As an aspiring researcher entering the field, I am seeking valuable knowledge from experienced research scholars. When embarking on a research endeavor, I am interested in understanding the key elements that contribute to its distinctiveness and innovation. I warmly welcome all types of suggestions and insights as I am eager to learn from the expertise of others in the field. What criteria are used to assess whether a work possesses novelty or not?
Assessing the novelty of a research work depends on various factors, including the research question, methodology, data analysis, and interpretation of results. Some commonly used criteria to evaluate the novelty of a research work include:
Originality: The research question and the approach used to answer it should be unique and original. The study should aim to address a gap in the current knowledge or provide a fresh perspective on an existing issue.
Significance: The research should contribute to the existing body of knowledge, either by providing new insights, confirming or challenging existing theories, or proposing new hypotheses.
Methodology: The research methodology should be sound and appropriate for the research question. The methods should be clearly described and reproducible, and the data should be reliable and valid.
Results: The results should be robust and statistically significant. They should be presented in a clear and concise manner and should support the research question and hypothesis.
Impact: The research should have practical implications and potential impact on the field. It should provide recommendations for future research or inform policy and practice.
The novelty and distinctiveness of a research work are evaluated by its contribution to the existing body of knowledge and its potential impact on the field.
I would start first by reading in your field of study about types of research that moved the field forward. For example, sometimes, researchers will question what is believed to be standard practice. I remember as a student nurse being told to adhere to strict bedrest for patients who had had a heart attack. They even had to be fed. Along came Paul Dudley White who proved bedrest makes cardiac functioning worse. Those cardiac patients were up and out of bed early after his research was published.
Any field of study has limits on what is known. When you read about an aspect of a phenomena in your field, what else would you like to know?
Nurses are always told to talk to unconscious patients because hearing is the last sense to go. Sometimes they did talk to them sometimes they didn't. What do you say to someone who doesn't respond? I interviewed 111 of previously unconscious patients. Some could hear, some didn't, some had all kinds of other experiences, and some were never totally unaware.
Recognize also ideas that could advance a field are not always approved of initially. It can be a struggle and lacking funding. I have some evidence that infants, 2 to 4 months of age, when they are asleep from being in a cradle position are less likely to wake up when put in their crib from that position then when put in their crib from a shoulder position. The cradle position is less likely than the shoulder position to stimulate proprioception and/or a vestibular response which will stimulate awareness/wakefulness. I cannot find anyone willing to test that hypothesis after 3 years of trying.
Most important, though, is knowing your skills and interests. Where in your field, do you want to make a difference? What do you see already that needs to be proven or enhanced?
Good luck to you and keep asking good questions.
- Badges
- Science method