Another mountain to climb, or just a final sprint ?
It may well be neither of these I think.
Analysing your findings is about showing people what happened in a sort of story. Try to be as comprehensive as possible, but make sure the story is readable, and that your findings are clear.
This will definitely require different iterations. So be prepared to have different versions of your story and also think of different audiences, for instance those who are technical and those who are non-technical.
When iterating your story, It is important to go back to your research questions and see how the findings are answering them. It is good to think how the findings answer the questions, and if they don't do so, then you can explain why.
Try to be open in your interpretation of the findings. Tell the reader what you found, but tell them as if you were just a reporter. It helps not to be too personal, at least in the initial sections. It also helps the reader to know where you stand, in other words how you agree/disagree with the findings. Remember that you have a set of values as a researcher. Your views about how the world is/should be might or might not fit with the findings.
Some people divide their findings narrative into several parts. First, a very descriptive part, where they fill in some general gaps of knowledge. They present some descriptive statistics. They also talk about the research context. They prepare the reader with some basic details.
The second part is now the juicy bit. They produce some strong statements, and then they show the evidence to support them. You can still be descriptive but then you start introducing your own analysis, questions and answers, your doubts, insights.
The third part is my favourite, and some times I ask my students after they tell me all the wonders they have discovered. I ask them: so what? Yes, the findings sound interesting, but...
The so what question aims to elicit the contributions that your findings and your research make. Do the findings confirm or contradict what has been said before in the literature? What are the implications for managers, for researchers and/or the public in general? Is it that the day after tomorrow people who read your findings will think differently? If so, how differently? How could the theories or frameworks in the literature change as a result of your research ? What could be the limitations of your research? What new questions can you leave for future research?
Because we are human beings we tend to overestimate what we know or what we have learned. We need to put our findings in perspective. For a start, we should not claim too much. There are many people out there doing research who do a much better job than us. For sure tomorrow there will be new and better insights being published in the areas of knowledge that interest us. Our findings are just a drop in the ocean of social sciences research.
Better to be humble than arrogant I think.
Not claiming too much also means advancing in small steps. That will give us the chance to have something to do after we finish. Remember that research is a continuous activity. So we had better save some of ideas for later, whilst they get more mature and ready to be used.
So once you have your findings, keep revising them a few times (remember iteration?), then put them in writing; whilst you do that please think of who can benefit from reading your findings. After you summarise, analyse and discuss the findings, think of one or two key contributions from your research.
Finally, it makes no harm to anyone to acknowledge a need to continue researching in the near future.
No comments:
Post a Comment