A Report on

Critical Discussion of Researcher Bias with Reference to Ethical Issues in the Research Process

For

BMAN73140Research Skills for Business and Management

UID: 8042371MSc Management

When Max Weber expressed his views on objectivity he mentioned that, “statements of fact are one thing, statements of value another, and any confusing of the two is impermissible.” Weber went on to explain his ideas about objectivity and maintained that a researcher could not investigate objectively, and that the values of the researcher ultimately influenced his perspective (Hoenisch, 2006). In this essay, we will outline the various philosophies of thought that play a role in shaping a researcher’s thought processes, and that are germane to the research being conducted by him. We also aim to bring to notice how a researcher’s values are inevitably reflected during the undertaking of the research, and why some of those values make it important for a business researcher to follow an ethical code while producing the research. There have been various accusations of bias in business and management research, which has further signified that bias, does not occur in the research alone but also occurs in the evaluation of the research (Hammersley and Gomm, 1997). Before a researcher decides to undertake definite research, he attaches himself to a philosophy of thought that designs the researcher’s approach, after successfully evaluating the nature of his research as well as the resources available (Gill and Johnson, 2002). According to Eilon (1975), researchers adopt a particular school of thought, either because it conforms to their academic knowledge or due to force of habit and conviction. It is thus inevitable that research is contaminated to a certain degree by the values and philosophies of the researcher.

According to Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Lowe (2002), there are various reasons why researchers need to employ an understanding of the various philosophies underlying research since it serves them three purposes, the first of these being that it helps the researcher to explain the research design that they intend to adopt and helps them to gather and interpret the evidence and employ it to answer the basic questions in their research. Secondly, it helps the researcher clarify whether the respective research design will be successfully implemented or not, and illuminate the limitations associated with the particular design. Another purpose served by being conscious of the different philosophies is that it helps the researcher go beyond their capabilities to design the research and overcome the limitations. The conduct of research depends upon factors such as ontology, which deals with the “nature of being,” epistemology, which relates to the theory of knowledge, and research methodology (Bratton et al., 2010).

In simpler terms by Marsh and Furlong (2002), ontology refers to the researcher’s view of the nature of the world and epistemology signifies what they can know about the world, and how they obtain that knowledge. A researcher develops a certain philosophical orientation towards his or her subject while conducting research, and it might be positivist, interpretive or realist. These philosophical foundations refer to the methodologies and there can be criticism of the distinction that a researcher provides between them, as a researcher’s epistemological position also defines their way of distinguishing between the three different traditions. It is not entirely possible to change one’s position while working on different projects, as a researcher’s position defines their fundamental approach towards the subject. Even so, there is a high degree of tolerance related to diverse epistemological and ontological viewpoints adopted in business and management research (Tranfield and Starkey, 1998).

Positivism is of the belief that the world exists independently of our knowledge of it and a researcher can test the validity of a theory by observation, thereby exemplifying

objectivity (Marsh and Furlong, 2002). According to Cole, Chase, Couch and Clark (2011), for students belonging to business subjects, there is a familiarity in adopting the positivist approach as they are traditionally more bent towards quantitative analysis and are more comfortable dealing with hard and measurable facts. Positivists hold the belief that research can, and must be value-free and that the researcher must be a mere disconnected observer of the objects that are studied (Myers, 2008).

The interpretivist tradition is in contrast to this and is subjective. Criticism from Cole, Chase, Couch and Clark (2011) forms the opinion that the researcher is so heavily influenced by their subjective position that the result of their research might not be “valid”. The epistemology in the interpretive approach is subjective, and this results in both the researcher as well as the reader consulting the project in view of their own subjectivity and knowledge, affecting the research produced by their own values and knowledge in the process.

According to Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2003), realism expresses the belief that reality exists independent of human thoughts and beliefs and extension of this belief to business and management implies that there are various forces that affect people without their knowledge and influences their behaviours. Although realism bears some ideas that are shared by positivists by considering reality to be external, it does make allowances for social constructionism that implies a subjective reality, and that different people have different interpretations of situations that arise and these varied outlooks affect their views and behaviours with others.

It is evident that research is influenced by the researcher’s ontological and epistemological considerations, but there are other aspects that might contaminate research to some degree, and these might be values and practical considerations that affect the reliability of the research. According to Bryman and Bell (2007), values reflect the researcher’s personal beliefs or a priori assumptions, and the research might end up reflecting the researcher’s individual bias, resulting in the research failing to be considered valid or scientific, or the researcher being biased to generate desired results in the chosen field. Bias might even occur during research when the researcher is intensely involved with participants under his study and develops empathy towards them. It then becomes difficult to remain indifferent to their perspective. It is now increasingly accepted that the researcher’s preconceived notions will inevitably affect research and that it will be laden with his values, making it imperative for the researcher to demonstrate reflexivity, which involves the researcher being critically aware of himself (Bryman and Bell, 2007; Johnson, 1997). Reflexivity results in the researcher acknowledging the existence of bias and personal beliefs in his research, with the aim to control his biases. Weber often announced the standpoint from which he would investigate a situation or facts, in his essay or his speeches to enable the reader to understand his perspective (Hoenisch, 2006).

Selectivity in observing and recording data contaminates the research and affects the interpretation of the researcher (Johnson, 1997). Bias might also occur while conducting interviews in the form of sampling or when a researcher misunderstands the question or the answer while conducting interviews and in such cases it would be beneficial to cross-examine the interviewee with similar questions (Adams, Khan, Raeside and White, 2007). A researcher might impose his own beliefs on the interviewees by the questions he forms to ask in interviews. According to Onwuegbuzie and Leech (2007), researcher bias may be either active or passive.

Passive bias refers to those characteristics of the researcher that are particular to his personality such as gender, ethnicity, clothing, etc., while active sources of bias may include the researcher’s mannerisms or statements that may influence observers about his preferences. It is also important to keep practical considerations in view while conducting research, even if they might seem mundane as compared to other concerns such as the values of the researcher. These considerations extend to various key issues in research such as choosing the strategy or the method.

Business and management research is also more susceptible to conflict of interests or affiliation bias, particularly when related to funding, and these issues affect the quality of research, making ethical deliberations important. Researchers in this field are also involved in studies that are rooted in powerful organizations, making it difficult for researchers to produce unbiased results, fearing power relations (Bell and Bryman, 2007). Johnson (1997) also maintains that researcher bias is a more frequent issue in qualitative research as it is more indeterminate than quantitative research, although quantitative research itself is not devoid of it. Some authors are of the opinion that secondary data reduces researcher bias to a certain extent, as it is less reactive than other methods because it is previously collected (Quinton and Smallbone, 2006).

Researchers can aim to reduce certain bias reflected in their research by undertaking various activities that seek to maximize validity, such as member checking, triangulation, thick description, peer reviews and external audits, while machines are made use of to eliminate bias more specifically in quantitative research methods (Creswell and Miller, 2010). Triangulation is considered to be an important methodology employed to limit bias since it combines several methods or data to confirm or generalize the research by converging numerous sources of information (Golafshani, 2003). Researchers often disclose their background along with their interpretation of how it might affect their conduct of the research to readers, in order to facilitate them to adopt their own positions (Johnson, 1997). According to Miles and Huberman (1994), there are various methods that a researcher can adopt in order to limit the extent of contamination of the research and these may be prolonged engagement with participants, persistent observation, using unassuming measures, making their intentions clear during the course of the research, being extremely cautious to not worsen any potential problems, avoiding bias in the selection of the sample, triangulating data, sharing field notes with peers, among many others.

A researcher has to be wary of keeping in mind the ethical constraints while conducting his research. During the course of the research various issues will arise relating to how the researcher plans his research and seeks access to organizations or individuals, and how he collects his data and analyses it (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2003). There is an ethical code of conduct which encompasses the academics in business and management research and that the researcher is expected to comply with. According to Bryman and Bell (2007), there are four major areas in which ethical considerations particularly arise in different stages of business and management research. These are informed consent, whether or not the participants are harmed in the process, the invasion of privacy and deception. It is essential for the researcher to be aware of these issues in order to be better equipped to make informed decisions on how to deal with them. Different ethical issues also arise in different stages of the research process such as during the initial access and design stages, the data collection stage, and during the analysis and reporting stages (Saunders, Lewis

and Thornhill, 2003). It is important to give consideration to ethics in business research as human intervention is becoming increasingly common in research and poor ethical decisions could cause damage to some participants (Polonsky, 1998). There are a variety of ways in which participants can be harmed during the course of research and these range from psychological to emotional harm, embarrassment, etc. and in such a scenario it is important to seek prior approval or sanction from the respective authority. It is also imperative to maintain confidentiality and anonymity of participants in order to prevent any victimization from taking place (Bell and Bryman, 2007). There are other aspects of ethical considerations that are brought to notice by the Framework for Health and Social Care, which maintain that it is also unethical to duplicate research, produce research that is not of high quality or delay research for unjustified reasons, apart from solely protecting those who participate in the research.

Although the treatment of participants involved in research is given prime importance, Hammersley and Traianou (2011) argue that the foremost ethical obligation of the researcher should be to focus on the production of knowledge through research and be committed to “value-neutrality” at the same time. They further elucidate that researchers may be committed to certain values that generally overlap across various cultures and which restrain their research. These ethical values of the researchers are given priority to and they might in particular be minimization of harm, respect for autonomy and protection from invasion from privacy. The varying concern across cultures might be the degree to which they seem offensive. Occasionally, there are requirements of seeking approval before the commencement of the research project by a formal ethics application process, although it has been criticized on some occasions by researchers who maintain that it restricts their academic freedom and questions their academic integrity (Polonsky, 1998).

Although it is critically important to incorporate ethical values within the research, sometimes the lengthy procedures involving approval from research governance increases the costs involved, delays the results of the research and is unfavorable to researchers willing to undertake the research (Munro, 2008). Bell and Bryman (2007) also lament that management researchers rely on the code of ethical conduct formed by social science researchers, whereas the nature of ethical dilemmas that are faced by management researchers are of a far different nature and concern.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle has aptly said, “It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has enough data”. This statement has highlighted the importance for a researcher to equip himself to making informed decisions on various issues that arise during the course of the research. In this essay, we have emphasized how a researcher’s values and practical considerations affect the quality of the research being produced by him. A researcher integrally follows a philosophical school of thought, which channels his thought processes and by extension forms his view of the world and the knowledge obtained through it. The essay has outlined various actions that can be carried out in order to limit the extent to which research can be contaminated, but there is no complete solution to the dilemma of producing ‘value-free’ research as qualitative, quantitative as well as mixed methods of research are all affected by a researcher’s bias. Due to increasing human intervention in business research, it is extremely important for researchers to bear ethical considerations in mind. It has also led to an increasing need for ethical regulations, making it a fundamental part of effective business practice. Contrarily, Hammersley and Traianou (2011), have also highlighted

the issue of moralism in research which implies the ‘vice of overdoing morality.’ It is unavoidable for research to be completely value-free but there are various methods that a researcher can adopt in order to limit the extent to which his values contaminate the research conducted by him. On the other hand, it is imperative to minimize the extent of bias in business and management research, as significant strategic and managerial issues are dealt with, based on the results produced in the researchers’ analysis. Hammersley and Traianou (2011) have explained why this has resulted in a number of ethical regulations and has brought to the forefront various ideals associated with research.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adams, J., Khan, H., Raeside, R. and White, D. (2007) Research Methods for Graduate Business and Social Science Students. New Delhi: Response Books.

Bell, E. and Bryman, A. (2007) The Ethics of Management Research: An Exploratory Content Analysis. British Journal of Management. 18(1), 63-77. [Online] Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2006.00487.x/full [Accessed: July 7, 2012]

Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2007) Business Research Methods. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

Bratton, J., Sawchuk, P., Forshaw, C., Callinan, M. and Corbett, M (2011) Work & Organizational Behaviour. 2nd ed. England: Palgrave Macmillan.

Cole, C., Chase, S., Couch, O., and Clark, M. (2011) Research Methodologies and Professional Practice: Considerations and Practicalities The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods Volume 9 Issue 2, 141-151. [Online] Available at: www.ejbrm.com [Accessed: July 17, 2012]

Creswell, J. and Miller, D. (2000) Determining Validity in Qualitative Inquiry. Theory Into Practice. 39(3), 124-130. [Online] Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2 [Accesed: July 18, 2012]

Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe R. and Lowe, A. (2002) Management Research. 2nd edition. London: Sage

Eilon, S. (1975) Seven faces of research, Operational Research Quarterly. 26(2) p359-367. [Online] Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/3007746 [Accessed: July 20, 2012]

Furlong, P., Marsh, D. (2002) A Skin not a Sweater: Ontology and Epistemology in Political Science. In: Marsh, D., Stoker, G. eds. Theory and Methods in Political Science. Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 17-41. [Online] Available at: http://www.palgrave.com/pdfs/0333948556.pdf [Accessed: July 15, 2012]

Gill, J. and Johnson, P. (2002) Research Methods for Managers. London: Sage.

Golafshani, N. (2003) Understanding Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research. The Qualitative Report. 8(4), 597-607. [Online] Available at: http://peoplelearn.homestead.com/MEdHOME/QUALITATIVE/Reliab.VALIDITY.pdf [Accessed: July 20, 2012]

Hammersley, M., Gomm, R. (1997) Bias in Social Research. Sociological Research Online. 2 (1) [Online] Available at: http://socresonline.org.uk/2/1/2.html?INFO=ISBN:_007240437x_TITLE:_Research [Accessed: July 20, 2012]

Hammersley, M., Traianou, A. (2011) Moralism and research ethics: a Machiavellian perspective. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 14 (5), 379-390. [Online] Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13645579.2011.562412 [Accessed: July 18, 2012]

Hoenish, S. (2006). Max Weber's View of Objectivity in Social Science. Available: http://www.criticism.com/md/weber1.html. Last accessed 9 July 2012.

Johnson, R.B. (1997) Examining the Validity Structure of Qualitative Research. Education. 118(2), 282. [Online] Available at: http://www.dralessandro.com/subpages/PDFfiles/Validity%20Structure.pdf [Accessed: July 21, 2012]

Miles, M. and Huberman, A. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. 2nd edition. London: Sage.

Munro, E. (2008) Research Governance, Ethics and Access: A Case Study Illustrating the New Challenges Facing Social Researchers. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 11(5), 429-439. [Online] Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13645570701708600 [Accessed: July 18, 2012]

Myers, M.D. (2008) Philosophical Perspectives. Chapter 4. Qualitative Research in Business and Management. Sage Publications Limited.

Onwuegbuzie, A. and Leech, N. (2007) Validity and Qualitative Research: An Oxymoron? Quality and Quantity. 41(2), 233-249. [Online] Available at: http://www.springerlink.com/content/v97v30tpv5766720/ [Accessed: July 17, 2012]

Polonsky, M. (1998) Incorporating Ethics into Business Student’s Research Projects: A Process Approach. Journal of Business Ethics. 17(11), 1227-1241. [Online] Available at: http://www.springerlink.com/content/m5630x7716uu10h9/ [Accessed: July 7, 2012]

Quinton, S. and Smallbone, T. (2006) Postgraduate Research in Business. A Critical Guide. London: Sage Publications. [Online] Available at: Dawson ebooks. [Accessed: July 13, 2012]

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., and Thornhill, A. (2003) Research Methods for Business Students. 3rd edition. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.

Tranfield, D., Starkey, K. (1998) The Nature, Social Organization and Promotion of Management Research: Towards Policy. British Journal of Management. 9 (4). 341-353. [Online] Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.00103/full [Accessed: July 17, 2012]