Keeping Pets, Predicting Elections, Discovering CEO Practices: Three Ways of Looking at Research
Blake Sanz

On the evening of Wednesday, April 22, the Writing Program sponsored an event at Boettcher Auditorium in which faculty from different disciplines convened to discuss how they conduct research in their fields. The panel was designed as a way to show students how the skills theyre learning in their Academic Research classes (WRIT 1133) align and integrate with skills used across campus.

On the panel were Ingrid Tague, associate professor and chair of the Department of History department, Tom Knecht, assistant professor of Political Science, and Joan Winn, professor from the Daniels College of Business. Each spoke briefly about the kinds of research they do in their fields, after which students asked questions.

Ingrid Tague discussed the kinds of interpretive research that she does in researching pets and pet-keeping in 18th-century Britain. In doing so, she mentioned the importance, when reading texts, in determining whats useful and whats not. She also mentioned how important it is in formulating your research question that you dont just try to determine whether its interesting to you. You also have to strive, she said, to determine why the issue matters to people outside yourself, to people within your discipline.

Tom Knecht discussed the quantitative methods he uses. Though many think that numbers-based research is irrefutable, Knecht explained how bias can often creep into the data, despite what we might think about the objective nature of numbers. To demonstrate, he provided a scenario from his own work. Suppose, he said, that we wanted to hypothesize that there is a connection between the strength of the economy and the likelihood of incumbents winning elections. Depending on how a researcher measured strength of the economy, the results might vary.

In discussing her qualitative work interviewing female CEOs of Czech companies, Joan Winn developed Knechts ideas on bias. She told a story about an interview she conducted with a particular Czech female executive, with whom she happened to hold much in common. Throughout the interview, they spoke at length about professional matters but also about the womans children, her family life, the world outside her job. After it was over, Winns graduate student expressed amazement at how much information shed received, commenting at how the subject had revealed so much to Winn that she never would have revealed to the graduate student. Winns point in telling the story: bias can exist not only in how you ask a question or how you define a term but also simply by who you are and what the nature of your dynamic is with those youre interviewing. Ultimately, Winn concluded, it is impossible to research and write without bias. You must strive to recognize your bias and account for it in your writing.

Following their remarks, the panelists took questions from the student audience regarding research methods and gave tips on how best to conduct and write from research. Prompted by students, the panelists weighed in on such issues as how to tell if a source is reliable and why they favor the kinds of research they conduct.

The exchange gave students a chance to see the different ways that research can be conducted at the university level and gave the panelists the chance to juxtapose their own methods against those of their colleagues.

The Point Front Page