Methods, Practice, and Conventions, Risk of Methodological Biases and Research Outcomes

The value of effective systematic research methodology has been, in the last decade a focus in the research methods literature. Academic research progresses increasingly adopting diversified, integrated qualitative and... [ view full abstract ]

The value of effective systematic research methodology has been, in the last decade a focus in the research methods literature. Academic research progresses increasingly adopting diversified, integrated qualitative and quantitative methods and methodologies, when solving, and researching applied work-assignments, or derivatives of engineering techniques, natural science, and other techno-scientific sectors, which involve mainly empirical studies and deterministic measurement types. This approach highlights a sense of dissatisfaction towards the existing theoretical framework, and the barrier of the qualitative and quantitative traditions, as shown by various traditional philosophical worldview approaches to research. On the other hand this attitude might act enabling a certain level of confidence in applying similar methods to solve divergent research issues that better can integrate the gap between the two realms of theory and practice. The choice of these methods reflects research paradigms, but also fashions, sponsorship bias, conventions of the moment, for which the culture of science is converging. Thus, the phenomenon under investigation are subordinated to the particular imposed research channel, and/or influenced by the academic environment. In this context, there is also a case for identifying the risks represented by inappropriate or absent risk assessment on impacts for risk of biases in regards of all these factors. Today research involves high pressure delivering determined by the achievement of practical results. Private sector is increasingly engaged in commencing research and development (R&D) partnerships, in those sectors with significant capabilities and market opportunities, strengthening university-industry partnerships. It involves biotechnology, agriculture, with products growth cycles, and researches in innovation related, but also pharma and drugs companies. To determine whether industry urgency abilities to cope with delivery market pressure falsely inflates the efficacy of the research outcomes, this study examines researches extracted from electronic databases, comparing methodological risk of biases and findings that are more likely impacted by these influencing factors described, and yielding to relationship post-sponsored industry implementations. Case studies are presented as evidences, to assess effects of risk of methodological biases on the research outcomes. The way they are perceived, as ‘social-scientific achievement’, indirectly influence decision-making, policy makers, and public opinion, generating a unique ontological and epistemological debates. The paper then identifies potential point of departure for academic researchers and industry practitioners that might address the current lack of an effective framework for methodological risk of biases.