Research Terminology: A Working Glossary
Five tables and a handful of prose passages carry the whole defined vocabulary of the supplied teaching source. They are gathered here in the source's own wording, with the labels it names but never defines listed separately so you can see exactly where the material runs out.
How this glossary is built
The supplied teaching source is a set of weekly notes and slide decks, not a textbook, and its vocabulary arrives in tables rather than in running definitions. Four tables do nearly all the work: a general terminology table, a table of the basic elements of a research project, a second shorter table restating three of those elements differently, a table of epistemological positions, and a table of research methodologies.
Everything in this glossary comes from those tables or from the source's own prose. Nothing has been imported from another text, nothing has been paraphrased into a tidier form, and nothing has been reconciled. Where the source contradicts itself, both versions appear.
Two habits make this vocabulary useful rather than decorative. The first is to check, every time you use one of these words in a proposal, whether the source actually defines it — several of the most impressive-sounding terms in the material are labels only. The second is to name your source for any term you define from elsewhere, so that a supervisor or reviewer can see which authority you are leaning on.
Terms for what a study does and what it uses
The general terminology table is the first vocabulary set in the material. It mixes three quite different kinds of term: what a study is trying to achieve, what medium its data is in, where the data came from, and which way the reasoning runs. They are printed as one list, so it is worth separating them mentally as you read.
GENERAL RESEARCH TERMINOLOGY AS PRINTED IN THE SUPPLIED SOURCE
| Term | Definition | Associated terms |
|---|---|---|
| Descriptive | Seeks to describe what is | Exploratory |
| Explanatory | Seeks to explain relationships between phenomena | Predictive |
| Evaluative | Seeks to test policy or management outcomes against benchmarks | None listed |
| Qualitative | Research in which words, and possibly images and sounds, are the medium | None listed |
| Quantitative | Research in which numbers are the main medium | None listed |
| Primary data | Data directly observed or gathered by the researcher engaged in the research project. These sources are relevant, timely and reliable | None listed |
| Secondary data | Use of existing data gathered by other people or organisations for other purposes. These sources are interpreted by others | None listed |
| Inductive | Hypotheses, explanations or propositions are generated from examination of the data | Exploratory |
| Deductive | Data collected to test a prior hypothesis or proposition | Hypothetical-deductive, confirmatory |
Associated terms are listed by the source without definitions of their own. Predictive, hypothetical-deductive and confirmatory are never defined in the supplied material.
The first three terms are the ones the source repeats when it comes to choosing a topic, where it says your research can generally be one of three types: descriptive, meaning finding out and describing what is; explanatory, meaning explaining how or why things are as they are and using that to predict; and evaluative, meaning evaluation of policies and programmes. Those slightly fuller glosses appear in the topic development material and are worked through in descriptive, explanatory and evaluative research.
Qualitative and quantitative are defined here by medium alone — words against numbers. Elsewhere in the material the same pair is defined by activity, as the difference between explicit judgment or interpretation and counting and calculating. The two definitions are compatible, but they are not the same definition, and the medium version is the narrower of the two.
Primary and secondary data are defined by provenance and purpose, and the definitions are not symmetrical: one carries three quality claims, the other carries a warning. Inductive and deductive are defined purely by order of operations — whether the proposition exists before the data or emerges from it.
The five basic elements of a research project
The second table names the five elements every research project is said to contain. This is the structural vocabulary of the whole subject: if you can place these five correctly in relation to each other, most of the rest of the material follows.
The five elements, as defined in the supplied source
- Epistemology
- The theory of knowing; embedded in the theoretical perspective and thus in the methodology.
- Methodology
- The strategy used to carry out the study; the design of the study.
- Methods
- The way in which the data to be used in the study is gathered.
- Ontology
- Assumptions about the nature of being; embedded in the theoretical perspective and thus in the methodology.
- Theoretical perspective
- The philosophical framework informing the methodology.
Two of those definitions are recursive by design. Both epistemology and ontology are described as embedded in the theoretical perspective, which is itself described as informing the methodology. The nesting is the point, and it is the same nesting the layered figure shows: philosophy underneath, methodology on top of philosophy, methods on top of methodology. The five elements are unpacked individually in the five basic elements of a research project.
A second, shorter table appears close by, restating three of the same terms in different words. It is not presented as a correction or a refinement. It simply gives different glosses.
THE SECOND, SHORTER TABLE — DIFFERENT WORDING FOR THREE OF THE SAME TERMS
| Term | Definition as printed here | Associated terms |
|---|---|---|
| Ontology | Ways of looking at work | Paradigm, philosophy |
| Epistemology | Relationship between researcher and topic being researched | None listed |
| Method | Ways of gathering and analysing data | Techniques |
This table also uses the singular Method and adds analysing to the definition, where the five-elements table uses Methods and confines it to gathering.
There is a third, prose-level definition of epistemology in the same material, and it is different again: epistemology refers to the means by which knowledge is created, with knowledge created in the research project through the use of research methodologies and methods. That version is the one developed at length in epistemology: how knowledge is created, and the ontological counterpart in ontology: assumptions about the nature of reality.
Epistemological positions
The material states that the epistemological positions generally considered are positivism, constructionism and interpretivism, and that some other philosophical frameworks used in social science research are functionalism, symbolic interactionism, feminism, critical inquiry and postmodernism. Each, it says, represents a particular framework for viewing the social world, and each represents particular ontological and epistemological standpoints.
Of those eight named frameworks, the table defines five. The definitions below are the whole of what the supplied source provides.
EPISTEMOLOGICAL TERMINOLOGY AS PRINTED IN THE SUPPLIED SOURCE
| Term | Definition | Associated terms |
|---|---|---|
| Positivist | Hypotheses — suppositions, propositions — tested using objectively collected factual data; if successful leads to scientific laws | Scientific method, logical empiricist, objectivist |
| Post-positivist | Hypotheses found to be consistent with data establishing probable facts or laws | None listed |
| Constructivist | People construct their own views of reality and researcher seeks to discover this | Social constructivism |
| Interpretive | People provide their own accounts or explanations of situations and behaviours | Phenomenology, ethnography, phenomenography, symbolic interaction, intersubjectivity, subjectivist |
| Critical inquiry | Research is influenced by beliefs or values critical of the status quo in society | Standpoint |
Functionalism, symbolic interactionism, feminism and postmodernism are named in the same passage as frameworks used in social science research, but are given no definitions anywhere in the supplied material.
Notice also that the associated terms column is doing heavy lifting in this table. Phenomenology, ethnography, phenomenography, symbolic interaction, intersubjectivity, subjectivist, logical empiricist, objectivist and standpoint are all named as associated terms and none of them is defined. Several are substantial traditions in their own right.
Research methodologies
The methodologies table is adapted in the supplied source from a research methods and methodologies text, cited in full in the references below. It is the only place in the material where methodologies receive definitions rather than labels, and it classifies each as qualitative or quantitative.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES AS DEFINED IN THE SUPPLIED SOURCE
| Methodology | Definition | Type |
|---|---|---|
| Historical | The synthesis of evidence to establish facts and draw conclusions about the past, through considering where the event happened, who was involved, when the event occurred and what kind of activity was involved | Qualitative |
| Comparative | Often used with historical research to compare different societies, whether in the past or in parallel in the present | Qualitative |
| Descriptive | Relies on observations as a way of collecting data that are recorded to be subsequently analysed. Depends on human responses and observations. Can be distorted by selective observation and biased interviews | Qualitative |
| Correlation | Describes the statistical measure of association between two phenomena. Studies may be relational or prediction | Quantitative |
| Experimental | Every relevant condition is isolated and controlled in the event investigated, to observe the effects when conditions are manipulated | Quantitative |
| Evaluation | Descriptive research designed to deal with complex social issues. Participants are equal partners in the design, implementation, interpretation and results | Qualitative |
| Action | Research carried out in the real world, designed to deal with a specific problem in a particular situation. There is little or no control over independent variables | Qualitative |
The source adds that other research methodologies may include ethnogeny, feminist and cultural. Those three are named only and are not defined.
The source offers only one piece of selection guidance to go with the table: different kinds of research questions require different kinds of approaches, and you should look at significant papers in the field you are investigating, understand what methodology they use, and consider using similar methods. It also advises speaking to your supervisor. The methodologies are treated individually in research methodologies: an overview.
Labels the source names but never defines
The layered figure reproduced in the material is a three-tier triangle, with data collection methods at the apex, research methodologies in the middle and fundamental philosophies at the base. Every tier is a list of labels. Definitions are not supplied on the figure, and for most of the labels they are not supplied anywhere else either.
THE THREE TIERS OF THE LAYERED FIGURE, AS LABELLED
| Tier | What the labels name | Labels as printed |
|---|---|---|
| Tier one (apex) | Data collection methods | Observation · Questionnaires · Interviews · Focus groups · Scales · Projective techniques · Images · Vignettes · Life history · Narrative · Diaries · Documents/Records/Archives · Internet research |
| Tier two (middle) | Research methodologies | Survey · Case study · Experimental design · Ethnography · Action research · Grounded theory · Content analysis · Discourse analysis · Documentary analysis · Textual analysis · Semiotics · Image-based research · Archival research · Feminist research |
| Tier three (base) | Fundamental philosophies | Positivism · Constructionism · Interpretivism · Functionalism · Critical theory · Feminism · Post structuralism · Post modernism |
Thirteen data collection methods, fourteen methodologies and eight philosophies — thirty-five labels in total.
A handful of these labels do correspond to terms defined elsewhere in the material. Experimental design corresponds to experimental in the methodologies table, action research to action, and positivism, constructionism and interpretivism to the positivist, constructivist and interpretive rows in the epistemological table. The rest have no definition in the supplied source at all.
Where the vocabulary conflicts with itself
Three conflicts sit inside the vocabulary itself and cannot be resolved from the supplied material. They are set out together here so you can see them at once rather than discovering them one at a time in the middle of drafting.
UNRESOLVED CONFLICTS IN THE SUPPLIED VOCABULARY
| Term | One version | The other version | How to handle it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Epistemology | The theory of knowing, embedded in the theoretical perspective | The relationship between researcher and topic being researched | Quote the gloss you use and cite where it appears. A third prose version, the means by which knowledge is created, is also available |
| Ontology | Assumptions about the nature of being, embedded in the theoretical perspective | Ways of looking at work, associated with paradigm and philosophy | The first is the standard formulation and is echoed in the prose, which asks questions about the nature of reality. Use it, and note the alternative |
| Constructionism and constructivism | Constructionism, used in the prose listing the three main positions and on the layered figure | Constructivist, used as the table heading, with social constructivism as its associated term | Record both. Do not treat them as obviously interchangeable in writing that will be examined |
| Method and methods | Methods — the way in which the data to be used in the study is gathered | Method — ways of gathering and analysing data, associated with techniques | The second version includes analysis. Say which activities your methods section covers rather than relying on the word |
The first three are genuine definitional conflicts. The fourth is a scope difference that is easy to miss and easy to trip over in a methodology chapter.
These are not the only inconsistencies in the material. The account of the research process appears once as a seven-stage sequence and once as a ten-step structure whose bullet list and section headings do not match each other, and a slide deck drops one of the five characteristics its accompanying notes give for social science research. Those are documented on the pages that cover them, including the ten-step thesis model.
Putting the vocabulary to work in a methodology chapter
A methodology chapter is largely an exercise in using these words in the right order and at the right level of commitment. The source gives you the order directly: philosophy sits underneath everything, methodology sits on top of philosophy, and methods sit on top of methodology, with the epistemological and ontological assumptions embedded in the theoretical perspective, which is embedded in the methodology used in the study.
- Ontological and epistemological assumptions
- Theoretical perspective
- Methodology
- Methods
- Data as evidence
Written out as a chapter, that becomes a sequence of declarations, each of which should follow from the one above it. The test the source applies throughout is fit: every step in the research process should be appropriate to the nature of the study, the aim of the study, the population of the study and the context of the study.
Terminology check before you submit a methodology chapter
- Every technical term you use is either defined in this glossary or accompanied by a citation to the text you took it from.
- You have not used a label from the layered figure as though it were a defined methodology.
- Where you use epistemology or ontology, you have quoted the gloss you are relying on.
- You have spelled constructionism or constructivism consistently, and said which you mean.
- Descriptive, evaluative and experimental are each used in one register only — purpose, or methodology — and it is clear which.
- Your methods section states whether it covers gathering only, or gathering and analysing.
- Each layer of the chapter follows from the one above it, and you could explain that link aloud without notes.
What to carry forward
- The supplied source defines twenty-six terms. Everything else it names — and it names a great deal more — is a label without a definition.
- Ontology and epistemology each carry two competing glosses in the material, and epistemology arguably three. Quote the one you use.
- Constructionism and constructivism both appear, for what is presented as the same position. Record both rather than merging them.
- Descriptive, evaluative and experimental each appear in more than one register. Say which you mean.
- The methodologies table is the only place methodologies are defined; the layered figure lists fourteen and defines none.
- For any term this glossary leaves undefined, take a definition from a cited text. Never fill a source gap and let the filling look like the source.
Frequently asked questions
Why does this glossary give two definitions for epistemology instead of choosing one?
Because the supplied teaching source gives two, in tables printed close together, and withdraws neither. One calls it the theory of knowing; the other calls it the relationship between researcher and topic being researched. A third version appears in the prose, describing it as the means by which knowledge is created. Choosing between them would mean asserting something about the source that the source does not assert about itself.
Should I write constructionism or constructivism?
The supplied source uses both — constructionism in its prose and on its figure, constructivist in its table of epistemological positions. It does not acknowledge the difference. Pick one, define it from a cited text, and use it consistently, because in the wider literature the two words are not always treated as interchangeable.
The source lists case study and grounded theory. Why are they not defined here?
Because the supplied material never defines them. They appear as labels on the middle tier of the layered figure, alongside twelve others, with no accompanying text. Inventing definitions for them would breach the rule this library works to. Take a definition from a research methods text and cite it.
Is this every term I will need for a research proposal?
No. It is every term the supplied teaching source defines. A proposal will almost certainly need vocabulary the source does not cover — sampling terms, validity and reliability terms, and analysis terms among them. Source those from a cited text and be explicit that you are doing so.
How should I cite a definition that comes from this material?
Attribute it to the teaching source you were given and quote the wording rather than paraphrasing it, particularly for any term this page flags as contested. Where the source itself adapted a definition from a published work — as it does for the methodologies table — cite the published work as well.
What is the difference between methodology and methods here?
Methodology is the strategy used to carry out the study, or the design of the study. Methods are the way the data to be used in the study is gathered. Note the scope wrinkle: a second table in the same material defines method as ways of gathering and analysing data, which brings analysis inside the term. State which activities your methods section covers rather than relying on the word to carry it.
References and source attribution
- Clarke, R. J. 2005, Research methods and methodologies, pp. 35-45 (the work the supplied source adapts for its methodologies table).
- Quinlan, C. 2011, Business Research Methods, 1st ed., Cengage Publishing, Chapter 1, p. 50 (the source of the layered methodological figure).
- Bryman, A. 2016, Social Research Methods, 5th ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford.
- O'Leary, Z. 2017, The Essential Guide to Doing Your Research Project, 3rd ed., Sage Publications, London.
- Naoum, S. G. 2013, Dissertation Research & Writing for Construction Students, 3rd ed., Routledge.
- The supplied teaching source: teaching notes and slide decks on introduction to research methods and on developing a research topic, terminology tables one to five and the accompanying prose. Institution, unit code and authors withheld.
Suggested questions for Ask KEVOS
- Give me the source definition of a term and tell me whether the supplied material defines it at all.
- Which terms in my draft methodology chapter are not defined in the supplied source?
- Show me every place the supplied source contradicts itself on terminology.
- Write a sentence declaring which definition of epistemology my study adopts.
- List the labels on the layered figure that have no definition in the supplied material.
- Explain the difference between descriptive as a research type and descriptive as a methodology.