Further Issues in Theoretical Framework in Social Sciences Research

Theoretical Framework in Social Science Research is the torchlight which shows the direction of what relevant data to pursue, but along the way an unexpected data may be seen in the collections. It is also it that consistently supposed to light how analysis of data could be done. But since there are traces of many other information in the store of the data collected, they must not be sorted out and thrown away. That is why every theoretical framework in social sciences research is not complete if is not constructed with elements that are against its main assumptions.

 

In the first paper which is titled "Theoretical Framework in Social Sciences Research", we have tried to bring out the meaning of theory, by what means a theory of research can be made and how a theoretical framework could be constructed.

 

Having observed that students at all levels – in the Department of Political Science, Bayero University, Kano – are continuously in confusion about theory formation in social research, it is appropriate to raise further issues.

 

These issues are numerous to be counted here. But very few of methodological importance:

1. Very often you find that there is no relationship between the literature review and the theoretical framework.
   
2. In many cases one would see that the relationship between the theory and the data is zero. Therefore, when analysis of the data is presented, would not see any assumption of the theoretical framework in it.
   
3. Many other researchers think that they must obtain an already existing theory to apply in their studies.
   
4. The theoretical framework gives an overall orientation of a research work including definition of key concepts. But it is very common to find operational definition of concepts from different perspectives.
   

Now lets take each one of these for further examination and recommendation.

 

Literature review is an assessment of many existing theoretical positions on the subject of the study. As pointed in the first paper, abstract positions are not the only theoretical views. A story can be orderly presented and become a theory. All these when relevant to the subject could be reviewed as theoretical positions under the literature review.

 

Theoretical framework of a research can be derived from one or a combination of theoretical positions. As one economic geographer puts it in social research "there is neither a single point of inquiry, nor a single logic, spatial or otherwise. The best we can hope for are shards and fragments; not one complete story but a set of fragmented stories".

 

Specifically referring to economic geography but can apply to other social sciences. This kind of theory formation and or application provides constructivist understanding of a subject as in postmodernist, post-structuralist and a number of other related critical frameworks.

 

Without even a section on theoretical framework the theoretical positions from literature review can be used to do the analysis. But if a regulation of a university says create a section on theoretical framework, okay do it, but should reflect theoretical positions from the literature review. Theoretical positions or fragments as economic geographer Trevor Barnes said is possible would give a more critical understanding of the subject.

 

This follows the idea that research is a social criticism and so in doing research we need to be critical for fear that we end up seeing what we want to see. From philosophical point of view this draws particularly from the works of French theorists such as Michael Foucault and Jacques Derrida who argue that our understandings of the world do not constitute objective knowledge but are constructions based on our individual experiences and on the fluidity of meaning of words. In other words knowledge is often subjective based on our understanding of the world, what we already know of it and how we interprete it and other texts about it, through other theoretical framework.

 

The second issue. The question of the relationship between theory and data. Contribution to knowledge is always determined by the relationship between theory and observation or data. Although the relationship varies, it may be adequate or inadequate, yet it must be seen that there is a theory informing the observation made or the analysis of data that is being made.

 

This drives us to the third problem mentioned. This is about constructing or searching (sic) of a theoretical framework. I remember one Phd. Candidate in political science going like a beggar with his cap in hand asking anybody he sees that he's begging for a theoretical framework of his work. And do you know? He was begging of a theoretical framework after he has finalized a topic (may be in the same way), a research problem, hypotheses (which is also a theory), and literature review. There are numerous of this example among researchers at sub-degree and undergraduate levels.

 

This reveals a confusion, a methodological one for that matter, which reduces the power of social sciences research to make contribution for national development of Nigeria. Thus, the researches become mere composition in the chosen languages which when read will not change the imagination and capacity of the readers to think towards more ideas on the subject.

 

However, it is not disputed that a theoretical framework may be an already existing theory, or a modification of an already existing theory, but a researcher may drive an assumption either based on a contribution of any other writer or not and construct his/her theory of a research.

 

The last major flaw raised in construction of theoretical framework in social sciences research is the relationship between operational definition of concepts and the theory of the research. If the other concepts and the theory of the research are too unparallel, the research report and outcome may be incoherent. Although in post-modern research this is tolerable, but the theoretical framework is to be constructed with theories that could accommodate all diversities of the concepts and even the data.

 

M.M. Yusif

April, 2011

 

When this paper is used must be acknowledged