THE UNITED NATIONS' RESEARCH INITIATIVE- TDR GLOBAL HAS AWARDED RECOGNITION TO KONNIFEL'S RESEARCH INTERNSHIP PROGRAMME AND MENTORSHIP PROGRAMME
THE UNITED NATIONS' RESEARCH INITIATIVE- TDR GLOBAL HAS AWARDED RECOGNITION TO KONNIFEL'S RESEARCH INTERNSHIP PROGRAMME AND MENTORSHIP PROGRAMME
Research is serious business and it must be conducted in a scientific and systematic manner. The researcher then undertakes a tough endeavour, that to stay neutral and objective and rise above their own biases. It is almost impossible to conduct a study without some degree of research bias but awareness about the same can minimise it for best results. In that light, consider this section as a cautionary aid that may guide you to recognize your own biases, motivations and reasonings that may potentially affect your research, so you can minimise them.
This occurs when due to a flaw in the sample selection process, a subset of the data is excluded from the study, thereby impacting or negating the statistical significance of the test. In simple words, imagine you're judging a pie contest, but you only taste the first slice from each pie. You might miss hidden gems in the middle or burnt crusts on the bottom. That's selection bias - choosing a sample that doesn't represent the whole picture, leading to misleading conclusions.
This occurs when due to a flaw in the sample selection process, a subset of the data is excluded from the study, thereby impacting or negating the statistical significance of the test. In simple words, imagine you're judging a pie contest, but you only taste the first slice from each pie. You might miss hidden gems in the middle or burnt crusts on the bottom. That's selection bias - choosing a sample that doesn't represent the whole picture, leading to misleading conclusions.
This occurs when you rely too heavily on an initial piece of information when making subsequent judgments. It can influence how you evaluate new evidence and lead to inaccurate conclusions. For your understanding, let's say you're at a car dealership to buy a new car. The salesperson starts the negotiation from a price that is much higher than you expected, let's say Rs 45L. Even though you know the car's market value is around Rs 15L, the salesperson's initial price of Rs 45L anchors your perception of what the car is worth. Now even if the salesperson lowers the price to Rs 35L, it still seems like a good deal because it is lower than the initial anchor, even though it's still higher than the car's actual value. This anchoring bias influences your perception and decision-making, causing you to accept a higher price than you initially intended simply because of the initial anchor set by the salesperson. Thus, this anchoring bias in research can lead to distorted results as you focus more on the initial piece of information instead of the entirety of content.
This bias stems from the tendency for journals to publish studies with statistically significant results (often positive findings) over null results (no significant effect seen between the variables that we set out to study ). This creates an incomplete picture of the research landscape and can overestimate the effectiveness of interventions or the prevalence of certain phenomena. Let’s take it back to the pie example, if you were to judge the pies based on just the way they look, ignoring the taste, then this creates a skewed view of reality ignoring significant evidence.
This arises from the researcher's own personal beliefs, expectations, or experiences unconsciously influencing their research design, data collection, or analysis. This can manifest in subtle ways, like framing questions in a leading manner or interpreting data in a way that aligns with their preconceived notions.
The source of research funding can introduce bias if it influences the research question, methodology, or interpretation of results. For example, studies funded by companies may be more likely to favour their products or services.
Furthermore, research is not conducted in a vacuum. External values, such as human welfare and social responsibility, guide researchers to consider the wider implications of their work, and navigating morals and ethics is a major responsibility of a researcher wherein every researcher is to draw their own boundaries.
Imagine a hypothetical scenario where you’re tasked to come up with a vaccine for an unknown virus, which could potentially lead to an outbreak and risk the lives of millions, but since it's unethical to expose people to a highly lethal virus, you are using humanity's closest biological relatives i.e monkeys as research subjects. However, this path is riddled with ethical landmines. Is harming these creatures justified to protect humanity from a potential threat? What would you do as a scientist faced with this very real scenario? The researcher might fall prey to the allure of the Hero Complex, a potent psychological force fueled by the desire to be humanity's saviour. This drive to conquer a potentially devastating disease and protect lives is undoubtedly noble. However, within this ambition lies a double-edged sword, the potential glory of success can be intoxicating, making the ethical considerations seem less significant in comparison. The crucial point is to move beyond simplistic categorizations and delve into the nuances of individual beliefs. Someone who values animal rights might not automatically reject all animal research but might advocate for stricter ethical guidelines and prioritise alternative methods whenever possible. Whenever in doubt a researcher can engage in respectful discussions with colleagues and superiors with varying viewpoints. This fosters a deeper understanding of the complex issues and helps identify potential blind spots in your own perspective. Additionally researchers can always seek the guidance of regulatory bodies like institutional review boards (IRBs) and ethics committees, that are established to help researchers navigate ethical challenges and ensure responsible research practices.
Research is an enduring journey of learning and unlearning. Perfection is always hard to achieve, is easier said than done and that’s okay! What’s important is to try your best. So, try your best to be neutral in all your research endeavours and balance your ethical values with the quest of discovery and as you grow in experience, it’ll become a much smoother process for you
