Research Proposal

For this assignment, you will design and propose a research design for an original empirical research project of your choice. You will select a research topic, review relevant literature, construct three hypotheses to be examined empirically, address concerns for scientific ethics and objectivity, and design a measurement instrument. When finished, you will have proposed and operationalized an empirical research topic up to the point of gathering data.

The entire research proposal is worth 40% of your final grade. You will produce it in three stages and can revise and resubmit earlier parts when subsequent deadlines fall due:

Part one: the research topic

Explain your research topic. Make your case for why it is important (e.g., it has important sociological implications, it is unaddressed by previous research, it is of personal concern to you). Conclude by framing your topic as a specific research question about the empirical relationship between two or more concepts. (You may find that this question will change by part two, after you review the relevant literature.)

Part one should be approximately two to three paragraphs long.

Back to top

Part two: the literature review

Using the Social Sciences Citation Index on the Web of Science database, find three sociological journal articles that contain theories relating to your research question. Use research or theoretical articles only. Get your articles approved by me if you are uncertain. Note: you will use one of these articles for a separate assignment, your methodological critique and comparison paper.

To search for articles successfully, your research question should address two or more concepts that you can then review in combination (e.g., articles theorizing the same relationship between concepts) or individually (e.g., articles where one or more of your concepts have been theorized as variables in different conceptual relationship) As you search, you may find that...

a. No one has previously researched your topic (very unlikely). If this is the case, then search for similar research which may shed light on how your topic and question have been addressed in the past. You might use some of Becker's tricks to think creatively about different literatures that indirectly address your concepts.

b. There is an "infinite" amount of previous research on your topic (more likely). In this case, you need to make some decisions about narrowing your topic.

Read your three articles and write separate literature reviews that explain what each theorized and discovered about your topic. Do not write general "summaries." Instead, organize your reviews around how each article theorized and operationalized particular relationships between concepts. Use these relationships to structure your discussion of how variables were operationalized, samples were obtained, and research designs were constructed. You will not necessarily refer to all the information from each article; instead, relate only that which is relevant to your topic and research question.

Citations and bibliography: Use proper citation style within the text and write a bibliography for the three articles according to the ASA Style Guide. You will not get full credit if your citation style is incorrect.

Part two should be approximately two to four pages long. Turn it in with part one (which you have already written) and part three. Remember, if you sharpen or change your research topic or question at this point, then you will need to revise part one.

Back to top

Part three: hypothesis construction

In a first paragraph, state a theory that best addresses your research topic and question. You can borrow a particular theory or synthesize your own from one or more of the articles you reviewed, or you can select one from yet another source (like sociological literature you read elsewhere). Along these lines, briefly give an explanation for why you selected your theory.

From this theory, construct three research hypotheses (H₁-H₃) that you can investigate empirically. Formulate your hypotheses as potential or predicated relationships between concepts that speak to your research question. Your hypotheses should be concrete enough that they can be tested (e.g., they predict actions or behaviors, not feelings or perspectives).

Identify and operationalize the dependent variables (DV) and independent variables (IV) for each hypothesis. Likewise, for each hypothesis identify and operationalize two extraneous variables that may not be in your hypothesis but may affect the observed outcomes (e.g., demographic factors like gender, race, class, etc.) Organize your writing around the following format:

Tip: part three is being graded for the completeness and soundness of your hypotheses, not the creativity of your writing. If you use the same variables for more than one hypothesis, just copy and paste what you have already written. If you are stuck about how to operationalize your variables, look at how other researchers have done so (that is, if this is appropriate to your measurement instrument; see part five).

Part three should be approximately three pages long. Turn it in with part one (which you have already written) and part two.

Back to top

Part four: objectivity, ethics, sampling

In a brief essay, discuss potential problems with your scientific objectivity. What were your preconceived beliefs or prior knowledge about your area of study before you began your research? What beliefs do you have about the people or elements you are going to study? What are your plans for your own career or social reform if you find (or do not find) what you have hypothesized? How might these affect your research design or conclusions if you are not careful? Address these and other possibly relevant questions of objectivity.

In a second essay, discuss potential ethical problems in your study. Could your subjects be harmed by your research, either in carrying it out or affecting society after it is finished? Who are the audiences for your research, and do they have "objective" concerns for the practical implications and policy recommendations that you make? Address these and other possibly relevant questions of ethics.

In a third essay, explain how you will derive your sample. Who or what is your target population? What is your unit of analysis? What is your sampling frame? What sampling technique do you plan to use? Why do you plan to use it, as opposed to others that are available? After answering these questions, describe how you will execute the selection of your sample. This should read like a detailed set of instructions that someone else could follow and execute without your help.

Finally, in a separate attachment, include a cover letter requesting participation by subjects from your sample. This should indicate who you are, the general purpose of your study, what type of participation you require from the subjects, where and how this will take place, and whether anonymity or confidentiality is guaranteed.

Part four should be approximately two to three pages long plus an extra one-page cover letter. Turn it in with parts one to three (revised, if necessary) and part five.

Back to top

Part five: the measurement instrument

Design a measurement instrument based on one of the options below.

Survey research: Construct a brief questionnaire (about 15-20 questions) that addresses all aspects of the hypotheses you constructed in part three. This should be ready for self-administration, so include clear instructions about how respondents should take, complete, and return the questionnaire. Pay careful attention to issues of design: question ordering, question phrasing, closed- or open-ended questions, overall convenience and attractiveness of the questionnaire, etc.

In-depth interviews: Construct an interview schedule that includes questions for all of your variables, as well as introductory comments to your respondents, explanations for answering questions, and follow-up questions or probes. If it is not self-evident from the "measurement" sections for your variables in part three, explain how you will analyze the interviews to measure your variables. Finally, address how you will deal with potential interviewer effects (e.g., through your appearance, the time and place of the interview).

Other methods (participant observation, experiments, content analysis, etc.): You will need to describe the setting for gathering your data, write instructions for 20-25 explicit observations to be made, explain how you will analyze these data to measure your variables, etc. Please consult with me if you choose one of these other methods.

Your measurement instrument will be evaluated for the validity and reliability of the observations it can produce. If you have good reasons for using a less than optimally valid or reliable measurement instrument (e.g., questionnaires are not appropriate for your subjects), then state these.

Part five should be approximately three to five pages long (but longer if you write a questionnaire, because of formatting concerns). Compile it with parts one to four, including any revisions you have made, into a final document. Make sure your citations and references follow the conventions of the ASA Style Guide. Use the spell-check function on your word processing software! When finished, the end product should read like the first half of a (very explicit) research article:

 back to top

Criteria for evaluation of research proposals

Here are some of the questions I will be asking as I evaluate your proposals:

1. Have you clearly operationalized your research question(s)? Is your proposal vague and insufficiently specific on key issues?

2. Have you succeeded in making the case that the study is worth doing? Does it have important implications for a sociological audience? Does it have implications for social policy, social theory, or social change?

3. Have you designed a study that examine the research problem from a sociological perspective? Do your question(s) and methodology reflect a sociological orientation?

4. Have you selected the most appropriate research design and methodology to explore the specific research question(s)?

5. Will your design be likely to provide answer(s) to your research question(s)?

6. Are you aware of what are likely to be the major methodological obstacles and ethical issues facing your study? Have you come up with a convincing case that these can be successfully resolved?