How can you distinguish a researchable from a non-researchable problem?

Answer 1

1.Data are available and accessible. The researcher must be sure that the participants in his investigation posses the needed data and that they are within his reach. So,one must not choose a problem in which the locations of the data are too far away,say foreign lands.

2.Data must meet the standards of accuracy,objectivity,and verifiability.The data gathered must be accurate,objective,and not biased,and can be verified when there arises a need,otherwise the result of the study will not be valid and generalizations formulated will be faulty.

3.Answers to the specific questions(subproblems) can be found. The data to be collected must supply the necessary answers to the specific questions.

4.The hypotheses formulated are testable,that is,they can be accepted or rejected.

5.Equipment and instruments for research are available and can give valid and reliable results.

Answer 2

Research requires data. Sometimes results from the data are negative (zero), but it is still data.

Since research must result in data, you must evaluate beforehand whether such data could be found through a research project.

Here is an extreme example of a non-researchable problem.

A physician wants first-hand reports of what patients thought and felt (past tense!) in the 12 to 48 hours before their deaths.

Deficiencies in this example:

• The patients are deceased; they cannot fill out a survey, answer questions, etc.
• Not all patient medical charts would contain quotes of what a dying patient said; No medical charts would contain quotes of what a patient thought, unless the patient verbalized those thoughts AND a nurse or doctor documented the quote in the record.
• Some patients may have not spoken in the last 12-48 hours of life (example: a patient who was unconscious; on a ventilator; had irreversible brain death, etc.)
• Families may not be able to recall, or correctly recall, what the patient said.

So, where would this physician get his "data"? This is a non-researchable project -- unless the physician changed his research question. He would have to study LIVING patients and follow them just before death. BUT, since no one can predict or guarantee the number of hours before death, he would also need to revise his parameter of "12 to 48 hours". Such a study might mean he has to study some patients for months before they die--- but, those patients would likely have more time to process and verbalize what they think and feel, which then would alter the data and alter the reliability and importance of the study. He couldn't include people who died faster, unless he could justify the methodology used to include them. His study would need to account for two diverse groups on a wide spectrum.

So, a researchable problem and the researcher must be able to:

• answer the questions the research poses in the first place
• have a scientific reliable data source
• have precise methodology for collecting and assessing the data
• recognize any divergent groups that were not recognized initially AND seek to revise the research -- the research question, the methodology, or both
• recognize when a project is simply unworkable before it is started

If a proposed research project can't do these things, it is a flawed research plan and should not be started.

NOTE: Research is different from Experiments. Experiments seek to answer the question, 'What if...' or to prove that the expected 'what if' actually occurs.

For example: A chemist mixes 2 solutions to understand what occurs to both solutions and the mixture.

Research extends the concept of proving or disproving what is 'expected'.

For example, Drug manufacturers expect that mixing components of Drug A and Drug B will produce a specific benefit and their research proves or disproves the original expectation.

Answer 3

Contains 14 words, this is an example of investigation