Collaboration and Argument
In research, there are mainly three types of methods used, qualitative method, quantitative method, and in recent times the mixed methods.
The third type of research method is most popular in recent times and so widely used. Collaboration is the process of working together to achieve a general goal, and in research aspects, it is a very important term. Generally, in a research when collaboration happens then, the collaborating partners divide the goals between themselves only to work separately to obtain a general objective of the research. When collaborating, every individual most importantly relies on the situational awareness which generally helps them to combine their knowledge and skills only to achieve the goals. Sometimes the collaboration is done across distances and in the cases situation analysis is generally controlled by technology.
Collaboration has brought about some very visible changes in the research processes. As of now, it can be regarded as a fundamental concept of the scientific research process, and through collaboration, scientists can bring their unique knowledge and multiple resources to solve complex problems even the problems that can not be singularly be solved can be answered in the process (Tartas & Mirza 2007). So, it can be said that collaboration has taken the research process into a new avenue.
The collaboration process has really made different research processes easier than earlier.
And it has done it in many ways. Here we can discuss the aspect with an example. Let us assume that a research is going on and it deals with a specific illness. The research is mainly directed to find a cure for the proposed illness. And as per initial plans, there will be several ways which will be executed to find a cure for the disease. And during the research process, the researchers will take these avenues to cure the disease and finally if they are successful will bring out a medicine for the disease.
Collaboration in a research makes the research processes faster. Along with that it also helps the research team to evaluate all the sources as per their importance in the research process. Structured collaboration helps the introspection of behavior and communication and this is very important in the process (Spring 1997).
In the given scenario the research team has really worked hard in the aspect of the research and in doing so they have taken the help of a number of different experts to get the most convenient aspects belonged to their research.
So it can be said that in the research method the team has been completely ethical.
It is clear that the papers that are written with collaboration use different forms of arguments than the papers that are written by individual persons.
The papers that are written in collaboration use different forms of arguments while the papers written by an individual writer goes to use only one form of argument. Hence one can find different angles in the papers that are written by the collaborative writers. Generally speaking, it has been seen that the collaborative papers become more and more informative than the individually written papers. In this case, the research team has also included the situational awareness program in their collaboration to give the research more exposure.
In the final analysis, we can say that in most of the cases the collaborative research methods are fruitful than the individual research methods.
In many cases, the papers that are written collaboratively use different warrants from the papers that are written individually.
Here the main aspect is quite similar to the earlier problem. In a collaborative paper, the focus is shared by a number of researchers and they work together equally to complete the research. As there are different angles available in the process, the research becomes more and more introspective and so correct. But in the individual papers the researcher himself or herself complies the whole paper and ultimately it reflects the vision of a single person. It is quite possible that all the different scenarios that are connected with the research may not get a place in the paper. So the paper in a way stays incomplete.
In a collaborative essay, one can place the arguments if they work in a proper way.
It is known that in a collaborative paper, every member of the team gets a part of the paper, and he or she has to concentrate on that part. Now the writer has to take up the subject and understand it thoroughly. Sometimes they have to go out of the box to think about what is the basic demand of the process and what will be the most potent argument that will go along with the research.
After that, the writer must have to take a clear position and it has to be done in such a way so that it does not disturb the general flow of the research method and process. After that along with presenting the general notion about the research topic, the writer can put up the argument he or she has taken and made some concrete comments on that argument. But in the case, one has to clearly remember the fact that the argument must have to be clear and to the point and it must not stop the discussion in any way. Along with that, the argument must be reasonable in the tone, which can attract the reader. Sometimes supporting statements can help the researcher's motives, and it is welcomed in the paper (Walton 1996).
But there are certain rules in the case. The researcher must not in any way try to contradict the general summary of the whole research. If it happens in a way then the complete research will be destroyed as the cause of the argumentative part. So it will be better to consult with other participants before making any part of the research argumentative in tone.
In the collaborative process, it is important for every person to mention his or her standings over the issues that are being discussed in the process.
It is not really wanted if the participant does not find the research process credible from her mind and it can certainly create problems in the way.
It will be beneficial from a personal as well as a collective point of view that the persons who are in the research be clear about their consciences and respond to the process in a professional way so that the final result becomes smooth.
A collaborative research paper is the ultimate result of teamwork, and every member of the team has to contribute something so that the research gets published and becomes successful.
It is clear in the way that every member of the team has something very important to play in the course of the research. It is not expected that any member of the team to express his or her discontent with the research after the completion of the project, or if the process is not thought suitable by the particular person. In most of the researches, the research design is done much earlier before the beginning of the research and every member of the team has to be well aware of their individual responsibilities and as well as the responsibilities as a team. Then the research can move on in a smooth way. But if the aspect of disagreement rises at any point of time, it generally hinders the movement of the research in a collaborative way and ultimately the research tends to fail. So before starting out with the process, every member must say their points and then join the research process (Michael 1997).
If there is any lack of support from the researchers this will certainly be seen in the final paper. It will really decrease the merit of the paper in a certain way and so the paper will lack in quality. So it is not really wanted in the process.
Yes, it is really true that in the case of individuals they do have a strong emotional attachment on the research paper, and often the emotional connection is seen in the research paper.
Sometimes the emotional attachments with the paper tend to overshadow the real motive of the writer and the paper gets dragged in a certain way. It is not expected from a research paper and it ultimately ruins the aim of the researcher and also the organizations that are directly or indirectly connected with the research paper and the process that preceded the paper.
But in a collaborative research paper, a number of researchers work on the project and the paper. So there are a number of views and the final paper is the collective product of all these persons. And in the case, all the participants whether they have any emotional attachment with the paper or not, compile together. In most cases, the research paper is a complete one and there are no traces of any type of emotional attachments with the topic. So the paper becomes more and more subjective and hence more attractive to the readers. It also offers more perspectives than any individual paper.
Peer review is one of the most important aspects of the research paper.
After completion of the paper, the researchers must employ some one who is not on the team but is well aware of the fact to check the research paper before submitting it to the proper authority. It is important in two different aspects. The first aspect is that the person who is reviewing the paper is not attached with the research and so will have no idea about the research process. He will look at the paper with a totally different angle than the researchers and may also comment on several aspects of the paper which will ultimately help to increase the quality of the paper. Secondly, it will be more like an internal review which will give the researchers some scope to develop their paper, and also they can get some ideas about the final paper (Mcgowan 2004).
In recent times, and in the sphere of research, plagiarism is one of the most serious offenses.
The offense is common in the sphere of biological researches, mostly in the field of medical sciences. Some times it can happen that more than one research are going in different parts of the world and these researches are dealing with the same subject.
Evaluating a team paper from plagiarism is a tough job. To examine the paper one must have to aware of the subject on which the paper is written as well as the paper which has charged the paper with plagiarism. Along with that, the person must have to have knowledge on different types of data that are used in the papers. It is a very difficult task as well as it is one of the most irresponsible aspects of any research procedure.
But reviewing one's own paper is something different. One is well aware of his or her paper and it is generally believed that one is also aware of every thing that is written in the paper. One goes to evaluate his or her own paper with two mottoes. The first one is to find out the corners where some more data or information will make the paper more attractive and relevant to the paper. And the second one is the most important. A person must carefully go through his or her paper to find out any unwanted mistakes, and if any mistake is detected, he must correct it. These silly mistakes can really harm a paper and it might lose its importance in the hands of the authority who are the main sponsor of the research (Kirschner & Van Bruggen 2004). It might also ruin the reputation of the researcher too. So it is very important to review one's own paper for at least twice before submitting it to any other person.
Generally, it has been seen that team writing produces stronger arguments than any individual writings.
It has been generally seen that the team which has members from different streams of studies, which are relevant to the research topic generally produce strongest arguments. But in some cases, some irrelevant arguments also occur in the process. So it is important to screen the general arguments and after then take them into the research paper.
Sometimes the individual argument papers are different from the team argument papers.
It is basically different in the choice of topics. But in a general sense, the differences do not make any qualitative problem in the cases. In most of the cases, the individual papers focus on common subjects while the team papers focus on the more complex stuff. The basic difference stays in the paper and what is the quality of the paper. Sometimes there are instances that an individual research paper gets a better response than a collective paper (Corbett & Guerra 2005). But generally, it does not the case.
To produce a good research paper the research team has to be careful of many aspects of the process, the materials etc and after all that, they will have to complete the paper. Only then the paper will become good in a general sense.