability to apply the statistical treatment rather than finding the best approach to answer their research questions.
We should constantly be reminded that our questions are grounded in the gaps we identify based on our readings– as we compare various works of prolific authors. Indeed, we have the intention in mind that our results can create an essential contribution to the growing body of knowledge about our topic of interest, yet in some instances, we choose paths that we thought were the right ones to take– inspired by wrong motives.
I admit that I once had the same mindset. I find it overwhelming how statistical jargon can create so much impact on those who do not have an orientation. However, learning those techniques made a great impression, but I always mastered the methods and not my chosen topic of interest.
It frustrates me knowing that some of the researchers I know are starting their journey, deciding what design to use, without determining first the gaps and questions they wanted to address.
If the research is methodological, then that’s fine. But if the topic is about a particular issue or problem in any context, I think that methods are just tools to answer the questions and should not be considered when starting a research journey.
It is only now that I fully understand why my professors are asking first what my RQs are or what the thesis statement is that projects my argument because that is where all research should begin.