CHAPTER 16 RESEARCH HANDBOOK 1. HOW DOES ONE VIEW SCIENCE AS A WHOLE? Viewed in totality in all its activities, science can be seen as a process and content of inquiry of research which asks and answers basic questions about nature. Inquiry into nature focuses upon the questions: what things exist in nature and how do these things interact? Science as inquiry can be characterized by four kinds of activities which address the following questions: 1. Of what is the universe made? This is the basic question about nature. We can call this activity about the content of nature as scientific content (ontology). Scientific content expresses the current state of knowledge in science about the nature of the observable world. 2. How do we know this? This is the basic question about method. Science now answers that question with the methods of science in experimentally-grounded theory. We can call this scientific method (epistemology). Scientific method proposes the proper philosophical approach (methodology) as a set of research tasks in the process of advancing knowledge. 3. What procedures and resources are necessary to inquire into nature, to use scientific epistemology? This is the basic question about the methodological approach and organizational resources needed to conduct scientific research. We can call this science administration (research). Science administration organizationally funds and/or performs research in the methodological forms of scientific inquiry -- as research proposals. 4. Why is science useful to society? This is the basic question about the value of science to human civilization. Science is practical to society by providing a knowledge base for technological innovation. We can call this scientific application (technology). Science administration organizationally funds and/or performs the process of advancing knowledge in terms of research tasks. 2. WHAT ARE THE INTELLECTUAL FRAMEWORKS OF SCIENCE? A ‘scientific paradigm’ is an 'intellectual-framework-behind-scientific-theories'. A scientific paradigm does not describe the 'details of research' at the cutting edge of disciplinary specialties. Instead, a paradigm describes the meta-theory, the framework, in which the research details (experimental formulation and theory) are constructed. A paradigm is an intellectual framework within which the scientists observe, describe, and explain nature. A paradigm is a ‘meta-logic’ to the ‘logic’ in a theory -- a kind of 'meta-theory' to the theories in a scientific discipline. The four paradigms used in science as 'meta-theories' are: Mechanism, Function, System, and Logic. 3. WHAT IS SCIENTIFIC METHOD? Scientific method focuses upon the construction of theory to explain nature and grounded int he experimental observation of nature. The process of scientific inquiry is not linear, going directly either from empiricism-to-theory nor theory-to-empiricism. Instead in the history of science, scientific progress has proceeded circularly in the logic of empiricism and theory, going around and around. Yet even in a circular interaction between experiment and theory, a basic premise of scientific inquiry is that nature be observable. Or conversely, science only studies what is observable in nature. Empiricism in science is grounded in observing nature. Theory is grounded in the empirical observations of nature. Figure 4.1 lists the different methodological techniques in the empiricism and theoretical aspects of scientific research: Experiment is the controlled observation of nature, experiencing nature through the human senses aided by scientific instruments. Instrument is a device which provides a means of extending the range and sensitivity of human sensing of nature. Measurement is an instrumental technique in observing nature that results in quantitative data about the phenomenal thing. Perceptual Space is conceptual framework within which a natural phenomenon is described. Analysis is inferring a mathematical pattern in the quantitative data of a set of experiments. Phenomenological Law is a generalization of relationships observed between natural objects. Model is a symbolic simulation of the processes of a phenomenal object. Theory is a symbolic description and explanation of a phenomenal field of objects. In any scientific event, one can identify the kinds or research techniques to advance science. For example, we saw in the previous case of Copernicus-to-Newton, that there were several research techniques used. 4. WHAT ROLE DOES MODELING PLAY IN SCIENTIFIC METHOD? Scientific models play an important role in theory construction. Models construct a formal abstraction and generalization (theoretical model) of the object to derive the observed properties and relationships and phenomenological laws of natural objects. The empiricism of the object interacts with the construction of its theoretical model as an intermediary in connecting empiricism to theory. In the example of Bohr's quantized atom model and the subsequent development of quantum theory, we saw how the atomic spectrum of the hydrogen atom (Rydberg's phenomenological law) was important to Bohr in his construction and validation of his quantum model of Rutherford's atom. Next, building upon Bohr's model, Heisenberg, Born, and Jordan constructed a matrix-version of quantum theory, soon followed by Schrodinger's wave-version of quantum theory. . Particularly important types of social science models are: (1) topological connective, (3) topological flow, (4) dynamic systems, and (5) optimization models. 5. HOW DOES METHODOLOGY DIFFER BETWEEN SOCIAL AND PHYSICAL SCIENCES? One difference between scientific disciplines is that the scientific paradigm of Mechanism is central to that physics and biology but not to mathematics and social science. In contrast, the scientific paradigm of Logic is central to mathematics and socials science but not to physics and biology. Moreover, the scientific paradigm of Function is only shared by biology and social science, and not used in physics or mathematics. However, the scientific paradigm of Systems is used by all the disciplines. A second difference is in phenomenological laws. Only the physical and biological sciences have causal explanations, phenomenological laws of cause and effect. Mathematics and social science do not use causality in explanation, instead using prescriptive or thematic explanations. A third difference is in objectivity. The physical science disciplines can achieve theory of absolute objectivity, knowledge of a physical object independent of context and observer (the principle of invariance in the formulation of physical theory). In contrast, social science disciplines can achieve theory only partly and temporarily nearly-objective. Social science theory is context-dependent and influenced by the values of the observer. Physical science attains 'value-free' and empirically-grounded theory. Social science attains 'value-loaded' and both empirically-and-normatively-grounded theory. All social science laws and theory use prescriptive (N&S) and/or thematic (N&S) explanations, being thus contextually dependent (requiring additional explanation for sufficiency). The causal and value-free methodology of the physical sciences gives only facts (empirical judgments), while the value-laden methodology of the social science must yield both empirical and normative judgments (facts and prescriptions). Observation of social phenomenon can see not only the action by an actor in a social phenomenon but see the motivation of the actor. Social science ‘laws’ observed in social behavior characterize both empirical events and normative meaning of events. The methodological challenge to the social sciences is to make and maintain a clear distinction between empirical observations and normative judgments: between what-is and what-ought-to-be. Even in the selection of a social-science-object-to-study, there is some prior evaluative concern about the importance of the topic as chosen by an observer, a subjectivity in topic selection. Schools of the social science disciplines have often divided into schools of idealism and realism ; and this has been due to the methodological issue of empirical and normative judgments in social science observation. Value-laden social science can be the most important method for learning about the objectivity of value (universal values) in modern life. Modern social science is essential to social progress in society, if it can successfully prescribe improved rationality for organized social activities (ethical rationality) Social science can use 'ideal-type' social theory, which is a generalization of the principles-of -order that a society thinks it should be operating in a given historical situation. An ideal type in social theory is an abstraction of the universal intentions of a society. Universal intentions in an Ideal-type are expressed as principles-of-order to guide social behavior. In the social sciences, the application of social science knowledge may always potentially alter social nature through consulting practice. In consulting practice, the observed participant-values (intentions) can be temporally and partially separated from the value judgments by the social science practitioner on these intentions. And in such a partial separation there can be a temporary distinction between participants' values and an observer's values. It is this kind of methodological partial-separation of empiricism from normative judgment that makes the kinds of business and policy and practitioner operations of social science professors useful to their clients. In the empirical description of what a client is doing (action) and in thinking what the action is accomplishing (purpose) may occur an unintended consequence for the client (unintended by the client's own intentions) and also unrecognized by the client. Empirical observations by a practitioner, on the consequences of a client's action, may show that the client's actions may not be attaining the client's intention. In such a case, a practitioner might suggest a different course-of-action to the client: a prescription for action. If such a prescription is science based, it is more likely to prove technically effective than when not science based. 6. HOW DOES ONE MANAGE A RESEARCH PROJECT IN A UNIVERSITY? Since the German reform of universities in 1800, professors in research universities are paid salaries for educational services but are selected for research skills and the ability to obtain external research funding. In the university, the research manager is a professor. Research requires external funding, and most universities restrict the submission of proposals for external funding to faculty. External funding is required to support graduate students who perform the research, research labor. Managing research therefore requires a professor to: (1) methodologically conceive the experiment and write a research proposal, (2) submit the proposal to an external agency and win external research funding, (3) hire graduate students to perform the research, (4) supervise the graduate students. 7. HOW CAN ONE IDENTIFY A RESEARCH ISSUE? A research proposal should first define the research issue of the proposed project and should identify all the relevant recent articles in scientific journal that together describe the frontier of science (or state-of-art of technology) in the area of the research. The issue is an opportunity to advance that knowledge. Books on a topic do not get one to the frontiers of knowledge, only recent articles in scholarly journals depict the recent frontiers of knowledge. Scientific communication is an essential procedural feature of science; and for this purpose scientific societies were organized. As science evolved from the 1600s in Europe, the organization of a 'scientific society' also evolved. The mission of a 'scientific society' is to facilitate scientific communication, through scientific meetings and journals. The formation of a society is an important step in the emergence of a new discipline or sub-discipline. To find a research issue, focus upon some aspect of a topic about nature. Then find journals which publish research on that aspect of nature. Go back five years in each journal and select articles relevant to the topic. Abstract a paragraph from each relevant article about what the research therein contributed to knowledge about the topic. Summarize the present state of knowledge and identify some yet puzzling aspect of that natural topic which should and could be studied. Imagine how you could study this. If you can identify a research issue yet puzzling at the frontier of research and how you could study this, you have a research issue.. 8. HOW CAN ONE WRITE A PERSUASIVE RESEARCH PROPOSAL?. In a proposal, the question asked about nature is the research issue of the proposal. The way the question will be answered is the scientific method of the proposal. The answer will be of what value to whom, research impact? A scientific research proposal for a research grant should clearly pose: (1) a scientific or technical vision of a research issue, (2) how the research can be performed in research methodology, and (3) potential use of the research results as research impact. The format of a research proposal should first address the four criteria of research vision, research methodology, research team, and research impact: Research Issue -- Vision. What is the frontier-of-science and/or state-of-art-in-technology in the specific research field? What are the issues or challenges or barriers to scientific/technical progress in the field? Which of these issues/challenges/barriers (research issues) will the research project address? Research Methodology. What research techniques will be used to address these? Research Team. What kinds of skills will be required in the methodology. Which members of the research team will provided these. Research Equipment. What research instruments will be needed to perform the research? How will these be accessed or purchased? Research Impact. How would successful results of the proposed project contribute to the advancements of knowledge and/or used on important problems? How will such progress be communicated or implemented to and for whom? 6. Research Budget a. What funding amount is requested for the project and for how long? 9. HOW SHOULD ONE MANAGE A RESEARCH CENTER IN A UNIVERSITY? A research center may be needed to add together enough for 'pieces' of research to attain scientific progress. There are two sizes of 'research projects' now in university research: (1) doctoral-size research project and (2) a group of research projects (critical mass of projects). The first is necessary for the university integration of education and research. The second is necessary for the advancement of scientific progress in a 'critical mass' of a research effort. The idea of a 'critical mass' of research efforts (a group of research projects) may be necessary for significant scientific progress in a university setting, requiring a university research center. A research center director must have a methodological capability of envisioning a research issue and the proper methodological direction of research for scientific and technological progress. A research director must transform this research vision into a concrete research plan by assembling a team of researchers who can formulate research projects along the methodological direction of the research issue, a strategic research plan for the center. Methodology in center research lies in envisioning a multi-disciplinary research issue, and organization in center research lies in assembling a proper multi-disciplinary research team with projects about the research issue. Although a multidisciplinary research center has an overriding vision of its strategic research issue, yet this is implemented as a portfolio of research projects. The projects in a university research center are pieces of a larger research vision of the center. The management role of the faculty research-group leaders in the center is to formulate research projects and guide doctoral candidates in performing the research projects. The role of the director is to ensure that all the research projects add up to a 'critical mass' of research to advance science and technology -- toward the strategic research issue of the center. In the science-technology interaction, research for technology cannot be planned until after a basic technological invention has occurred. After the basic technology invention, research then can be planned by focusing on the generic technology system, production processes, or underlying physical phenomena. Technology-focused-and-targeted basic research can be planned for: Generic technology systems and subsystems for product systems Generic technology systems and subsystems for production systems Physical phenomena underlying the technology systems and subsystems for product systems and for production systems. Research can be targeted to improve a technology system through improving any aspect of the system: Improved components Improved connections Improved materials Improved power and energy Improved system control Improved system boundary The physical phenomena underlying a system can be focused on any of the system aspects: Phenomena involved in the system boundary Phenomena underlying components Phenomena underlying connections Phenomena underlying materials Phenomena underlying power and energy Phenomena underlying system control. 10. HOW CAN SCIENCE RESEARCH BE EFFECTIVELY TRANSFERRED TO TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH? Industrial researchers are very sophisticated about current technology and, in particular, about its problems and locating and identifying the roadblocks to technical progress. However, because of the applied and developmental demands on industrial research, they have limited time and resources to explore ways to leapfrog current technical limitations. On the other hand, academic researchers have time, resources, and students to explore fundamentally new approaches and alternatives that leapfrog technologies. Together, industry and university researchers can see how to effectively bound a technological system in order to envision a next generation of technology (NGT). This boundary is an important judgment, combining judgments (1) on technical progress and research directions which together might produce a major advance and (2) over the domain of industrial organization that such an advance might produce a significant competitive advantage. (Betz, 1996) To effect industry and university research cooperation on next-generation-technology innovation, a bridging institution is necessary, because industries and universities live in almost completely different universes. The industrial universe is a world of technology, short-term focus, profitability, and markets. In contrast, the university universe is a world of science, long-term view, philanthropy, and students. This is the role of a university research center to bridge the two views, creating a balance between (1) technologically pulled research and scientifically pushed research, (2) short-term and long-term research focus, (3) proprietary and nonproprietary research information, and (4) vocationally relevant education and professionally skilled education. These are the issues inherent in industry and university cooperation. Properly handled, these provide creative tension: Linking technology and science in real-time operation Creating progress in knowledge and developing the technological competitiveness of nations. 11. HOW SHOULD A RESEARCH AGENCY PLAN A RESEARCH-FUNDING PROGRAM? To obtain money to fund research, a government research-funding agency is budgeted through a government budget. An agency budget is then divided among agency research programs which give out research grants and/or contracts. To obtain a research budget from the government, a research-funding agency must submit annual budget plans with research strategies. A science/technology funding agecy can use strategic research issues, planned as interactions between nature, problems, invention, and systems research. Strategic program initiatives can connect (1) progress in the science of nature for improved systems representation, (2) progress in science for improved problem analysis, (3) & (4) inventions of new technologies for improved instrumentation and techniques for science, and (5) invention of new technologies to solve problems. Science-roadmaps can facilitate the planning of research program initiatives based upon scientific opportunities to improve the understanding of nature underlying societal problems and applications. The term of 'technology-roadmap' is often used by research funding agneices to describe the technical benefits from funding scientific and technology research. 12. HOW SHOULD OFFICERS IN A RESEARCH AGENCY MANAGE A RESEARCH-FUNDING PROGRAM? A large research-funding government agency organizes into directorates and then intro divisions and then into research programs. Research proposals from universities and/or companies are electronically submitted to the research programs for research grants and/or contracts. These proposals are reviewed for research quality and relevance by means of peer reviews. A program office conducts the peer review process and recommends upon an award or declination for a proposal. The professional responsibilities of the program officer are: (1) Read the proposal and identify the proper kinds of scientific expertise to review the research quality of the proposal; (2) Select peer reviewers in academic, governmental, or industrial research positions who have published in the areas of expertise and are qualified to judge the research quality; (3) Electronically forward a copy of the research proposals with a request to review the research proposal with a proper regard to confidentiality of information in the proposal; (4) Receive the reviews and upon the advice in the review decide whether or not the proposal should be funded (graded as an excellent proposal, very good, good, fair, or poor proposal); (5) Allocate a grant budget to those of the excellent and very good proposals the program officer decides to fund and can fund within the program budget; (6) In some programs, a Program Officer will use an external panel (selected by the program officer to offer funding advice) which will meet under the auspice of the Program Officer and will offer funding advice by ranking in terms of quality the reviewed research proposals, and then the Program Officer on this advice allocates funds to proposals (projects or centers) within the program budget constraint (7) Forward recommended proposals for grants to the Division Director overseeing the program; (8) Upon approval by the Division Director, the proposals to be funded as research grants are sent to the NSF Division of Grants in the Directorate of Budget, Finance & Award Management; (9) The Division of Grants then notifies the Professor and University administration (for each approved proposal) that a research grant based upon the proposal will be awarded for a certain amount to begin by a certain date; (10) After formal notification of the award, the University administration establishes a research budget line upon which the Professor can draw to fund and begin the research project; (12) As research progresses in the project, the Professor sends any required progress reports to NSF and the University administration sends requests for reimbursement of research spent on the grant. For example, the review process in NSF was shown in Figure 1.3. PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 11