HOME | CURRENT | ARCHIVES | FORUM

Research World, Volume 4, 2007
Online Version


Report R4.1

On Entering the Research World

Seminar Leader: D. P. Dash, XIMB
dpdash[at]ximb.ac.in

The seminar leader started the discussions by raising an interesting question: What do you find in the “research world”? The participants contemplated on this for a few minutes and the discussion that followed seemed to raise many other related questions. Some of these were:

* Is the research world different from the day-to-day world?
* What is the interrelation between both the worlds?
* How do the everyday world and research world interact?

The very mention of "research" creates an impression of an exclusive domain, distinct from the everyday experiences, having a different vocabulary that is out of bounds for the common person. The everyday world and the research world appear to be different in many respects. However, there may be a continuous interaction between them. The everyday world contributes problems and data to the research world; the research world often provides ways of solving problems in the everyday world. This point was discussed further using the following model:

Figure 1. An epistemology for making sense of the (groundless) social process (Source: Checkland, 2005, p. 288)

In this model, the real-world experiences lead to the interpretations of the experienced world, which in turn lead to judgments concerning the experienced world. The judgments may modify the standards, norms, and values, and also lead to action. The action can change the real-world experience and may modify the standards, norms, and values.

Interpretations of real-world experiences, or observations, are important elements of the research world. These serve as input for analysis and theory formulation. Observations however are not neutral or objective as they are often assumed to be. Those who aspire to enter the research world need to be aware of at least two major aspects of observations:

* The historical aspect of observations denotes specific “observer traditions.” These are expressed through observation instruments, languages, conventions, etc.

* The political aspect of observations, the so-called "politics of perception," denotes issues of interests, power, and control which are part of the observational process.

Both of these aspects influence what gets observed and what are reported as observations. Both are institutionalised in the form of disciplines. Thus it is not surprising that often there is very little interaction among disciplines on account of the fact that they cannot agree on observations that are basic to the research process.

However the need to converse across various observer traditions has given rise to the increased attention to interdisciplinarity. Dalke, Grobstein, and McCormack (2006) explore this through metaphoric and metonymic ways of thinking: metaphoric means "relatedness in categories or other abstractions" and metonymic means "contiguous in space or time." While the metaphoric mode relates to theorists, the metonymic mode relates to observational scientists. Both the categories approach investigation with different tools and with different modes of evaluation.

The interplay between metaphoric and metonymic modes of thinking can also be conceptualised as a way of describing the interactions between the research world and the everyday world. The term synechdoche is introduced by Dalke and colleagues to better capture this interplay of the two modes of thinking. Synechdoche draws attention to the relationship between parts and the whole. From this perspective, metaphoric and metonymic thinking are not seen as opposing, but as analytic and synthetic forces that facilitate the creation of “surprises.”

References

Checkland, P. (2005). Webs of significance: The work of Geoffrey Vickers. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 22(4), 285-290.

Dalke, A., Grobstein, P., & McCormack, E. (2006). Theorizing interdisciplinarity: The evolution of new academic and intellectual communities. Retrieved June 21, 2006, from http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/local/scisoc/theorizing.html


Reported by Madhavi Latha Nandi, with inputs from Jacob D. Vakkayil, A. Govind Menon, and C. D. Kuruvilla (June 26, 2006).


Copyleft The article may be used freely, for a noncommercial purpose, as long as the original source is properly acknowledged.


Xavier Institute of Management, Xavier Square, Bhubaneswar 751013, India
Research World (ISSN 0974-2379) http://www1.ximb.ac.in/RW.nsf/pages/Home