DT>Then you are saying that a "study" can be conducted and be considered 
DT>research if certain conditions exist?
Yes..
DT>Do you mean the data collecting must be structured 
DT>or the environment must be structured? 
You have to eliminate variables so that what is being tested
is clearly defined...
DT>I see you use studies and research separately.
Yes.. I do so because these terms are not agreed upon by all
who use the terms.  You and I, for example, mean different
things by these terms...
DT>You have a narrow definition of research I think.
I'd prefer to call it a precise definition... Scientific
method, control of variables, control group, manipulation
of parameters, look for relationships between cause and
effect, test again....
DT>Studies are conducted by researchers,
Look, we're not going to get anywhere by simply repeating
the terms "research" and "studies" without CLEAR definition.
Define what you consider to be a valid study; does it 
include the criteria I equate with scientific research?  If
not, what is the difference?  At what point, or under what
conditions, would a study NOT be research in your opinion?
DT>Why do you differentiate between the two?
After verification, I would have some confidence in the
conclusions of scientific research; I wouldn't accept it as
absolute TRUTH, mind you, but I would accept that the 
conclusions follow from the data.  A study, to me, does not
carry the same degree of confidence in the conclusions, 
because I define study as not including the scientific
process.  A study, to me, is the collecting of data without
attempting to isolate and control variables.  Some of what
you are calling "studies" I would probably call scientific
research.
RM>I guess I have to point out that for me, research involves 
RM>scientific method, not simply thrashing about hoping to
RM>stumble across something by collecting observations more or
RM>less randomly...
DT>Qualitative research is scientific
SOME may be, but a lot of it is not....
DT>It is systematic and each research strategy is specific in its 
DT>approach.  
Then, to my definition, it is not a study, but is scientific
research... Nothing says that scientific research HAS to be
quantitative...
DT>But studies can be highly reliable.  Many are.
My point is that these highly reliable studies are probably
scientific research, and not what I call studies...
DT>... it can also be said that it is unnecessary to run an 
DT>experiment every time one conducts a study.
RM>Absolutely, as long as one realizes that any conclusions
RM>are questionable and unverified without running further
RM>tests, and conducting experiments which modify variables.
DT>I'm not sure this is a necessary procedure in every research project.
You have to understand what I'm saying here..  Without the
experimental method, there is no real structure and control.
The result is that the data can be interpreted however it may
suit one's fancy.  This is not research... It would be VERY
unusual to develop data in this manner which would be
unequivocal...
DT>A case study is a detailed examination of a particular 
DT>setting, subject, documents, or events.
Now we have a new term: case study... Your definition?
DT>Suppose I want to do research on the origins of a particular group 
DT>of folk-lore or gorillas in the wild.
How do you propose to do it?  Anecdotal "evidence"?  The

.
--- Silver Xpress Mail System 5.4P1a
---------------