When you get results by using some methodology , how can be sure that if these results are 100 % novel?
To claim something novel, it needs to possess the "quality of being new, original, or unusual". The methodology itself can be novel. The results obtained from using a known methodology may also be novel. How does one assess this? One possibility may be to undertake a thorough review of literature.
To claim something novel, it needs to possess the "quality of being new, original, or unusual". The methodology itself can be novel. The results obtained from using a known methodology may also be novel. How does one assess this? One possibility may be to undertake a thorough review of literature.
Hello,
1. Thorough literature review.
2. Please be sure that obtained results are 'real' - they are not due to unusual sample characteristics or compromised methodology.
Good luck with your research
Correct Subhash and Witold,
A comprehensive and rigorous literature search and review will reveal the 'gaps' in knowledge. Any research centred on those 'gaps' should be 'original'. However, do be aware that this is more like adding another piece to the research puzzle. It is usually part of the wider picture and, therefore, unlikely to be completely novel in that sense. That said, very little research is completely original outside of the existing context of known knowledge and theory.
When you get results by using some methodology , how can be sure that if these results are 100 % novel?
After generating your research findings followed by thesis / article writeup and before they were being certified as "pass" or being published as an article, these thesis / article will need to go through rigorous review by subject matter experts or authority in certain research areas. These experts / scholars can review your findings accordingly to evaluate whether they are really contributing to knowledge.
Hello again,
also it is important to distiguish here whether results are novel or research questions?
please clarify
Witold
The purpose of a thorough literature review is to make sure the available gasps/problems in the previous research and then come up with the novel solution to fill in the limitations.
Once you will have a detailed knowledge of previous work being done, you will be able to build the platform to work something novel and in that way, you will be in a better position to know the novelty and worth of your work.
All the Best
In addition to the above answers on verifying the result against literature. It is important to make sure that your data is correct. No missings, not skewed for inferential statistics analysis. Assumptions of the test are met. by this you can become highly confident in the novelty of the result.
good luck
A study is novel if there are scanty literature in that field of knowledge, your would therefore provide additional insight into that field of knowledge. It is also novel if it is being done newly in your country or part of the world. It is novel if you use new tools and technique from other fields in your own research for the first time.
A research could be novel if:
- there is a deficit in the literature in the field;
- the methodology is (relatively) new with reference to traditional practices, but reasonable with respect to the specificity of the issue to be addressed;
- there is scarce interest of traditional academic consideration (e.g. lack of citations, etc.) towards those who tackle the issue;
- there is interest of young students or researchers in addressing the issue (e.g. in their thesis or research work).
The "novelty rate" can be recognized by reasonably combining the above criteria.
A research could be novel if:
- there is a deficit in the literature in the field;
- the methodology is (relatively) new with reference to traditional practices, but reasonable with respect to the specificity of the issue to be addressed;
- there is scarce interest of traditional academic consideration (e.g. lack of citations, etc.) towards those who tackle the issue;
- there is interest of young students or researchers in addressing the issue (e.g. in their thesis or research work).
The "novelty rate" can be recognized by reasonably combining the above criteria.
You first find the Theoretical Gaps and Methodological gaps in literature and then on basis of the contributions you made to the theory and by using that methodology which you have mentioned in your gaps then you claim that this is novel
Results are depends on Methodology, If methodology is new there is a huge possibility to get novel findings.
on the other hand elements or parameters are taken into consideration must be unique one to bring out a novel result.
You cannot be 100% sure because you do not know all the keywords that authors are using and do not have access to all libraries.
So be content with 99% certainty.
One can verify only to some extent if one's research work is novel or not and this may be done by conducting a thorough review of literature. One cannot be sure that the results obtained are 100% novel as there is always a possibility of grey literature that is created by researchers and practitioners in various fields, but is not published commercially. Grey literature can be found in the form of reports, conference papers, posters, dissertations, clinical trial data etc. It is practically not possible to find the complete grey literature in the field being researched.
Just search and search again and again with different keywords at different data bases!
Or ask a highly specialized person at the field to express his/her opinion...
Research novelty can be predicted by literature review and plagiarism.
The novelty depends on your depth knowledge of the subject. Then, do a thorough literature search to find out what is known and what are the gaps.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Research Methodology