Academic Papers - Week 5

This Weeks Task

This week we are to find two academic articles of our choice, the only condition being that they are related to IT/CompSci and can be verified as legitimate academic articles.

Paper 1

Title: Does Gamification Work? — A Literature Review of Empirical Studies on
Gamification

APA Reference: Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014, January). Does gamification work?--a literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In 2014 47th Hawaii international conference on system sciences (HICSS) (pp. 3025-3034). IEEE.

How did I find this article?

Originally I was looking through a popular internet forum to see what others had referenced as their favourite computer science papers and came across the idea of gamification, I then searched scholar.google.com for this keyword and picked out one of the more popular choices in an attempt to find something somewhat introduction to the idea.

What kind of article is this?

This paper is found in the proceedings for the 2014 International Conference on System Sciences, making it a 'Conference' paper. It is also described as a literature review based on empirical studies on gamification.

What makes this an academic article?

There are many aspects that make a paper/article 'academic';

• the title
• the authors (usually with an email address and affiliation)
• the abstract
• the introduction
• a review of other papers relevant to the topic ( a literature review)
• a description of what the research was and what the researchers did
• the results of what they did
• a discussion about what the results mean
• a conclusion
• a list of references

This paper includes 90% of these elements & has been sourced from an official peer-reviewed conference proceedings list.

It appears that identifying a legitimate academic article is somewhat intuitive in my mind, similar to how we identify real-life objects, like trees for example. We know intuitively what a tree is when we look at it and classify it as such. If something integral was missing it would stick out like a sore thumb.

Given this is one of my first encounters with this type of activity I have found myself having to pay a bit more attention to the specifics. I am sure experienced people do not have to look into much detail at all before they know what they are dealing with.

How well does this article fit Lars' description of a legitimate academic article?

This paper has a 90%+ similarity with Lars' description, which is why I have chosen it in the first place, in order to hopefully produce something that is in align with our beloved tutors' wishes.

References:

This paper contains a total of 45 references, which appears to be highly extensive to me. This is due to its reliance on empirical evidence from other sources to conclude the writers own research question,

Citations:

The paper has 2222 citations as of 31/03/2019.

URL: https://www.computer.org/csdl/proceedings-article/hicss/2014/2504d025/12OmNzE54xe

Am I interested in reading this article further?

I am interested in reading this paper, especially given that it is based off a lot of previous empirical research into the topic, which in turn means the question being asked here is built on top of these previous articles. This makes it more alluring to me as I like to obtain big-picture perspectives.

If we are to be given a task that involved reading an article this article will be highly considered for sure.

Paper 2

Title: Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond

APA Reference: Preskill, J. (2018). Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond. Quantum, 2, 79.

How did I find this article?

Found via google scholar once I defined that I am interested in the field of quantum computing, most of my research was done on the actual CompSci/IT fields I would like to look into moreso than the actual papers.

What kind of article is this?

Journal paper.

What makes this an academic article?

The source, the wealth of people referencing it, the credibility of the author, the paper sticks to standard academic paper practices.

How well does this article fit Lars' description of a legitimate academic article?

Quite well except it is longer than requested, it appears to be longer due to the wide breadth involved when tackling general questions under quantum computing, there are a lot of sub-categories the author has had to cover in order to construct the paper to a level that feels suitable for the wide implications of this technology.

References:

The paper has 57 references

Citations:

The paper has been cited by 213 other papers as of 31/03/2019.

URL: https://quantum-journal.org/papers/q-2018-08-06-79/

Am I interested in reading this article further?

I am very interesting, especially considering my heavy interest in where technology is heading. Quantum computing will have wide effects on society as a whole if its potential is realized.

Class work/Notes

This week the course outline has changed a little bit, which moves the content revolved around assignment 2 to be taught sooner. This appears to be due to comments regarding this content taking awhile to start compared to when the assignment is due?

Following the introduction talk, we got into the presentations, yay. We did not put too much effort into our presentation due to the looming pressure of other subjects.

Presentation topics covered:

1. Secondary Research  – Blake, Stewart
2. Observational Research – Rob, Cam
3. Exploratory Research – Hao, Yifeng, Derrick
4. Case Study Research – Achuthanand, Geeta, Appu, Balu
5. Experimental Research –  Teja, Jagdeep
6. Discourse Analysis – Erica, Robin, Daniel
7. Action Research – Jess, Patrick Jake
8. Meta-Analysis – Rachel, Corrina, Di
9. Design-based research – Finn, Deja, Sakar, Jeff
10. Randomised Controlled Trials – Oliver, Zepeng Dong, Yuwei Zhang, Yuefen Zhou

I found it hard to focus on the content of the other presentations whilst worrying about my own after we had presented it became a lot easier to pay attention. It felt like some presentations were too flooded with information for me to follow. Largely in part due to my mind drifting off, I tried to avoid this in my own presentation section by keeping it simple, hopefully, I succeeded here. Our group also did not understand that we were to relate our given research method directly to IT, we did understand this was to be done in our blogs but not in our presentation due to it not being clearly communicated with us.

Why do we look for 'academic' articles?

Important for:

• find out what smarter people have said
• find what is likely the most credible information
• group your work with the work that others have done, you are not expected to always be original

Method:

• look at the kinds of research approaches others have taken
• under how others have applied the research approach to learn how to do it well

It is useful to:

• see what questions others have left open, there may be room to pick up a question for yourself
• to find a useful starting point for your own work

Action Research & Credibility - Week 4

Class Discussion

Lars approached concerns some people expressed regarding last weeks blog topic, some people were uncertain as to whether they got their information right. He essentially said that it is open to interpretation due to the nature of the topic. The main purpose was to ensure that we think about the topic and form our own understanding of the theories presented to us.

Some students have expressed that it was too hard? I disagree here as I had fun learning about these concepts which are a welcome change to the normal IT technical information we learn about.

Credibility

Does the epistemology match the ontology?

Was the means of discovering the information suitable for the question being asked?

Was the method followed sufficiently rigorous?

Who did the work/research? Do they seem credible?

Bias?

Who paid?

Who do they work for?

Where and when was the work make public?

Is it still relevant?
Peer-reviewed?
Where/how did you find it?

An in-class activity in which we all individually rated the credibility of a wealth of information sources showed us that some areas are regarded as considerably credible than others, this lead into a conversation into some of the specific sources & the nature of credibility in general.

Group work

The next part of the class had us divided into groups to research a particular research method, our group was given action research, we are to make a presentation on this before next week which is proving to be a bit of extra work on top of our already existing blogs. This presentation has been given lower priority than this week's blogs due to it having no relation to marks.

Action Research

What is it? 

Action research is any research into practice undertaken by those involved in that practice, with the primary goal of encouraging continued reflection and making improvement.

https://jalt-publications.org/node/4985/articles/5631-linking-research-action-simple-guide-writing-action-research-report (24/03/2019)

While action researched can be used in any field it is most popular in teaching, this is due to practitioners wanting to try different methods of teaching in their classrooms but remain unsure of their effectiveness. Action research allows us to explore the effectiveness of new techniques and continually develop the curriculum. Action research is self-reflective and built upon an iterative structure that has the practitioner continuously improving upon oneself.

Action research is a cyclical process made up of four essential steps.

1. Identifying the problem.
2. Devising an action plan.
3. Implementing the plan.
4. Observing and reflecting upon the process.

https://go.valenciacollege.edu/faculty/development/teaching-learning-academy/action-research/arp_softchalk/ (24/03/2019)

What kinds of questions/problems might it be useful for?

As I have already hinted, Action Research is most effective in a classroom type setting, although it is most effective here it may be replicated across other fields in which the environment is similar.

The easiest example to present of use of action research is teaching techniques deployed within a classroom setting, a teacher may structure a lesson in a particular way to try and get a concept across to their students which the intention of trying to teach but also to actively criticize the methods used and ready to implement others the next time around if suitable. This shows the types of problems that action research can be deployed in which is situations where the research practitioner is actively participating in the event that the research information is based off.

How could it be used in IT research?

The obvious use of this in IT is in IT education, In a way many of our tutors subtly employ this form of research themselves as they criticize their teaching methods and build upon their ways to aid in the development of their course over time, although they do this without adhering to the principles of Action Research and without seeking a very deep level of how one should go about it (to my knowledge anyway). If more tutors were able to focus further on Action Research for the courses under their wing it would lead to a great development of these courses, it is unfortunate that it does not turn out this way in this institute a lot of the time due to courses changing hands often. The courses that do get to age along with a tutor really do shine as the most valuable periods of learning at NMIT

Outside of education, I can imagine the concept of Action Research being deployed in software teams albeit in a more subtle way than classrooms. Considering that project managers control many of the tools, techniques and methods teams use to plan, produce and deploy software it is possible to criticize the results of the variables you are setting for your team. A certain planning method may prove less efficient at producing elegant software for your particular set of employees for example. I believe introducing too much change in a work environment like this also carries risk, therefore it is important to change a small number of variables at a time in order to not affect the overall predictability of the team's performance too heavily.

What are the strengths of the approach?

Applicable results!

When your research has yearned successful outcomes the effects are immediate and tangible. The benefit to the practitioner and the subjects is realized by all at the time of research.

Engaging!

Action Research involved the researcher themselves within the process, they are a variable within the environment at question. This increases engagement levels in the research which aid in keeping the practitioner motivated, can you imagine researching teaching techniques without applying them yourself?

What are the weaknesses of the approach?

There is an inherent level of risk associated with changing teaching methods, it is possible to stumble and try something worse than what you used before. In the short-term, this creates trouble but as long as the practitioner stays the course the benefits will become apparent over many cycles of the process.

It can be said that the weakness is in the need for iteration before significant positive changes can be realized.

It is also heavily time-consuming and is typically only applicable to small-scale studies. This is why it is primarily found within the classroom where the cycle of iteration is manageable & the size of classrooms suits the small-scale nature required for this type of research to be most effective.

Thanks for reading.

Scientific Paradigms - Week 3

Class Work

In class, we have begun by going further into Ontology and Epistemology. In this discussion, Lars has helped us form more concrete definitions of the words in question. This helps the class come to the same understanding following our independent research. It may be easy to get the wrong idea with such abstract concepts.

My research into Ontology and Epistemology appears to be somewhat on-point although I have failed in some sense to focus on the correct points in my blog I believe. Not bad for a first attempt though.

Lars went into a lecture pertaining to the origin of epistemology & ontology as we know it today which came about around in the 1900s with postmodernism. Modernism cut away a lot of the unnecessary additions in our engineering and thinking, art is cut away in the name of efficiency. For example, the way our buildings changed to have less art & design implemented into them in favour of more modern and efficient looks.

Postmodernism is described as a way of critiquing beliefs and most of the knowledge our society holds in this day and age. It is about challenging certain knowledge structures that some believe are simply social constructs and are not objective truths. An example of this is the argument that genders are not binary, this is clearly bogus and an extreme example of the bad side of postmodernism but there are also some good examples such as good vs evil which in reality is not as binary as used to believe in previous ages. Challenging certain beliefs is helpful to our society I believe although the concept of postmodernism can also be used in a negative manner to disregard objective knowledge in favour of a belief that better suits the believer.

Ontology & Epistemology Spectrum



Ontology                    Realism          Constructivism        Nominalism
Epistemology             Positivism       Interpretivism         Anti-Positivism

Realism -              Objective Existence
Constructivism - We construct reality together
Nominalism -       Things are as I think they are

Positivism -          Measure objectively
Interpretivism -   You can never be objective
Anti-Positivism - Each persons view is valid

Google Scholar was introduced to us as a method of finding & citing prominent academic papers. One was highlighted with the topic pertaining to design science which is of interest to me, I may give this one a read for curiosities sake.

Today we have covered a wide arrange of topics which have been engaging.

Out of Class Work

I read over this weeks tasks and was left wondering why we are writing about a specific scientific paradigm without understanding the big picture of scientific paradigms first? Perhaps it is just how my mind likes to approach things by coming in from a bigger perspective rather than the details.

First I will learn about the concept of scientific paradigms then select one that intrigues me to highlight near the end.

Citation: Clickstream Data Yields High-Resolution Maps of Science. By Johan Bollen, Herbert Van de Sompel, Aric Hagberg, Luis Bettencourt, Ryan Chute, Marko A. Rodriguez, Lyudmila Balakireva. Public Library of Science ONE, March 11, 2009.

A "map of science" created by sorting some 800,000 published papers into 776 paradigms. The red circles are where they overlap from referencing one another - creating a visual representation of scientific discussion in the world today.

Source: Nature Magazine

What are scientific paradigms?

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (first published in 1962), Kuhn defines a scientific paradigm as: "universally recognized scientific achievements that, for a time, provide model problems and solutions for a community of practitioners, i.e.,

• what is to be observed and scrutinized
• the kind of questions that are supposed to be asked and probed for answers in relation to this subject
• how these questions are to be structured
• what predictions made by the primary theory within the discipline
• how the results of scientific investigations should be interpreted
• how an experiment is to be conducted, and what equipment is available to conduct the experiment.

"The Structure of Scientific Revolution, Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 3rd edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996. page 10

Thomas Kuhn published a book called "The structure of Scientific Revolutions" in 1962 that opened our eyes to the reality of scientific paradigms, the main concept of this is that scientific progress is not linear but instead cyclical.

In these cycles, the scientific landscape exists within agreed upon scientific paradigms, a scientific paradigm is a set of assumptions that are made for us to base new science upon. An easy way to understand his is realizing that biology courses don't begin with describing the evolutionary theory, it is already assumed that this base level of knowledge is true within the current scientific paradigm even though many may not understand how this has been proven to be true. Religious people also exist within their own paradigms, they assume that God is behind the true nature of reality.

Assumptions can be powerful in that they can allow us to get on with other things, Assumptions are clearly capable of also being a negative force which can inhibit our understanding of reality and blind us, if our base understanding is incorrect then everything derived from it is likely also incorrect. I personally battle with not assuming too much and sometimes trust my intuition a little too much which doesn't afford much success in the IT world.

Throughout history, science has seen many paradigm shifts which have revolutionized our world and completely changed the type of science going forward. These 'paradigm shifts' can be understood metaphorically as similar to major changes in climate on earth. For a long time the planet was in an ice age and the ecosystem was operating under the given conditions, then the climate paradigm changed to a more temperate one thanks to a tilt in the earth's rotation, we then saw a major shift in the planets normal conditions, changing upon which types of species were allowed to propagate and the types of evolutionary traits that were necessary for survival.

Paradigm shifts change our base set of assumptions which in turn means we have to adapt our way of science to this new scientific paradigm.

Interestingly enough we may be on the cusp of a new paradigm shift within my lifetime, may I bring your attention to a recent United States Congress bill that has been passed:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/6227?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22H+Amdt+856%22%5D%7D

As we all know Quantum particles 'communicate' with each other instantaneously from anywhere in the universe. If our scientific paradigm as we know it is challenged by a valid & sound theory of quantum science in a way that allows us to harness it's power. I believe it to be that our current scientific paradigm will shift and in hundreds of years our current day science will be seen in much the same way as science deep in our past.

Reality as we know it clearly has secrets far beyond our current understanding, when and how the next scientific paradigm shift commences is only a matter of time.

This week's Questions

Now that I have that base understanding out of the way I can address the actual task I was supposed to be doing:

Work Given: Choose a Scientific Paradigm

• Describe it
• Explain what it could possibly be used for – also, give an example
• Write why you like this paradigm – or don’t like it

SOME IMPORTANT SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTIONS OR PARADIGM SHIFTS

TIME	MATHEMATICS, ASTRONOMY, PHYSICS	GEOLOGY, CHEMISTRY,	BIOLOGY, MEDICINE,
Antiquity to 1400s	Theory of a Spherical Earth
Early 1500s	Heliocentric Theory of Solar System (Copernicus, Brahe, Kepler)
Mid 1600s	Corpuscular Theory of Light and Optics (Newton)		Theory of Blood Circulation (Harvey)
Mid 1600s	Theory of Motion and Mechanics (Newton)		Cellular Theory of Biological Structure (Leeuwenhoek, Hooke,)
Mid 1700s		Oxygen Theory of Combustion (Lavoisier)
Mid 1700s		Theory of Gases, (Boyle, Charles, Cavendish, Lavoisier)	Species Concept in Biology (Linnaeus)
Late 1700s	Theory of Static Electricity (Franklin)	Theory of Gaseous Chemical Elements (Dalton, Lavoisier)
Early 1800s	Theory of Heat and Thermodynamics (Rumford, Carnot, Joule,)	Theory of Metallic Elements (Davy, )
Early 1800s	Theory of Current Electricity and Electro-Chemistry (Galvani, Coulomb, Faraday)	Uniformitarian Theory of Geology (Hutton, Lyell)	Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection (Darwin, Wallace, Huxley)
Late 1800s	Electro-magnetic Wave Theory of Light (Clerk-Maxwell)	Periodic Theory of All Elements (Mendeleev)	Bacterial Theory of Disease (Koch, Pasteur, )
Late 1800s	Quantum Theory of Radiation (Planck)	Theory of Recent Ice Ages (Agassiz)
Late 1800s	Sub-Atomic Particle Theory of Matter (Thompson)
Early 1900s	Theory of General Relativity (Einstein)	Isotopic Theory of All Elements (Moseley, Aston)	Theory of Genetical Inheritance, (Mendel, De Vries, Bateson)
Early 1900s	Theory of Galactic Dimensions (Hubble)		Theory of Blood Groups (Landsteiner)
Mid 1900s	Theory of Expanding Universe (Hubble)	Theory of Continental Drift and Plate Tectonics (Wegener)	Theory of DNA Coding (Crick, Watson, Franklin)
Mid 1900s	Theory of Gravitational Collapse ( )

Source: https://deskarati.com/2011/08/17/scientific-revolutions-or-paradigm-shifts/

Chosen scientific paradigm: Theory of General Relativity (Einstein)

Description: General relativity is the observed gravitational effect between masses resulting from their warping of spacetime.

This showed that space and time were two intertwined forces of our universe, each effecting the other at all times.

I will spare this blog a more detailed explanation as I have already gone in-depth on scientific paradigms in general.

What was it used for?

GPS

From the knowledge that general relativity supplied us about the relation between space and time we are able to produce GPS systems that power a large force of technology in our world today.

BLACK HOLES

Einstein predicted the existance of black holes, which although do not have an affect on our day to day lives it greatly affects our understanding of the universe whilst also raising new questions.

NUCLEAR ENERGY

Nuclear energy may have came a lot later if it were not for Einteins works, this techonology allowed us access to nuclear power which has seen many benefits but on the other side also gave life to nuclear weapons which have caused great devastation and still to this day give certain nations the ability to destroy millions of lives.

Why do I show interest in this paradigm?

This paradigm is of particular interest to me because it is in our current age one of the most famous & prolific paradigms known to general humanity. The conseqences of this paradigm shift had far reaching negative & positive effects on our society that are still observable to this day.

Given how recent this paradigm shift occured it allows me to understand just how much of an effect peredigm shifts can have on humanity. This undersanding makes my imagination wander as to the possibilities of the next paradigm shift. Will millions or even billions die at the hand of new technology? Will we travel the stars? Will we age beyond our biological shells and form a symbiotic relationhip with AI which results in our conciousness being uploaded to the general intelligence once our biological life has reached it's conclusion?

Changes will come fast, the consequence of government interest in quantum technology should be watched closely as this has potential to spawn the next great scientific paradigm shift of humanity.

Truth & Ontology & Epistemology - Week 2

This weeks topic is based around 'Truth'.

In class work

In our class we divided into groups and discussed the questions below, I have answered these questions with my own personal interpretation, some of which disagreed with opinions within my group. I felt that it was being overcomplicated as the discussion went on further. It was a bit of a mind melter, which made me want to tap out of the conversation a bit.

1.  Is there a difference between ‘knowing’ something and ‘having knowledge’ of something?
   I would interpret knowledge as something that is agreed upon among many people, this is why people say phrases such as "common knowledge". It is aggregate experiences/opinions which are agreed upon by a group of people no matter how big or small this group is.
   
   Knowing however is more of a personal truth that is not being said to be knowledge among many people, for example, "I know the answer to this question", this is what you would tell someone if you wanted to share personal knowledge to others. If everyone knew the answer to said questions then it would be knowledge amongst that group of people.
2. What is ‘truth’?
   When we agree that something is the truth we are accepting that the information given is the truth.
3. What do we really mean when we say something is ‘true’?
   If we say something is true we are agreeing that the information is true.
4. Is there a difference between knowing something is ‘true’ and believing that something is ‘true’?
   
   Knowing that something is true would have to involve science or some form of experience that others can replicate. Believing something is true is simply agreeing that something is true.
5. What is the difference between subjective and objective ‘truth’?
   Subjective is a personal truth, this typically pertains to morals, points of view, beliefs etc. Objective truth has to be based in fact and must be something that can be replicated by multiple people or sources, this makes it an objective truth in reality.
6. What is a ‘fact’ and can ‘facts’ change?
   A fact is something that exists alongside objective reality. Facts can change over time in the case that reality also changes in a way that affects the given fact.
7. How do we discover if something is ‘true’ or not?
   Through scientific methods, basing information on facts.
8. “We do not see things as they are but as we are” Anais Nin. What does this mean?
   This saying appears to stem from the fact that our perception of reality all comes from within ourselves, this is modified by our senses in that we all to some extent receive similar information through our senses but in the end, our perception of reality is a reflection of our own mind.
9. “Reality is an illusion, albeit a very persistent one”Einstein. What does this mean?
   I would perceive reality being an illusion due to the limited perception we have of it, through our basic 5 senses we form our perception of reality. This can differ between people as our senses may feed different information to different people also following this our brain may interpret the information in different ways. All of this can lead to a wide variety of people having different perceptions of reality. Without any of us possessing a true vision of reality, we are simply all perceiving a watered down illusion of what is actually out there.
10. Is there a difference between ‘true’ and ‘valid’? Explain!
    
    Valid means that a conclusion is valid in accordance with the given premises, this does however not mean that any of this argument is based on truth. To have an argument that is valid & true the premises needs to be based on truth and the conclusion has to be valid for the given premises. 

Next Topic

Our next topic is Ontology & Epistemology.

Epistemology: How we think.

Ontology: What reality we base it on.

This Weeks Blog Questions:

Ontology is what reality actually is, while epistemology is what we (perceive and) describe reality to be.

(https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_the_difference_between_Ontology_and_Epistomology) - 10/03/2019

What is ontology? 

Ontology is described to be the study of 'being' and is concerned with the true nature of reality.

There are a number of different takes on the core meaning of ontology, without getting into that I would boil it down to the above definition as a broad overview of the topic.

An ontology may also boil down to being 'beliefs about reality'.

How is it relevant to research?

Different kinds of research are founded on different beliefs of what we think the truth is, therefore our ontology, our beliefs can widely affect the outcome of research in one way or another. Your ontology in research is an important thing to nail down as it has a spillover effect in shaping the way the rest of your research turns out.

There are two types of ontology that exist as opposites: realism & relativism. Understanding how these work in a research context greatly aids in understanding how ontology affects your research as a whole.

Realism: 

• One truth exists
• It does not change
• Objective measurements
• Generalizable

Relativism:

• Multiple realities exist
• Shaped by context
• Truth evolves and changes
• May use in similar contexts

Sourced from:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCOsY5rkRs8

Ontologically, either you're a realist or an anti-realist. Either you accept facts are real independently of the "human mind" (realist), i.e. objective, or you accept that reality is only subjective (anti-realist). Ontological theories are based on either one or the other. In ontology, relativism, as you can infer, is the sceptic's favourite approach to anti-realism.

(https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_are_the_terms_for_various_ontological_positions_Are_realism_and_relativism_ontological_positions_If_yes_what_do_they_mean) - 10/03/2019

What is epistemology? 

"All epistemology begins in fear ... fear that the senses are too feeble and the intellect too frail; fear that the memory fades, even between adjacent steps of a mathematical demonstration; dear that authority and convention blinds; fear that God may keep secrets or demons deceive." (Lorraine Daston and Peter Galison)

Epistemology is the study of knowledge.

An example of a theory of knowledge is an empirical approach, knowledge gained in this manner is done by our senses, for example observing a plant in real life can lead to you knowing its shape, colour and other defining attributes. This knowledge is defined as empirical knowledge.

Another example of epistemology is propositional knowledge, this knowledge is based on facts. For example: "I know a dog has four legs", "2 x 2 = 4".

Practical knowledge is my last example, this form of knowledge is similar to "know how" and is, for the most part, our unconscious knowledge. For example: Driving a car, walking downstairs, playing a sport etc.

Sourced from:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3IcbRNQR4c

How is it relevant to research?

From understanding the various types of epistemologies that exist we can understand how they shape research, what epistemology is our research based on?

Epistemology is needed in order to distinguish between true and false as we obtain knowledge from the world around us. By knowing what type of knowledge and understanding the type of knowledge we are using we can discern in a more scientific manner the truth of a given situation and provide more accurate research.

Sourced from:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3IcbRNQR4c

What is the connection between ontology and epistemology in a research context?

In a research context, these two elements can shape each other to greatly affect the outcome of research, if your ontology is based in realism then the type of knowledge you require is propositional knowledge, these are generally facts that can be replicated throughout society.

Relativist ontology, however, may depend more on empirical knowledge that comes from our senses, this adds a layer of context to the research because our senses are inherently flawed and only offer us an illusion of reality based on what makes it past our senses and into our brain.

This is my attempt at linking the two together, my research on the topics and give me a wide variety of answers and ways to approach the actual understanding of these words. I have a feeling that I will come to understand a lot more following our next class.



I am used to knowing things intuitively, so exploring knowledge in this manner is challenging but healthy.