IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO CONDUCT RESEARCH WORK WITHOUT
CONCEPTS”. DISCUSS
Introduction
Research is a pedagogic action that comprises defining and redefining problems, formulating
hypotheses or suggested solutions; collecting, organizing and evaluating data; making deductions
and reaching conclusions; and at last carefully testing the conclusions to determine whether they
fit the formulating hypothesis. The purpose of research is to answer questions and acquire new
knowledge. Research is the primary tool used in virtually all areas of science to expand the
frontiers of knowledge (Marczyk, et al, 2005). Ultimately, by conducting research, researchers
attempt to reduce the complexity of problems, discover the relationship between seemingly
unrelated events, and ultimately improve the way we live. The results of research studies are
frequently shared publicly through peer reviewed journals, the Internet, and various other media
outlets that are accessible to both scientists and nonscientists alike. It is necessary, therefore, for
researchers to understand the relevance of their work to humanity. Concepts help the researchers
to speak not just to themselves but also to others who may not share in their scientific interests.
This paper discusses the relevance of concepts in research by advancing the tone of the task that
indeed, it is impossible to conduct research without concepts.
5
Definition of Concept
Concepts are symbolic or abstract elements representing properties, or features of processes, or
phenomenon (Berg, 2001). Concepts may communicate ideas or introduce particular
perspectives, or they may be a means for casting a broad generalization. In terms of ideas,
concepts are important because they are the foundation of communication and thought. Concepts
provide a means for people to let others know what they are thinking, and allow information to
be shared (Ibid.). Because of the role they play in research work, every researcher must have a
section reserved for definition or operationalization of concepts. According to Giovanni Sartori,
concepts are so important that they define what we are. In his own words, “we are . . . prisoners
of the words we pick, we had better pick them well” (1984:60). Indeed, it is Sartori’s argument
that concept formation lies at the heart of all social science endeavors.
“It is impossible to conduct research work without using concepts. It is impossible even
to conceptualize a topic, as the term suggests, without putting a label on it. Concepts are
integral to every argument for they address the most basic question of social science
research” (Sartori, 1970:1038).
A deeper understanding of concepts is clearly presented by John Gerring when he identifies what
he refers to as four elements of an empirical concept: (a) the term (a linguistic label comprising
one or a few words); (b) attributes that define those phenomena (the definition, intension,
connotation, or properties of a concept); (c) indicators that help to locate the concept in empirical
space (the measurement or operationalization of a concept); and (d) phenomena to be defined
(the referents, extension, or denotation of a concept) (2012:116). Understanding these elements
is fundamental for any researcher as it allows one the latitude to achieve a higher degree of
conceptual adequacy. This could be attained by; (a) choose a different term, (b) alter the defining
attributes contained in the intension, (c) adjust the indicators by which the concept is
6
operationalized, or (d) redraw the phenomenal boundaries of the extension (Ibid.). As a
researcher does this, he or she engages in concept formation, which becomes an essential
element of research work.
Concept formation is essential because researchers from different backgrounds employ the
concepts to suit their research topics and problems. This may also be the case for researchers
within the same intellectual tradition. Concepts are routinely stretched, older concepts are
redefined and new words are created. Words with similar meanings end up competing for
relevance within the research realm leading to conceptual confusion and disagreement. This
whole process is what Sartori refers to as “playing musical chairs with words” (1984:38). One
way of resolving this difficult is to realize that different concepts tend to be appropriate for
different research tasks and research venues. In research work, therefore, concept
operationalization is done to help a researcher address the issue of conceptual ambiguities.
Gerring identifies “seven criteria that are critical to the formation of empirical concepts in the
social sciences” and in addressing the ambiguities: (1) resonance, (2) domain, (3) consistency,
(4) fecundity, (5) differentiation, (6) causal utility, and (7) operationalization (i.e., measurement)
(Gerring, 2012:116).
Resonance is the degree to which a term or definition makes sense, is intuitively clear, or it
conforms to established usage. For a researcher to communicate, he or she must use concepts
that resonate with established usage. Domain means the linguistic terrain within which a concept
is expected to resonate. It is the boundary within which a concept is understood to apply. While
greater breadth of comprehension and usage is always desirable, no social science concept is
universal. Consistency implies the capacity of a concept to carry the same meaning (more or
7
less) in each empirical context to which it is applied. Fecundity could also be viewed as
coherence, depth, fruitfulness, illumination, informativeness, insight, natural kinds, power,
productivity, richness, or thickness. It is the ability of a concept to explain as much as possible
the empirical world. Differentiation means that a concept should be distinguishable from other
concepts. Causal utility is the capacity to function causally, as well as descriptively. That is, they
serve as components of a larger causal argument.
Apart from concept formation, researchers also engage in concept definition based on three
approaches: minimal, maximal, and cumulative. Minimal definition strategy seeks to identify the
bare essentials of a concept. Each attribute that defines a concept minimally is regarded as a
necessary condition: all entities must possess this attribute in order to be considered a member of
the set. Maximal definitions, aim for the inclusion of all attributes, thereby defining a concept in
its purest, most ideal form. Cumulative definition reconciles minimal and maximal approaches
by ranking the attributes commonly associated with a concept in a cumulative fashion, that is, as
more or less essential to a concept.
Relevance of Concepts in Research Work
The Scientific Method
The development of the scientific method is credited to Roger Bacon, a philosopher and scientist
from 13th-century England; although some argue that the Italian scientist Galileo Galilei played
an important role in formulating the scientific method. Later contributions to the scientific
method were made by Francis Bacon and René Descartes (Marczyk, Ibid). It is characterized by:
8
empirical approach, observations, questions, hypotheses, experiments, analyses, conclusions and
replication. Every research has to follow a scientific process which is defined by concepts.
Understanding the process first requires one to internalize the concepts. This process is best
thought of as an approach to the acquisition of new knowledge, and this approach effectively
distinguishes science from nonscience. The scientific method is not a single method, but rather
an overarching perspective on how scientific investigations should proceed. It is a set of
concepts, principles and methods that help researchers obtain valid results from their research
work.
Conceptual framework
A conceptual framework is an interconnected set of ideas (theories) about how a particular
phenomenon functions or is related to its parts. The framework serves as the basis for
understanding the causal or correlational patterns of interconnections across events, ideas,
observations, concepts, knowledge, interpretations and other components of experience.
Everyone has a conceptual framework about how reality works that allows him or her to make
predictions about how A is related to B and what will happen when the two intersect. This allows
us to make choices about our behavior on the basis of what we think those relationships are.
A conceptual framework is a structure which the researcher believes can best explain the natural
progression of the phenomenon to be studied (Camp, 2001). It is linked with the concepts,
empirical research and important theories used in promoting and systemizing the knowledge
espoused by the researcher. It shows the series of action the researcher intends carrying out in a
research study
9
According to Adom, et al (2018) conceptual framework explains the path of a research and
grounds it firmly in theoretical constructs. The overall aim of the two frameworks is to make
research findings more meaningful, acceptable to the theoretical constructs in the research field
and ensures generalizability. They assist in stimulating research while ensuring the extension of
knowledge by providing both direction and impetus to the research inquiry. For this reason, the
conceptual framework of a study—the system of concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs,
and theories that supports and informs your research—is a key part of your design (Miles &
Huberman, 1994). Miles and Huberman (1994) defined a conceptual framework as a visual or
written product, one that “explains, either graphically or in narrative form, the main things to be
studied— the key factors, concepts, or variables—and the presumed relationships among them”
(p. 18). Conceptual framework informs the rest of the research design to help to assess and refine
research goals, develop realistic and relevant research questions, select appropriate methods, and
identify potential validity threats to findings.
Concepts as the building blocks of theories
Theory can be defined as a general and, more or less, comprehensive set of statements or
propositions that describe different aspects of some phenomenon (Babbie, 1998; Hagan, 1993;
Senese, 1997). Theories can be understood as interrelated ideas about various patterns, concepts,
processes, relationships, or events. Concepts are the “building blocks of theory” (Turner, J. 1989:
5). The inclusion of a theory in a research is indispensable because theories heighten the quality
of a research.
Theories are systematically and logically constructed from concepts. Every research must have a
section on theoretical framework. It is the ‘blueprint’ or guide for a research (Grant & Osanloo,
10
2014). It is a framework based on an existing theory in a field of inquiry that is related and/or
reflects the hypothesis of a study. It is often ‘borrowed’ by the researcher to build his/her own
house or research inquiry. It serves as the foundation upon which a research is constructed.
Sinclair (2007) and Fulton and Krainovich-Miller (2010) compare the role of theoretical
framework to that of a map or travel plan. Thus, when travelling to a particular location, the map
guides your path. Likewise, the theoretical framework guides the researcher so that s/he would
not deviate from the confines of the research. The theoretical framework consists of theoretical
principles, constructs, concepts, and tenants of a theory (Grant & Osanloo, 2014).
Cognitive scientific explanations, description and prediction
Most researchers agree that the three general goals of scientific research are description,
prediction and understanding/explanation (Cozby, 1993; Shaughnessy & Zechmeister, 1997).
Concepts play a crucial role in helping a researcher attain these noble goals. Description refers to
the process of defining, classifying, or categorizing phenomena of interest in a given research
work. Prediction often stems from description. If a researcher finds that there is a relationship
(i.e., correlation) between two variables, then it may be possible to predict one variable from
knowledge of the other variable. Explanation is the successful identification of the cause or
causes of a phenomenon under research. These goals may not be achievable without the use of
concepts.
11
Concepts aid in communication
Concepts are used to construct a language of communication for a group of professionals. The
usefulness of scientific discovery is limited if it is not communicated to the consumers and the
general public. Scientists rely on concepts to communicate their research results. This could be
through publications (peer-reviewed journals), in national and international conferences where
the results are shared with other researchers, and finally dissemination through popular media,
such as magazines, newspapers, and blogs.
Conclusion
This paper has discussed the place of concepts in research work from the foundation laid by
Giovanni Sartori and ably analyzed by John Gerring. While concepts are key to any research
work, caution must be taken in dealing with conceptual ambiguities that arise during research
work. Researchers from all disciplines use concepts to achieve the main objective of research; to
discover and disseminate new and relevant knowledge. This implies that research work must be
scientific and must be shared. Concepts are necessary in both cases. Without concepts, the
structure and vision for a study will be unclear.
12
REFERENCES
Adom, D., Hussein, E. K. & Agyem, J. A. (2018). Theoretical and conceptual framework:
Mandatory ingredients of a quality research. International Journal of Scientific Research, 7 (1),
438 – 441.
Babbie, E. (1998). The practice of social research (8 th Ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
Berg, B. L. (2001). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. London: Allyn and
Bacon.
Camp, W. G. (2001). Formulating and evaluating theoretical frameworks for career and technical
education research. Journal of Vocational Educational Research, 26 (1), 27-39.
Cozby, P. C. (1993). Methods in behavioral research (5 th Ed.). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield
Publishing Co.
Fulton, S. & Krainovich-Miller, B. (2010). Gathering and Appraising the Literature. In G.
LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, J. (Eds). Nursing research: methods and critical appraisal for
evidence-based practice (7 th Ed.). St. Louis MO: Mosby Elsevier.
Gerring, J. (2012). Social science methodology. A unified framework. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Grant, C. & Osanloo, A. (2014). Understanding, selecting, and integrating a theoretical
framework in dissertation research: Creating the blueprint for ‘house’. Administrative Issues
Journal: Connecting Education, Practice and Research, pp. 12-22. DOI: 10.5929/2014.4.2.9
Hagan, F. E. (1993). Research methods in criminal justice and criminology (3 rd Ed.). New Yak
Macmillan.
Machery, E. (2009). Doing without concepts. New York: Oxford University Press.
Machery, E., & Seppälä, S. (2011). Against hybrid theories of concepts. Anthropology and
Philosophy, 10, 99–126.
Marczyk, G., DeMatteo, D. & Festinger, D. (2005). Essentials of research design and
methodology. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded source book
(2 nd Ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Sartori, G. (1970). Concept misinformation in comparative politics. American Political Science
Review, 64 (4), 1033–1046. Cited in Gerring, J. (2012). Social science methodology. A unified
framework. New York: Cambridge University Press.
13
______ .1984. Social science concepts: A systematic analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Cited in
Gerring, J. (2012). Social science methodology. A unified framework. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Senese, J. D. (1997). Applied research methods in criminal justice. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
Sinclair M. (2007). Editorial: A guide to understanding theoretical and conceptual frameworks.
Evidence Based Midwifery 5(2): 39.
Shaughnessy, J. J., & Zechmeister, E. B. (1997). Research methods in psychology (4 th Ed.).
Boston: McGraw Hill.
Tuner, J. H. (1989). Theory building in sociology: assessing theoretical cumulation. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
