introduction to research methodology and ethical considerations

WEEK 1
INTRODUCTION TO
RESEARCH &
ETHICAL
CONSIDERATIONS
EDUC 6041
Research Methods in Applied Linguistics
Semester 1, 2021

Agenda
Unit introduction
What is Research?
Research in Applied Linguistics
Philosophical Assumptions & Epistemological
Worldviews
Ethical Considerations in Applied Linguistics
Assignments

Introduction
This unit aims to equip post-graduate/HDR students in
Applied Linguistics with the knowledge, design and
methods related to conducting research across areas in
TESOL, SLA, Applied Linguistics and Language Education.
Throughout this unit, you will have the chance to engage
in the philosophical dialogues surrounding different
research paradigms, explore various research
methodologies, raise awareness of ethical and research
design issues, and finally, pull it all together in your
research proposal.
You will also start to critically reflect on how each
epistemological paradigm is developed and informs
your chosen research design, how to make critical and
meaningful inquiries into your research, and how to
use different strategies in your research toolbox to
design a solid and rigorous research proposal.

Unit Logistics
• Check the unit outline for detailed information about
the learning resources, assessments, and program
calendar.
• Frequent the unit Blackboard (BB) site on a weekly
basis for lecture materials, activities and resources.
• You need to get Paltridge & Phakiti’s (2015)
textbook; the other readings are accessible via the
Reading List (see “Getting Started” on BB)
• Assessment guidelines and marking criteria are
included on BB and you should submit each
assignment via Turnitin before/on the due date.
• We will use in-class discussion, supplemented by
unit discussion board, to share/exchange
information about the unit logistics, such as inquiries
about the assignments, materials, resources, etc.

What is
research?
Can you define it in your own
words?
Accordingly, what is research
design?

DEFINITION:
RESEARCH
“a systematic approach to finding answers to a
question” (Mackey & Gass, 2016, p. 27)
“a systematic process of inquiry consisting of
three elements or components: (1) a question,
problem or hypothesis; (2) data; and (3) analysis;
and interpretation of data” (Nunan, 1992, p. 3)
“…an activity every one of us does all the time to
learn more about the world around us” (Dornyei,
2007, p. 15)
• (Mackey & Gass, 2016; Phakiti & Paltridge, 2015)

DEFINITION:
RESEARCH
(cont’d)
Research is to systematically investigate something
(everyday problem) in order to answer the
inquiries that will further advance our
understanding and contribute to existing
knowledge in the field pertaining to your research
area.
So you will pose a question(s), collect, analyse data
and use your results to answer the question(s).
Your research may
❖Provide insights into the researched
questions
❖Fill the gap in existing knowledge
❖Test the theory
❖Verify previous studies
❖Offer implications for research and
practice

Applied
Linguistics
❖ “an interdisciplinary field of study that aims to understand the
multifaceted roles and nature of language use and/or language
problems in social contexts”
❖“draw on a range of theories and research methodologies not only
from linguistics, but also from other disciplines such as education,
psychology, and sociology”
❖“understanding how language is used or leant as well as what
problems or difficulties people face when using language to
communicate in a variety of situations and contexts”
❖“understand the roles of individuals and real-world contexts affecting
the nature of language learning or use generally or in a particular
context”
❖“reduce or minimize issues concerning unfairness or inequality
among people due to language-related issues and barriers”
❖Areas: SLA, language teaching and learning, ESP, language
testing/assessment, sociolinguistics, language policy, CALL, critical
pedagogy, World Englishes, discourse analysis, bilingual education,
heritage language, pragmatics, action research, etc.
(Phakiti & Paltridge, 2015)

Research in
Applied
Linguistics
❖Primary: empirical data needed to be gathered
using instruments in order to answer the research
question(s)
❖Secondary: gaining information about the current
status of existing theories and knowledge in a
particular research area; similar to a systematic
review of the literature that could form the
foundation of a primary research study
❖Cross-sectional: data collected from one or more
cohorts at a single point in time or short period of
time; snapshot of data collection (one-shot)
❖Longitudinal: data collected from the participants
over a period of time in order to observe
developmental changes in learning behaviours
❖Replication: “to discover whether the same
findings are obtained by another research in
another context” (Porte, 2012, p. 3)

Research in
Applied
Linguistics
(cont’d)
Quantitative
Seeking to determine the relationship between variables
by manipulating/controlling conditions of learning using
standardizing instruments and data collection procedures
to answer research questions and hypotheses.
A large sample size is generally the goal in order to make
better inferences and generalizations to the bigger
populations by means of statistical analysis.

Research in
Applied
Linguistics
(cont’d)
Qualitative
Seeking to make sense of language learning or use in
context or a phenomenon naturally occurring in a social,
class setting. Instead of “controlling” a learning condition
or context, it stresses the importance of understanding
the insights of the meaning making process gained from
the participants’ perspectives.
Unobtrusive observations, interviews and documents are
gathered from the sociocultural setting where the
learning activities take place. Interpretations about the
investigated phenomenon are made through the thick
description approach.

Research in
Applied
Linguistics
(cont’d)
Mixed methods
Seeking to use the complementing strengths of
both quantitative and qualitative research
designs in order to maximize the understanding
of the phenomenon under research.
It is complex in ways that a researcher needs to
justify why mixed methods research is
conducted by providing a rationale of specific
research paradigms that guide the phases of its
implementation (e.g., parallel or sequential).
we’ll talk more
about the
characteristics of
the three types
of research in
session 2

TUTORIAL 1
Share your professional
interests and concerns:
What kind of work are
you doing now, have
done, or will do related
to ESL/EFL/FL education?
What are some burning
questions you would like
to seek answers for
regarding your work,
concerns, and interests?
Come up with some
possibilities for research
based on your previous
discussions.

Definitions of Philosophical Assumptions
Before we start, can you try to define each term below in your own
words?
Paradigm
Ontology
Epistemology
Methodology

Definitions
❖Paradigm:
“The basic belief system or worldview that guides the
investigator, not only in choices of method but in
ontologically and epistemologically fundamental ways”
(Guba & Lincoln, 1998, p. 105); “the underlying
philosophical view of what constitutes knowledge or
reality…and directs researchers to collect data and/or
evidence that can be viewed as valid, legitimate or
trustworthy” (Paltridge & Phakiti, 2015, p. 15).
❖Ontology:
Philosophical inquiry into the nature of reality (what is there
and what can be known about how things really are and
work?)
❖Epistemology:
The study of what accounts for “knowledge” (how
knowledge is known and what is the relationship between
the inquirer and the researched?)
❖Methodology:
The process of finding answers to the research inquiries
using appropriate and relevant methods

Your worldview(s) (philosophical
assumptions or inquiry paradigms)
will inform your research
problem(s), frame your research
approach(es) and guide your
research method(s).
As such, it is important to first
reflect on the worldview(s) that you
bring with you before embarking on
your research journey.
(Creswell, 2014, p. 5)

Worldview:
POSTPOSITIVISM
• A single, universal truth exists beyond ourselves.
• The claim that reality (truth) is absolute with
certainty cannot be held anymore.
• It admits fallibility but the reality can still be
constructed through the “scientific method” (i.e.,
hypothesis testing using statistical procedures).
• It is the knowledge claim upon which most
quantitative research is based.

Worldview: SOCIAL
CONSTRUCTIVISM

Worldview: CRITICAL
THEORY (FEMINISM,
RACE, QUEER)

TUTORIAL 2 – Fill in the blanks
Interpretive
Framework
Ontology
(the nature of reality)
Epistemology
(how reality is known)
Axiology
(role of values)
Methodology
(approach to inquiry)
Positivist Realism: Reality is ‘out there’ and can
be known; hypothetical linear or cause-
effect relationships
Postpositivist Reality can only be approximated. But it is
constructed through research and statistics.
Interaction with research subjects is kept to a
minimum. Validity comes from peers, not
participants.
Social
constructivist
Individual values are
honoured and negotiated
among individuals.
Critical (race,
feminist,
queer)
Start with assumptions of power and identity
struggles, document them, and call for action and
change.
Pragmatic Reality is what is useful, is practical,
and works.
Reality is known through using many tools of
research that reflect both deductive (objective)
evidence and inductive (subjective) evidence.
Values are discussed because
of the way that knowledge
reflects both the researchers’
and the participants’ views.
The research process involves both quantitative
and qualitative approaches to data collection
and analysis.

PUT IT ALL TOGETHER:
INTERPRETIVE FRAMEWORK AND ASSOCIATED BELIEFS
(CRESWELL, 2013, PP. 36-37; PALTRIDGE & PHAKITI, 2015, P. 21)
Interpretive
Framework
Ontology
(the nature of reality)
Epistemology
(how reality is known)
Axiology
(role of values)
Methodology
(approach to inquiry)
Positivist Realism: Reality is ‘out there’ and can
be known; hypothetical linear or cause-
effect relationships
Objective; context- and value-free; to prove or
test theory; generalise findings; to establish
universal theory
Researcher’s biases need to
be controlled and not
expressed in a study
Control and manipulation of variables, testing
and measurement of variables, quantitative
research methods such as experimental, survey,
statistical research; quantitative instruments (e.g.,
tests, questionnaires); stress reliability and
validity of measurement and analysis.
Postpositivist A single reality exists beyond ourselves,
“out there.” Researcher may not be
able to understand it or get to it
because of lack of absolutes.
Reality can only be approximated. But it is
constructed through research and statistics.
Interaction with research subjects is kept to a
minimum. Validity comes from peers, not
participants.
Researcher’s biases need to
be controlled and not
expressed in a study
Similar to positivism, but modified quantitative
research designs; multiple strategies (including
qualitative techniques, but must be objective)
Social
constructivist
Multiple realities are constructed
through our lived experiences and
interactions with others.
Reality is co-constructed between the
researcher and the researched and shaped by
individual experiences.
Individual values are
honoured and negotiated
among individuals.
More of a literacy style of writing used. Use of
an inductive method of emergent ideas (through
consensus obtained through methods, e.g.,
interviewing, observing, textual analysis)
Critical (race,
feminist,
queer)
Reality is based on power and identity
struggles. Privilege or oppression based
on race or ethnicity, class, gender,
mental abilities, sexual preferences.
Reality is known through the study of social
structures, freedom, and oppression, power,
and control. Reality can be changed through
research.
Diversity of values is
emphasized within the
standpoint of various
communities.
Start with assumptions of power and identity
struggles, document them, and call for action and
change.
Pragmatic Reality is what is useful, is practical,
and works.
Reality is known through using many tools of
research that reflect both deductive (objective)
evidence and inductive (subjective) evidence.
Values are discussed because
of the way that knowledge
reflects both the researchers’
and the participants’ views.
The research process involves both quantitative
and qualitative approaches to data collection
and analysis.

TUTORIAL 3
ISSUE 1: Objectivity vs. Subjectivity
Positivists argue that researchers’ observations of the world
should be “neutral, pure and uncontaminated” by
interpretive/theoretical assumptions and values. On the
contrary, social constructivists claim that observation is
always value/theory-laden, drawn from the
interpretive/conceptual values and interests researchers
bring with them.
Is subjectivity really a big no-no that needs to be avoided?
Can objectivity guarantee truth?
These two contradictory views between both positivist and
social constructivist camps are still a heated debate. Which
claim do you stand by? Please make a case for your
argument.
ISSUE 2: Your Epistemological Camp
Among all the epistemological families (i.e.,
positivism, postpositivism, social constructivism, critical
theory and pragmatism) that have been introduced,
which epistemological family do you belong to or is
related to your field of study?
Please share with your class your understanding of
this epistemological family that resonates with you,
regarding its central concepts, characteristics in
research and how it frames your study.

ETHICS in Applied
Linguistics Research
❖ What is ethics?
❖ Why ethics?
❖ Ethical issues, dilemmas and considerations
❖ Informed consent, ethical principles and
guidelines
❖ Australian Association for Research in
Education (AARE)
❖ Curtin Human Research Ethics Committee
(HREC)
❖ Academic Integrity

WHAT IS ETHICS
(MORALS)?
• Generally referred to as guidelines
(codes of conduct) that allow us to
distinguish “good” (professionally
acceptable) behaviour from “bad”
behaviour, or simply means “doing what
is right, treating people fairly, and not
hurting anyone” (Lichtman, 2009, p. 53).
• In the research and professional
communities, ethics refers to a set of
rules and standards that govern
behaviour of an investigator who
conducts research involving “human
subjects”. Rules such as researcher
responsibility, principles of fairness, and
integrity should be complied.

WHY ETHICS
• Since research in the field of Applied
Linguistics generally involves collecting data
from “human subjects” (informants;
participants), researchers are responsible to
protect and respect their participants with
integrity.
• Misconducts, risks and ethical dilemmas
anticipated in the research study should be
addressed, coped with and minimized.
• Codes of conduct relating to research ethics
are adopted by a particular professional
entity (e.g., institution, government agency,
university, research association). Before a
study can be conducted, ethical application
should be approved by the ethical board and
be abided by throughout the study (during,
after).

RISK
• All researchers (regardless of being
qualitative or quantitative) need to
anticipate and assess the potential for
risk that may cause human rights
violations. For instance, participants
might disclose confidential knowledge or
information that is likely to expose them
to the risk of being harmed physically or
psychologically.
• Your research may further “disempower”
your participants (i.e., put them in a
vulnerable situation due to the inherent
power relation). How will your research
“benefit” them?
It is the researcher’s responsibility to protect participants’
identity and mitigate the potential harm to the minimum.
Participants’ best interests should be always taken into great
consideration.

ETHICAL ISSUES
• As a researcher, what kind of potential
ethical issues would you anticipate in
your field of study? They may “sneak
into” each stage of your research
with/without your awareness…

ETHICAL
CONSIDERATIONS
HAVE YOU…
• pressured participants to sign the consent forms
(e.g., teacher vis-à-vis students)?
• informed participants of the purpose of the
study?
• declared any conflict of interest?
• refrained from deceptive practices and further
marginalizing your participants?
• respected participants and research site being
studied (e.g., sociocultural community)?
• shared information with participants (including
the researcher’s role) and allowed them to “have
a say” in your research?
• “exploited” your participants (e.g., taking too
much their time) without providing fair
reciprocity (i.e., to give back)?
• maintained their confidentiality?

CORE PRINCIPLES
• Respect for persons; Yielding optimal benefits while
minimizing harm; Justice
• These principles are shaped by a researcher’s paradigm
stance (e.g., positivist vs. constructivist), research
methodology (e.g., quant vs. quali), levels of individual
training and personality, and macro/microethics
• Quantitative researchers in the positivist camp usually follow
the rigorous ethical procedures and clearances whereas their
qualitative counterparts in the critical theory camp also
consider the issues of power relationship between the
researcher and participants and advocate the empowerment
of participants and social justice
• Macroethics: abiding by the codes of conduct mandated by
institutional ethics protocols and guidelines (best practices)
• Microethics: acknowledging ethical dilemmas arising from the
roles and responsibilities between the researchers and
participants in specific research contexts throughout the
research process
• Though it’s crucial for an AL researcher to adopt those
guidelines for best practices in conducting research, it’s also
important to be cognizant of the ethical dilemmas negotiated
between the stakeholders in particular researched settings
(De Costa, 2015, p. 245)

WHAT ETHICAL
ISSUES CAN ARISE IN
EACH RESEARCH
STAGE?
• Prior
• Beginning
• Collecting data
• Analysing data
• Reporting data
• Publishing data
“Practicing ethics is a complex
matter…Ethics has become a more
pervasive idea stretching from the origins of
a research study to its final completion and
distribution…[it] should be a primary
consideration rather than an afterthought”
(Creswell, 2012, p. 23)

ETHICAL PRACTICES AND TECHNIQUES
Before/At the outset of the study During data collection/analysis Reporting/Publishing data
Macroethics •protocols of institutional ethical review board
(e.g., IRB) need to be observed and co-
investigators for cross-national collaboration
need to be informed as well
•negotiating with/educating IRB that not all
research settings require the same forms of
consent
• consent forms made accessible and
comprehensible to participants with options of
multiple languages and oral consent provided
in compliance with local cultural practices
•Aware of the research bias that may sneak into
the process of data collection/analysis (e.g.,
prestige/self-deception/acquiescence bias)
•Transparent, rigorous and informed data
analyses contribute towards preserving the
ethical fibre of research (e.g., knowing the logic
behind statistical analysis standards and keeping
a research diary to document subjectivity in
qualitative research).
•Researchers’ responsibility regarding the uses
and misses of research results for unethical
purposes
•Being transparent when reporting data and
making data available for replication studies
•Avoid plagiarism (publish or perish), declare
conflicts of interest and respect academic
integrity
Microethics •Researchers cognizant of the time given up by
the participants and only collecting the data
addressing the research questions.
•ensuring the validity and reliability of the
instruments and data reduction with special
attention paid to the accessibility and
comprehensibility of the language and
instruments
•Weighing the potential ethical impact of
treatments on participants (pilot study)
•Building a mutually respectful relationship
(rapport) and acknowledging that the whole
research process is a social practice shaped by
both the researcher and participants (e.g.,
interview)
•Not only taking advantage of the participants
but also giving benefits back to the community by
building trust and social justice
•Making situated, microethical decisions that
supersede ethical codes (macroethics)
•Honestly reporting both statistical and practical
significance of research findings without
individual bias that fails to test SLA theory
•Dissemination of research findings selectively
without harming participants’ confidentiality but
honoring the information contributed by them
•Researchers balance macroethical guidelines
with reflective microethical practices at the
publication stage
(De Costa, 2015)

ETHICAL ISSUES IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
(CRESWELL, 2013, p. 58)

ETHICAL ISSUES IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
(CRESWELL, 2013, p. 59) APA 7th edition (2020)

LANGUAGE
When writing your findings (especially for
qualitative researchers), biased language and
tone, such as sexual/racial discrimination,
should be avoided.
How will you change the wordings below to
make them less prejudiced?
• “This student’s behaviour was typical of a
high school boy.”
• “There were 200 Latinos living in this area.”
• “All the subjects in this study….”
• “The woman physician….”

LANGUAGE (APA)
Check APA Publication Manual for the suggested
guidelines in language and writing style. Below are
modifications to the wordings in the previous
slide:
• “This student’s behaviour was typical of a high
school boy.”
-> The student’s behaviour was seen as “hyper”
according to his teacher (be neutral and specific)
• “There were 200 Latinos living in this area.”
->200 Mexicans…
• “All the subjects in this study….”
-> participants, informants
• “The woman physician….”
-> The physician

INFORMED CONSENT
• Researchers need to receive permission from the
participants being studied (sometimes
gatekeepers, i.e., minors’ guardians, school
principals, the authority in context) before data
can be collected. The consent form acknowledges
and specifies how participants’ rights will be
protected. It should include (Creswell, 2009, p.
89):
• Identification of the researcher, sponsoring
institution, research purpose, how the
participants are selected, type of participant
involvement and the benefits for their
participation
• Specification of the potential risks, how their
identity and confidentiality will be protected
• Assurance that they can withdraw at any time
(without being penalized, e.g., students)
• Names of the principal investigators and contacts
if concerns arise

DEALING WITH
MINORS
• Informed consent may be given by adults to
research involving such risk to themselves
• Minors should not be asked to consent to risks of
harm that cannot be remedied
• Educational researchers are not entitled to accept
the consent of parents or educational
administrators on behalf of minors
• For lesser risks, the consent of both guardians
and students should be sought
• If participants are too young to consent, research
should not carry any risk of harm, and the
consent of guardians should still be obtained

ETHICAL DILLEMAS
While trying to establish rapport with your
participants without getting too close to them, you
may still encounter ethical dilemmas, such as:
• Shall you still keep the information they reveal to you as
confidential or take action on their behalf when the
information is considered to be harmful to them if left
untold?
• Will you get the informed consent from the observed
people in a public space (e.g., supermarket)?
• Will you get the informed consent from members in an
online social networking space (e.g., a Facebook group, a
Fanfiction chat room) even if you’re just “lurking” or
observing surreptitiously?
There is no easy answer. It’s also contingent upon the
ethical review committee’s judgment. But your
conscientiousness, sensitivity and experience as a
qualitative researcher will shed light on your ethical
decision making—i.e., your moral compass will guide
you on the right track (see also those case studies in Lichtman,
2009 and Richards, 2002 for health services)

CONFIDENTIALITY
• Participants and informants have
the right to remain anonymous
• Their privacy should be protected
by the removal of identifying
descriptions from published data,
unless they explicitly waive their
rights
• These rights should not be
waived by minors, nor may their
guardians waive them for them

HARM TO GROUPS
Significant harms to the groups
being researched that should be
avoided include:
• Stereotyping
• The creation or reinforcement of
prejudice
• Loss of privacy and dignity
• Affront, for example as a result of
insensitivity
• Damage to the integrity of institutions
• Destruction of personal relations
• Destruction of inter-group relations

RESEARCH METHODS
• Researchers should recognise the uncertainty
of all claims to knowledge
• In particular they should recognise that
justifications for research methodologies
depend upon epistemological views which are
disputed and uncertain
• Where research results are presented in a
context where this is not well understood,
researchers should beware of presenting them
as though they were infallible
• They should declare the existence of alternative
professional opinions to their own. Responses
to those opinions should be honest and
measured

REPORTS OF
RESEARCH
• Reports of research should draw attention to the
limitations of the results, both in reliability and in
applicability
• Researchers should avoid and if necessary, act to
correct misuse of research and misunderstanding of its
scope and limitations
• They should not exaggerate the significance of their
results, nor misrepresent the practical or policy
implications
• This is particularly important where the results are for
widespread public consumption
• Researchers must not fabricate, falsify or intentionally
misrepresent evidence, data, findings or conclusions
• They should report their findings fully without
omission of significant data, disclosing details of their
theories, methods and research designs which might
bear upon interpretations of their findings
• They should report research conceptions, procedures,
results and analyses accurately in sufficient detail to
allow knowledgeable, trained researchers to
understand and interpret them

CURTIN HUMAN
RESEARCH ETHICS
COMMITTEE (HREC)
• To obtain ethics clearance (approval by an
ethics committee) for your research study, you
need to complete an Application for Ethics
Approval for Research Involving Humans (Form
A, granted by HREC) or an Application for
Approval of Research with Minimal Risk (Form
C, granted by the Faculty of Humanities
committee). All the application forms and
documents need to be completed and
submitted via InfoEd.
• Also refer to “Humanities HDR Handbook”
Welcome Pack Humanities Graduate Research Hub (curtin.edu.au)

CURTIN VALUES
Integrity
Act ethically,
honestly and fairly
• Honor
communities,
engender trust
through openness
honestly and
consistency; lead
by example and
act with due care;
make informed
decisions and be
accountable for
outcomes
Respect
Listen, value and
acknowledge
• Ensure safety, health,
and wellbeing are
paramount; act
professionally with
courtesy and
consideration of
others; give and be
responsible to
constructive feedback;
value diversity and
promote equity and
inclusion
Courage
Lead, take
responsibility and
question
•Embrace challenges
and opportunities
with ability and
purpose; support
intellectual freedom
and value bold ideas;
take ownership of
decisions and learn
from experience; live
our values and uphold
guiding principles
Excellence
Strive for
excellence and
distinction
• Reflect, learn,
improve; advance
creativity and
innovation; offer
exceptional levels
of service;
acknowledge
success and the
achievements of
others
Impact
Empower,
enable, inspire
• Deliver outcomes
that make a
difference;
inspire others to
fulfil their
potential; work
together to
achieve common
goals; build
partnerships that
create
opportunities

ACADEMIC INTEGRITY
• presenting the work/property of another as one’s own without appropriate
acknowledgment or referencing (e.g., all forms of digital and print sources, too
closely paraphrasing sentences, self-plagiarism)
• Three levels of plagiarism; to avoid plagiarism, special attention should be paid to
academic writing style in referencing, quoting and paraphrasing
Plagiarism
• Curtin students are subject to the Australian Copyright Act 1968 and Curtin’s
policies when it comes to using others’ intellectual property (e.g., only 10% of the
pages or one chapter in a book is allowed for copying)
Copyright
• An online text matching system that crosschecks text in a student’s assignment
with multiple databases or sources in any published form. Curtin uses Turnitin
as a means of screening plagiarism and ensuring academic integrity
Turnitin
• A conduct that is dishonest or unfair in relation to any academic work (e.g.,
cheating in exam, gaining additional help from another).
Academic
Misconduct

To protect academic integrity and avoid academic misconduct, please
refer to Curtin Student Guidelines for Avoiding Plagiarism to better
understand different types and levels of plagiarism and how to avoid it.

introduction to research methodology and ethical considerations

More Related Content

Similar to introduction to research methodology and ethical considerations (20)

More from trucn4 (7)

Recently uploaded (20)

introduction to research methodology and ethical considerations