RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok

A PLANNING MATRIX FOR RESEARCH 87
Presenting and reporting the results
As with the stage of planning data analysis, the
prepared researcher will need to consider the form
of the reporting of the research and its results,
giving due attention to the needs of different
audiences (for example, an academic audience may
require different contents from a wider professional
audience and, a fortiori, from a lay audience).
Decisions here will need to consider:
how to write up and report the research
when to write up and report the research (e.g.
ongoing or summative)
how to present the results in tabular and/or
written-out form
how to present the results in non-verbal forms
to whom to report (the necessary and possible
audiences of the research)
how frequently to report.
For examples of setting out a research report,
see the accompanying web site (http://www.
routledge.com/textbooks/9780415368780 –
Chapter 3, file 3.1.doc).
A planning matrix for research
In planning a piece of research, the range of
questions to be addressed can be set into a matrix.
Box 3.3 provides such a matrix, in the left-hand
column of which are the questions which figure in
the four main areas set out so far:
orienting decisions
research design and methodology
data analysis
presenting and reporting the results.
Questions 1–10 are the orienting decisions,
questions 11–22 concern the research design
and methodology, questions 23–4 cover data
analysis, and questions 25–30 deal with presenting
and reporting the results. Within each of the
30 questions there are several sub-questions
which research planners may need to address.
For example, within question 5 (‘What are the
purposes of the research’) the researcher would
have to differentiate major and minor purposes,
explicit and maybe implicit purposes, whose
purposes are being served by the research, and
whose interests are being served by the research.
An example of these sub-issues and problems is
contained in the second column.
At this point the planner is still at the divergent
phase of the research planning, dealing with
planned possibilities (Morrison 1993: 19), opening
up the research to all facets and interpretations.
In the column headed ‘decisions’ the research
planner is moving towards a convergent phase,
where planned possibilities become visible within
the terms of constraints available to the researcher.
To do this the researcher has to move down
the column marked ‘decisions’ to see how well
the decision which is taken in regard to one
issue/question fits in with the decisions in regard
to other issues/questions. For one decision to fit
with another, four factors must be present:
All of the cells in the ‘decisions’ column must
be coherent – they must not contradict each
other.
All of the cells in the ‘decisions’ column must
be mutually supporting.
All of the cells in the ‘decisions’ column must
be practicable when taken separately.
All of the cells in the ‘decisions’ column must
be practicable when taken together.
Not all of the planned possibilities might be
practicable when these four criteria are applied.
It would be of very little use if the methods of
data collection listed in the ‘decisions’ column of
question 21 (‘How will the data be gathered’)
offered little opportunity to fulfil the needs of
acquiring information to answer question 7 (‘What
must be the focus in order to answer the research
questions’), or if the methods of data collection
were impracticable within the time scales available
in question 4.
In the matrix of Box 3.3 the cells have been
completed in a deliberately content-free way, i.e.
the matrix as presented here does not deal with
the specific, actual points which might emerge in
aparticularresearchproposal.Ifthematrixwere
to be used for planning an actual piece of research,
then, instead of couching the wording of each
Chapter 3