researcher meaning

• Dictionaries home
• American English
• Collocations
• German-English
• Grammar home
• Practical English Usage
• Learn & Practise Grammar (Beta)
• Word Lists home
• My Word Lists
• Recent additions
• Resources home
• Text Checker

Definition of researcher noun from the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary

• European researchers say olive oil could help prevent cancer.
• Researchers found there was no evidence of an increased risk of infection.
• The study was carried out by researchers at Bristol University.
• researcher in something a leading researcher in the field of artificial intelligence
• researchers in psychology
• experienced
• analyse/​analyze something
• compare something and something
• examine something
• researchers in the field

Definitions on the go

Look up any word in the dictionary offline, anytime, anywhere with the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary app.

Nearby words

• TheFreeDictionary
• Word / Article
• Starts with
• Free toolbar & extensions
• Word of the Day
• Free content
• artificial intelligence
• big science
• child-directed speech
• coresearcher
• Dick George Frederick
• discourageable
• research and development
• research center
• research centre
• research colloquium
• research director
• research establishment
• research facility
• research fellow
• research lab
• research laboratory
• research project
• research quantum
• research rocket
• research staff
• research student
• research work
• research worker
• researchful
• researchist
• resectability
• resectoscope
• resectoscopy
• Reseda luteola
• Reseda odorata
• resegregate
• resegregation
• Research, Recommendations and Electronic Voting
• Research, Scholarship and Creative Activity Program
• Research, Scholarship and Knowledge Transfer
• Research, Scholarship, and Creative Activity
• Research, Technological Development
• Research, Technological Development and Demonstration
• Research, Technological Development and Innovation
• Research, Technology Transfer, and Economic Development
• Research, Writing, and Information Technology
• Research-Based Nurse Education
• Research-Based Science Education
• Research-Extension-Farmer-Input Linkage System
• Research-in-Progress Database
• Research-Related Health Information
• research-use only
• Research/Intelligence Analyst Program
• Research/Recertify/Upgrade
• researchable
• researched into
• Researched Superior Quality
• Researcher administered survey
• Researcher Exchange Programme
• Researcher'S Mobility Portal
• researcher-administered survey
• Researchers
• Researchers for Asylum Seekers
• Researchers, Academicians and Allied Workers Union
• Researchers, Scientists and Engineers
• researches into
• Researchful
• researching
• Researching Active Solar Longitudes
• Researching Alternative Health Foundation
• Researching and Applying Metaphor
• Researching Effective Pedagogy in the Early Years
• researching into
• Researching structures
• Researching, Advancing and Inspiring Student Engagement
• Researching, Work and Learning
• Facebook Share

What does a researcher do?

Would you make a good researcher? Take our career test and find your match with over 800 careers.

What is a Researcher?

A researcher is trained to conduct systematic and scientific investigations in a particular field of study. Researchers use a variety of techniques to collect and analyze data to answer research questions or test hypotheses. They are responsible for designing studies, collecting data, analyzing data, and interpreting the results. Researchers may work in a wide range of fields, including science, medicine, engineering, social sciences, humanities, and many others.

To become a researcher, individuals usually need to obtain a graduate degree in their chosen field of study. They may also need to gain experience working as an assistant or intern in a research setting before becoming a full-fledged researcher. Researchers may work in academic or industrial settings, or they may work independently as consultants or freelance researchers. Regardless of the setting, researchers play a vital role in advancing knowledge and finding solutions to real-world problems.

What does a Researcher do?

Researchers are essential to the advancement of knowledge in various fields, including science, technology, medicine, social sciences, and humanities. Their work involves conducting systematic investigations to gather data, analyze it, and draw meaningful conclusions. Through their research, they can identify new problems and challenges, develop innovative solutions, and test hypotheses to validate theories.

Researchers also play a critical role in improving existing practices and policies, identifying gaps in knowledge, and creating new avenues for future research. They provide valuable insights and information that can inform decision-making, shape public opinion, and drive progress in society.

Duties and Responsibilities The duties and responsibilities of researchers can vary depending on the field of study and the type of research being conducted. However, here are some common duties and responsibilities that researchers are typically expected to fulfill:

• Develop research proposals: Developing a research proposal typically involves identifying a research question or problem, reviewing the relevant literature, selecting appropriate research methods and techniques, and outlining the expected outcomes of the research. Researchers must also ensure that their proposal aligns with the funding agency's objectives and guidelines.
• Conduct literature reviews: Literature reviews involve searching for and reviewing existing research papers, articles, books, and other relevant publications to identify gaps in knowledge and to build upon previous research. Researchers must ensure that they are using credible and reliable sources of information and that their review is comprehensive.
• Collect and analyze data: Collecting and analyzing data is a key aspect of research. This may involve designing and conducting experiments, surveys, interviews, or observations. Researchers must ensure that their data collection methods are valid and reliable, and that their analysis is appropriate and accurate.
• Ensure ethical considerations: Research ethics involve ensuring that the research is conducted in a manner that protects the rights, welfare, and dignity of all participants, as well as the environment. Researchers must obtain informed consent from human participants, ensure that animal research is conducted ethically and humanely, and comply with relevant regulations and guidelines.
• Communicate research findings: Researchers must communicate their research findings clearly and effectively to a range of audiences, including academic peers, policymakers, and the general public. This may involve writing research papers, presenting at conferences, and producing reports or other materials.
• Manage research projects: Managing a research project involves planning, organizing, and coordinating resources, timelines, and budgets to ensure that the project is completed on time and within budget. Researchers must ensure that they have the necessary resources, such as funding, personnel, and equipment, and that they are managing these resources effectively.
• Collaborate with others: Collaboration is an important aspect of research, and researchers often work with other researchers, academic institutions, funding agencies, and industry partners to achieve research objectives. Collaboration can help to facilitate the sharing of resources, expertise, and knowledge.
• Stay up-to-date with developments in their field: Research is an evolving field, and researchers must stay up-to-date with the latest developments and trends in their field to ensure that their research remains relevant and impactful. This may involve attending conferences, workshops, and seminars, reading academic journals and other publications, and participating in professional development opportunities.

Types of Researchers There are many types of researchers, depending on their areas of expertise, research methods, and the types of questions they seek to answer. Here are some examples:

• Basic Researchers: These researchers focus on understanding fundamental concepts and phenomena in a particular field. Their work may not have immediate practical applications, but it lays the groundwork for applied research.
• Applied Researchers: These researchers seek to apply basic research findings to real-world problems and situations. They may work in fields such as engineering, medicine, or psychology.
• Clinical Researchers: These researchers conduct studies with human subjects to better understand disease, illness, and treatment options. They may work in hospitals, universities, or research institutes.
• Epidemiologists : These researchers study the spread and distribution of disease in populations, and work to develop strategies for disease prevention and control.
• Social Scientists: These researchers study human behavior and society, using methods such as surveys, experiments, and observations. They may work in fields such as psychology, sociology, or anthropology.
• Natural Scientists: These researchers study the natural world, including the physical, chemical, and biological processes that govern it. They may work in fields such as physics, chemistry, or biology.
• Data Scientists : These researchers use statistical and computational methods to analyze large datasets and derive insights from them. They may work in fields such as machine learning, artificial intelligence, or business analytics.
• Policy Researchers: These researchers study policy issues, such as healthcare, education, or environmental regulations, and work to develop evidence-based policy recommendations. They may work in government agencies, think tanks, or non-profit organizations.

What is the workplace of a Researcher like?

The workplace of a researcher can vary greatly depending on the field and area of study. Researchers can work in a variety of settings, including academic institutions, government agencies, non-profit organizations, and private companies.

In academic settings, researchers often work in universities or research institutions, conducting experiments and analyzing data to develop new theories and insights into various fields of study. They may also teach courses and mentor students in their area of expertise.

In government agencies, researchers may work on projects related to public policy, health, and safety. They may be responsible for conducting research to support the development of new regulations or programs, analyzing data to assess the effectiveness of existing policies, or providing expertise on specific issues.

Non-profit organizations often employ researchers to study social and environmental issues, such as poverty, climate change, and human rights. These researchers may conduct surveys and collect data to understand the impact of various programs and initiatives, and use this information to advocate for policy changes or other interventions.

Private companies also employ researchers, particularly in industries such as technology and healthcare. These researchers may be responsible for developing new products, improving existing technologies, or conducting market research to understand consumer preferences and behaviors.

Regardless of the setting, researchers typically spend a significant amount of time conducting research, analyzing data, and communicating their findings through presentations, reports, and publications. They may also collaborate with other researchers or professionals in their field, attend conferences and workshops, and stay up-to-date with the latest research and developments in their area of expertise.

Frequently Asked Questions

Academic writer vs researcher.

An academic writer is someone who produces written material for academic purposes, such as research papers, essays, and other scholarly works. Academic writers may work as freelance writers, editors, or as staff writers for academic institutions or publishers.

On the other hand, a researcher is someone who conducts original research to generate new knowledge or validate existing knowledge. Researchers may work in academic settings, government agencies, private companies, or non-profit organizations. They typically design and execute experiments, surveys, or other data collection methods, analyze the data, and draw conclusions based on their findings.

While there may be some overlap between the skills required for academic writing and research, they are distinct activities with different goals. Academic writers often rely on the research of others to support their arguments, while researchers generate new knowledge through their own experiments and data analysis. However, academic writers may also be researchers who write about their own research findings.

Continue reading

Research Basics

• What Is Research?
• Types of Research
• Secondary Research | Literature Review
• Developing Your Topic
• Primary vs. Secondary Sources
• Evaluating Sources
• Responsible Conduct of Research
• Additional Help

A good working definition of research might be:

Research is the deliberate, purposeful, and systematic gathering of data, information, facts, and/or opinions for the advancement of personal, societal, or overall human knowledge.

Based on this definition, we all do research all the time. Most of this research is casual research. Asking friends what they think of different restaurants, looking up reviews of various products online, learning more about celebrities; these are all research.

Formal research includes the type of research most people think of when they hear the term “research”: scientists in white coats working in a fully equipped laboratory. But formal research is a much broader category that just this. Most people will never do laboratory research after graduating from college, but almost everybody will have to do some sort of formal research at some point in their careers.

So What Do We Mean By “Formal Research?”

Casual research is inward facing: it’s done to satisfy our own curiosity or meet our own needs, whether that’s choosing a reliable car or figuring out what to watch on TV. Formal research is outward facing. While it may satisfy our own curiosity, it’s primarily intended to be shared in order to achieve some purpose. That purpose could be anything: finding a cure for cancer, securing funding for a new business, improving some process at your workplace, proving the latest theory in quantum physics, or even just getting a good grade in your Humanities 200 class.

What sets formal research apart from casual research is the documentation of where you gathered your information from. This is done in the form of “citations” and “bibliographies.” Citing sources is covered in the section "Citing Your Sources."

Formal research also follows certain common patterns depending on what the research is trying to show or prove. These are covered in the section “Types of Research.”

• ~[123]~: Dec 21, 2023 3:49 PM
• ~[124]~: https://guides.library.iit.edu/research_basics

What Is Research, and Why Do People Do It?

• Open Access
• First Online: 03 December 2022

Cite this chapter

You have full access to this open access chapter

• James Hiebert 6 ,
• Jinfa Cai 7 ,
• Stephen Hwang 7 ,
• Anne K Morris 6 &
• Charles Hohensee 6  

Part of the book series: Research in Mathematics Education ((RME))

16k Accesses

Abstractspiepr Abs1

Every day people do research as they gather information to learn about something of interest. In the scientific world, however, research means something different than simply gathering information. Scientific research is characterized by its careful planning and observing, by its relentless efforts to understand and explain, and by its commitment to learn from everyone else seriously engaged in research. We call this kind of research scientific inquiry and define it as “formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses.” By “hypotheses” we do not mean the hypotheses you encounter in statistics courses. We mean predictions about what you expect to find and rationales for why you made these predictions. Throughout this and the remaining chapters we make clear that the process of scientific inquiry applies to all kinds of research studies and data, both qualitative and quantitative.

You have full access to this open access chapter,  Download chapter PDF

Part I. What Is Research?

Have you ever studied something carefully because you wanted to know more about it? Maybe you wanted to know more about your grandmother’s life when she was younger so you asked her to tell you stories from her childhood, or maybe you wanted to know more about a fertilizer you were about to use in your garden so you read the ingredients on the package and looked them up online. According to the dictionary definition, you were doing research.

Recall your high school assignments asking you to “research” a topic. The assignment likely included consulting a variety of sources that discussed the topic, perhaps including some “original” sources. Often, the teacher referred to your product as a “research paper.”

Were you conducting research when you interviewed your grandmother or wrote high school papers reviewing a particular topic? Our view is that you were engaged in part of the research process, but only a small part. In this book, we reserve the word “research” for what it means in the scientific world, that is, for scientific research or, more pointedly, for scientific inquiry .

Exercise 1.1

Before you read any further, write a definition of what you think scientific inquiry is. Keep it short—Two to three sentences. You will periodically update this definition as you read this chapter and the remainder of the book.

This book is about scientific inquiry—what it is and how to do it. For starters, scientific inquiry is a process, a particular way of finding out about something that involves a number of phases. Each phase of the process constitutes one aspect of scientific inquiry. You are doing scientific inquiry as you engage in each phase, but you have not done scientific inquiry until you complete the full process. Each phase is necessary but not sufficient.

In this chapter, we set the stage by defining scientific inquiry—describing what it is and what it is not—and by discussing what it is good for and why people do it. The remaining chapters build directly on the ideas presented in this chapter.

A first thing to know is that scientific inquiry is not all or nothing. “Scientificness” is a continuum. Inquiries can be more scientific or less scientific. What makes an inquiry more scientific? You might be surprised there is no universally agreed upon answer to this question. None of the descriptors we know of are sufficient by themselves to define scientific inquiry. But all of them give you a way of thinking about some aspects of the process of scientific inquiry. Each one gives you different insights.

Exercise 1.2

As you read about each descriptor below, think about what would make an inquiry more or less scientific. If you think a descriptor is important, use it to revise your definition of scientific inquiry.

Creating an Image of Scientific Inquiry

We will present three descriptors of scientific inquiry. Each provides a different perspective and emphasizes a different aspect of scientific inquiry. We will draw on all three descriptors to compose our definition of scientific inquiry.

Descriptor 1. Experience Carefully Planned in Advance

Sir Ronald Fisher, often called the father of modern statistical design, once referred to research as “experience carefully planned in advance” (1935, p. 8). He said that humans are always learning from experience, from interacting with the world around them. Usually, this learning is haphazard rather than the result of a deliberate process carried out over an extended period of time. Research, Fisher said, was learning from experience, but experience carefully planned in advance.

This phrase can be fully appreciated by looking at each word. The fact that scientific inquiry is based on experience means that it is based on interacting with the world. These interactions could be thought of as the stuff of scientific inquiry. In addition, it is not just any experience that counts. The experience must be carefully planned . The interactions with the world must be conducted with an explicit, describable purpose, and steps must be taken to make the intended learning as likely as possible. This planning is an integral part of scientific inquiry; it is not just a preparation phase. It is one of the things that distinguishes scientific inquiry from many everyday learning experiences. Finally, these steps must be taken beforehand and the purpose of the inquiry must be articulated in advance of the experience. Clearly, scientific inquiry does not happen by accident, by just stumbling into something. Stumbling into something unexpected and interesting can happen while engaged in scientific inquiry, but learning does not depend on it and serendipity does not make the inquiry scientific.

Descriptor 2. Observing Something and Trying to Explain Why It Is the Way It Is

When we were writing this chapter and googled “scientific inquiry,” the first entry was: “Scientific inquiry refers to the diverse ways in which scientists study the natural world and propose explanations based on the evidence derived from their work.” The emphasis is on studying, or observing, and then explaining . This descriptor takes the image of scientific inquiry beyond carefully planned experience and includes explaining what was experienced.

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, “explain” means “(a) to make known, (b) to make plain or understandable, (c) to give the reason or cause of, and (d) to show the logical development or relations of” (Merriam-Webster, n.d. ). We will use all these definitions. Taken together, they suggest that to explain an observation means to understand it by finding reasons (or causes) for why it is as it is. In this sense of scientific inquiry, the following are synonyms: explaining why, understanding why, and reasoning about causes and effects. Our image of scientific inquiry now includes planning, observing, and explaining why.

We need to add a final note about this descriptor. We have phrased it in a way that suggests “observing something” means you are observing something in real time—observing the way things are or the way things are changing. This is often true. But, observing could mean observing data that already have been collected, maybe by someone else making the original observations (e.g., secondary analysis of NAEP data or analysis of existing video recordings of classroom instruction). We will address secondary analyses more fully in Chap. 4 . For now, what is important is that the process requires explaining why the data look like they do.

We must note that for us, the term “data” is not limited to numerical or quantitative data such as test scores. Data can also take many nonquantitative forms, including written survey responses, interview transcripts, journal entries, video recordings of students, teachers, and classrooms, text messages, and so forth.

Exercise 1.3

What are the implications of the statement that just “observing” is not enough to count as scientific inquiry? Does this mean that a detailed description of a phenomenon is not scientific inquiry?

Find sources that define research in education that differ with our position, that say description alone, without explanation, counts as scientific research. Identify the precise points where the opinions differ. What are the best arguments for each of the positions? Which do you prefer? Why?

Descriptor 3. Updating Everyone’s Thinking in Response to More and Better Information

This descriptor focuses on a third aspect of scientific inquiry: updating and advancing the field’s understanding of phenomena that are investigated. This descriptor foregrounds a powerful characteristic of scientific inquiry: the reliability (or trustworthiness) of what is learned and the ultimate inevitability of this learning to advance human understanding of phenomena. Humans might choose not to learn from scientific inquiry, but history suggests that scientific inquiry always has the potential to advance understanding and that, eventually, humans take advantage of these new understandings.

Before exploring these bold claims a bit further, note that this descriptor uses “information” in the same way the previous two descriptors used “experience” and “observations.” These are the stuff of scientific inquiry and we will use them often, sometimes interchangeably. Frequently, we will use the term “data” to stand for all these terms.

An overriding goal of scientific inquiry is for everyone to learn from what one scientist does. Much of this book is about the methods you need to use so others have faith in what you report and can learn the same things you learned. This aspect of scientific inquiry has many implications.

One implication is that scientific inquiry is not a private practice. It is a public practice available for others to see and learn from. Notice how different this is from everyday learning. When you happen to learn something from your everyday experience, often only you gain from the experience. The fact that research is a public practice means it is also a social one. It is best conducted by interacting with others along the way: soliciting feedback at each phase, taking opportunities to present work-in-progress, and benefitting from the advice of others.

A second implication is that you, as the researcher, must be committed to sharing what you are doing and what you are learning in an open and transparent way. This allows all phases of your work to be scrutinized and critiqued. This is what gives your work credibility. The reliability or trustworthiness of your findings depends on your colleagues recognizing that you have used all appropriate methods to maximize the chances that your claims are justified by the data.

A third implication of viewing scientific inquiry as a collective enterprise is the reverse of the second—you must be committed to receiving comments from others. You must treat your colleagues as fair and honest critics even though it might sometimes feel otherwise. You must appreciate their job, which is to remain skeptical while scrutinizing what you have done in considerable detail. To provide the best help to you, they must remain skeptical about your conclusions (when, for example, the data are difficult for them to interpret) until you offer a convincing logical argument based on the information you share. A rather harsh but good-to-remember statement of the role of your friendly critics was voiced by Karl Popper, a well-known twentieth century philosopher of science: “. . . if you are interested in the problem which I tried to solve by my tentative assertion, you may help me by criticizing it as severely as you can” (Popper, 1968, p. 27).

A final implication of this third descriptor is that, as someone engaged in scientific inquiry, you have no choice but to update your thinking when the data support a different conclusion. This applies to your own data as well as to those of others. When data clearly point to a specific claim, even one that is quite different than you expected, you must reconsider your position. If the outcome is replicated multiple times, you need to adjust your thinking accordingly. Scientific inquiry does not let you pick and choose which data to believe; it mandates that everyone update their thinking when the data warrant an update.

Doing Scientific Inquiry

We define scientific inquiry in an operational sense—what does it mean to do scientific inquiry? What kind of process would satisfy all three descriptors: carefully planning an experience in advance; observing and trying to explain what you see; and, contributing to updating everyone’s thinking about an important phenomenon?

We define scientific inquiry as formulating , testing , and revising hypotheses about phenomena of interest.

Of course, we are not the only ones who define it in this way. The definition for the scientific method posted by the editors of Britannica is: “a researcher develops a hypothesis, tests it through various means, and then modifies the hypothesis on the basis of the outcome of the tests and experiments” (Britannica, n.d. ).

Notice how defining scientific inquiry this way satisfies each of the descriptors. “Carefully planning an experience in advance” is exactly what happens when formulating a hypothesis about a phenomenon of interest and thinking about how to test it. “ Observing a phenomenon” occurs when testing a hypothesis, and “ explaining ” what is found is required when revising a hypothesis based on the data. Finally, “updating everyone’s thinking” comes from comparing publicly the original with the revised hypothesis.

Doing scientific inquiry, as we have defined it, underscores the value of accumulating knowledge rather than generating random bits of knowledge. Formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses is an ongoing process, with each revised hypothesis begging for another test, whether by the same researcher or by new researchers. The editors of Britannica signaled this cyclic process by adding the following phrase to their definition of the scientific method: “The modified hypothesis is then retested, further modified, and tested again.” Scientific inquiry creates a process that encourages each study to build on the studies that have gone before. Through collective engagement in this process of building study on top of study, the scientific community works together to update its thinking.

Before exploring more fully the meaning of “formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses,” we need to acknowledge that this is not the only way researchers define research. Some researchers prefer a less formal definition, one that includes more serendipity, less planning, less explanation. You might have come across more open definitions such as “research is finding out about something.” We prefer the tighter hypothesis formulation, testing, and revision definition because we believe it provides a single, coherent map for conducting research that addresses many of the thorny problems educational researchers encounter. We believe it is the most useful orientation toward research and the most helpful to learn as a beginning researcher.

A final clarification of our definition is that it applies equally to qualitative and quantitative research. This is a familiar distinction in education that has generated much discussion. You might think our definition favors quantitative methods over qualitative methods because the language of hypothesis formulation and testing is often associated with quantitative methods. In fact, we do not favor one method over another. In Chap. 4 , we will illustrate how our definition fits research using a range of quantitative and qualitative methods.

Exercise 1.4

Look for ways to extend what the field knows in an area that has already received attention by other researchers. Specifically, you can search for a program of research carried out by more experienced researchers that has some revised hypotheses that remain untested. Identify a revised hypothesis that you might like to test.

Unpacking the Terms Formulating, Testing, and Revising Hypotheses

To get a full sense of the definition of scientific inquiry we will use throughout this book, it is helpful to spend a little time with each of the key terms.

We first want to make clear that we use the term “hypothesis” as it is defined in most dictionaries and as it used in many scientific fields rather than as it is usually defined in educational statistics courses. By “hypothesis,” we do not mean a null hypothesis that is accepted or rejected by statistical analysis. Rather, we use “hypothesis” in the sense conveyed by the following definitions: “An idea or explanation for something that is based on known facts but has not yet been proved” (Cambridge University Press, n.d. ), and “An unproved theory, proposition, or supposition, tentatively accepted to explain certain facts and to provide a basis for further investigation or argument” (Agnes & Guralnik, 2008 ).

We distinguish two parts to “hypotheses.” Hypotheses consist of predictions and rationales . Predictions are statements about what you expect to find when you inquire about something. Rationales are explanations for why you made the predictions you did, why you believe your predictions are correct. So, for us “formulating hypotheses” means making explicit predictions and developing rationales for the predictions.

“Testing hypotheses” means making observations that allow you to assess in what ways your predictions were correct and in what ways they were incorrect. In education research, it is rarely useful to think of your predictions as either right or wrong. Because of the complexity of most issues you will investigate, most predictions will be right in some ways and wrong in others.

By studying the observations you make (data you collect) to test your hypotheses, you can revise your hypotheses to better align with the observations. This means revising your predictions plus revising your rationales to justify your adjusted predictions. Even though you might not run another test, formulating revised hypotheses is an essential part of conducting a research study. Comparing your original and revised hypotheses informs everyone of what you learned by conducting your study. In addition, a revised hypothesis sets the stage for you or someone else to extend your study and accumulate more knowledge of the phenomenon.

We should note that not everyone makes a clear distinction between predictions and rationales as two aspects of hypotheses. In fact, common, non-scientific uses of the word “hypothesis” may limit it to only a prediction or only an explanation (or rationale). We choose to explicitly include both prediction and rationale in our definition of hypothesis, not because we assert this should be the universal definition, but because we want to foreground the importance of both parts acting in concert. Using “hypothesis” to represent both prediction and rationale could hide the two aspects, but we make them explicit because they provide different kinds of information. It is usually easier to make predictions than develop rationales because predictions can be guesses, hunches, or gut feelings about which you have little confidence. Developing a compelling rationale requires careful thought plus reading what other researchers have found plus talking with your colleagues. Often, while you are developing your rationale you will find good reasons to change your predictions. Developing good rationales is the engine that drives scientific inquiry. Rationales are essentially descriptions of how much you know about the phenomenon you are studying. Throughout this guide, we will elaborate on how developing good rationales drives scientific inquiry. For now, we simply note that it can sharpen your predictions and help you to interpret your data as you test your hypotheses.

Hypotheses in education research take a variety of forms or types. This is because there are a variety of phenomena that can be investigated. Investigating educational phenomena is sometimes best done using qualitative methods, sometimes using quantitative methods, and most often using mixed methods (e.g., Hay, 2016 ; Weis et al. 2019a ; Weisner, 2005 ). This means that, given our definition, hypotheses are equally applicable to qualitative and quantitative investigations.

Hypotheses take different forms when they are used to investigate different kinds of phenomena. Two very different activities in education could be labeled conducting experiments and descriptions. In an experiment, a hypothesis makes a prediction about anticipated changes, say the changes that occur when a treatment or intervention is applied. You might investigate how students’ thinking changes during a particular kind of instruction.

A second type of hypothesis, relevant for descriptive research, makes a prediction about what you will find when you investigate and describe the nature of a situation. The goal is to understand a situation as it exists rather than to understand a change from one situation to another. In this case, your prediction is what you expect to observe. Your rationale is the set of reasons for making this prediction; it is your current explanation for why the situation will look like it does.

You will probably read, if you have not already, that some researchers say you do not need a prediction to conduct a descriptive study. We will discuss this point of view in Chap. 2 . For now, we simply claim that scientific inquiry, as we have defined it, applies to all kinds of research studies. Descriptive studies, like others, not only benefit from formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses, but also need hypothesis formulating, testing, and revising.

One reason we define research as formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses is that if you think of research in this way you are less likely to go wrong. It is a useful guide for the entire process, as we will describe in detail in the chapters ahead. For example, as you build the rationale for your predictions, you are constructing the theoretical framework for your study (Chap. 3 ). As you work out the methods you will use to test your hypothesis, every decision you make will be based on asking, “Will this help me formulate or test or revise my hypothesis?” (Chap. 4 ). As you interpret the results of testing your predictions, you will compare them to what you predicted and examine the differences, focusing on how you must revise your hypotheses (Chap. 5 ). By anchoring the process to formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses, you will make smart decisions that yield a coherent and well-designed study.

Exercise 1.5

Compare the concept of formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses with the descriptions of scientific inquiry contained in Scientific Research in Education (NRC, 2002 ). How are they similar or different?

Exercise 1.6

Provide an example to illustrate and emphasize the differences between everyday learning/thinking and scientific inquiry.

Learning from Doing Scientific Inquiry

We noted earlier that a measure of what you have learned by conducting a research study is found in the differences between your original hypothesis and your revised hypothesis based on the data you collected to test your hypothesis. We will elaborate this statement in later chapters, but we preview our argument here.

Even before collecting data, scientific inquiry requires cycles of making a prediction, developing a rationale, refining your predictions, reading and studying more to strengthen your rationale, refining your predictions again, and so forth. And, even if you have run through several such cycles, you still will likely find that when you test your prediction you will be partly right and partly wrong. The results will support some parts of your predictions but not others, or the results will “kind of” support your predictions. A critical part of scientific inquiry is making sense of your results by interpreting them against your predictions. Carefully describing what aspects of your data supported your predictions, what aspects did not, and what data fell outside of any predictions is not an easy task, but you cannot learn from your study without doing this analysis.

Analyzing the matches and mismatches between your predictions and your data allows you to formulate different rationales that would have accounted for more of the data. The best revised rationale is the one that accounts for the most data. Once you have revised your rationales, you can think about the predictions they best justify or explain. It is by comparing your original rationales to your new rationales that you can sort out what you learned from your study.

Suppose your study was an experiment. Maybe you were investigating the effects of a new instructional intervention on students’ learning. Your original rationale was your explanation for why the intervention would change the learning outcomes in a particular way. Your revised rationale explained why the changes that you observed occurred like they did and why your revised predictions are better. Maybe your original rationale focused on the potential of the activities if they were implemented in ideal ways and your revised rationale included the factors that are likely to affect how teachers implement them. By comparing the before and after rationales, you are describing what you learned—what you can explain now that you could not before. Another way of saying this is that you are describing how much more you understand now than before you conducted your study.

Revised predictions based on carefully planned and collected data usually exhibit some of the following features compared with the originals: more precision, more completeness, and broader scope. Revised rationales have more explanatory power and become more complete, more aligned with the new predictions, sharper, and overall more convincing.

Part II. Why Do Educators Do Research?

Doing scientific inquiry is a lot of work. Each phase of the process takes time, and you will often cycle back to improve earlier phases as you engage in later phases. Because of the significant effort required, you should make sure your study is worth it. So, from the beginning, you should think about the purpose of your study. Why do you want to do it? And, because research is a social practice, you should also think about whether the results of your study are likely to be important and significant to the education community.

If you are doing research in the way we have described—as scientific inquiry—then one purpose of your study is to understand , not just to describe or evaluate or report. As we noted earlier, when you formulate hypotheses, you are developing rationales that explain why things might be like they are. In our view, trying to understand and explain is what separates research from other kinds of activities, like evaluating or describing.

One reason understanding is so important is that it allows researchers to see how or why something works like it does. When you see how something works, you are better able to predict how it might work in other contexts, under other conditions. And, because conditions, or contextual factors, matter a lot in education, gaining insights into applying your findings to other contexts increases the contributions of your work and its importance to the broader education community.

Consequently, the purposes of research studies in education often include the more specific aim of identifying and understanding the conditions under which the phenomena being studied work like the observations suggest. A classic example of this kind of study in mathematics education was reported by William Brownell and Harold Moser in 1949 . They were trying to establish which method of subtracting whole numbers could be taught most effectively—the regrouping method or the equal additions method. However, they realized that effectiveness might depend on the conditions under which the methods were taught—“meaningfully” versus “mechanically.” So, they designed a study that crossed the two instructional approaches with the two different methods (regrouping and equal additions). Among other results, they found that these conditions did matter. The regrouping method was more effective under the meaningful condition than the mechanical condition, but the same was not true for the equal additions algorithm.

What do education researchers want to understand? In our view, the ultimate goal of education is to offer all students the best possible learning opportunities. So, we believe the ultimate purpose of scientific inquiry in education is to develop understanding that supports the improvement of learning opportunities for all students. We say “ultimate” because there are lots of issues that must be understood to improve learning opportunities for all students. Hypotheses about many aspects of education are connected, ultimately, to students’ learning. For example, formulating and testing a hypothesis that preservice teachers need to engage in particular kinds of activities in their coursework in order to teach particular topics well is, ultimately, connected to improving students’ learning opportunities. So is hypothesizing that school districts often devote relatively few resources to instructional leadership training or hypothesizing that positioning mathematics as a tool students can use to combat social injustice can help students see the relevance of mathematics to their lives.

We do not exclude the importance of research on educational issues more removed from improving students’ learning opportunities, but we do think the argument for their importance will be more difficult to make. If there is no way to imagine a connection between your hypothesis and improving learning opportunities for students, even a distant connection, we recommend you reconsider whether it is an important hypothesis within the education community.

Notice that we said the ultimate goal of education is to offer all students the best possible learning opportunities. For too long, educators have been satisfied with a goal of offering rich learning opportunities for lots of students, sometimes even for just the majority of students, but not necessarily for all students. Evaluations of success often are based on outcomes that show high averages. In other words, if many students have learned something, or even a smaller number have learned a lot, educators may have been satisfied. The problem is that there is usually a pattern in the groups of students who receive lower quality opportunities—students of color and students who live in poor areas, urban and rural. This is not acceptable. Consequently, we emphasize the premise that the purpose of education research is to offer rich learning opportunities to all students.

One way to make sure you will be able to convince others of the importance of your study is to consider investigating some aspect of teachers’ shared instructional problems. Historically, researchers in education have set their own research agendas, regardless of the problems teachers are facing in schools. It is increasingly recognized that teachers have had trouble applying to their own classrooms what researchers find. To address this problem, a researcher could partner with a teacher—better yet, a small group of teachers—and talk with them about instructional problems they all share. These discussions can create a rich pool of problems researchers can consider. If researchers pursued one of these problems (preferably alongside teachers), the connection to improving learning opportunities for all students could be direct and immediate. “Grounding a research question in instructional problems that are experienced across multiple teachers’ classrooms helps to ensure that the answer to the question will be of sufficient scope to be relevant and significant beyond the local context” (Cai et al., 2019b , p. 115).

As a beginning researcher, determining the relevance and importance of a research problem is especially challenging. We recommend talking with advisors, other experienced researchers, and peers to test the educational importance of possible research problems and topics of study. You will also learn much more about the issue of research importance when you read Chap. 5 .

Exercise 1.7

Identify a problem in education that is closely connected to improving learning opportunities and a problem that has a less close connection. For each problem, write a brief argument (like a logical sequence of if-then statements) that connects the problem to all students’ learning opportunities.

Part III. Conducting Research as a Practice of Failing Productively

Scientific inquiry involves formulating hypotheses about phenomena that are not fully understood—by you or anyone else. Even if you are able to inform your hypotheses with lots of knowledge that has already been accumulated, you are likely to find that your prediction is not entirely accurate. This is normal. Remember, scientific inquiry is a process of constantly updating your thinking. More and better information means revising your thinking, again, and again, and again. Because you never fully understand a complicated phenomenon and your hypotheses never produce completely accurate predictions, it is easy to believe you are somehow failing.

The trick is to fail upward, to fail to predict accurately in ways that inform your next hypothesis so you can make a better prediction. Some of the best-known researchers in education have been open and honest about the many times their predictions were wrong and, based on the results of their studies and those of others, they continuously updated their thinking and changed their hypotheses.

A striking example of publicly revising (actually reversing) hypotheses due to incorrect predictions is found in the work of Lee J. Cronbach, one of the most distinguished educational psychologists of the twentieth century. In 1955, Cronbach delivered his presidential address to the American Psychological Association. Titling it “Two Disciplines of Scientific Psychology,” Cronbach proposed a rapprochement between two research approaches—correlational studies that focused on individual differences and experimental studies that focused on instructional treatments controlling for individual differences. (We will examine different research approaches in Chap. 4 ). If these approaches could be brought together, reasoned Cronbach ( 1957 ), researchers could find interactions between individual characteristics and treatments (aptitude-treatment interactions or ATIs), fitting the best treatments to different individuals.

In 1975, after years of research by many researchers looking for ATIs, Cronbach acknowledged the evidence for simple, useful ATIs had not been found. Even when trying to find interactions between a few variables that could provide instructional guidance, the analysis, said Cronbach, creates “a hall of mirrors that extends to infinity, tormenting even the boldest investigators and defeating even ambitious designs” (Cronbach, 1975 , p. 119).

As he was reflecting back on his work, Cronbach ( 1986 ) recommended moving away from documenting instructional effects through statistical inference (an approach he had championed for much of his career) and toward approaches that probe the reasons for these effects, approaches that provide a “full account of events in a time, place, and context” (Cronbach, 1986 , p. 104). This is a remarkable change in hypotheses, a change based on data and made fully transparent. Cronbach understood the value of failing productively.

Closer to home, in a less dramatic example, one of us began a line of scientific inquiry into how to prepare elementary preservice teachers to teach early algebra. Teaching early algebra meant engaging elementary students in early forms of algebraic reasoning. Such reasoning should help them transition from arithmetic to algebra. To begin this line of inquiry, a set of activities for preservice teachers were developed. Even though the activities were based on well-supported hypotheses, they largely failed to engage preservice teachers as predicted because of unanticipated challenges the preservice teachers faced. To capitalize on this failure, follow-up studies were conducted, first to better understand elementary preservice teachers’ challenges with preparing to teach early algebra, and then to better support preservice teachers in navigating these challenges. In this example, the initial failure was a necessary step in the researchers’ scientific inquiry and furthered the researchers’ understanding of this issue.

We present another example of failing productively in Chap. 2 . That example emerges from recounting the history of a well-known research program in mathematics education.

Making mistakes is an inherent part of doing scientific research. Conducting a study is rarely a smooth path from beginning to end. We recommend that you keep the following things in mind as you begin a career of conducting research in education.

First, do not get discouraged when you make mistakes; do not fall into the trap of feeling like you are not capable of doing research because you make too many errors.

Second, learn from your mistakes. Do not ignore your mistakes or treat them as errors that you simply need to forget and move past. Mistakes are rich sites for learning—in research just as in other fields of study.

Third, by reflecting on your mistakes, you can learn to make better mistakes, mistakes that inform you about a productive next step. You will not be able to eliminate your mistakes, but you can set a goal of making better and better mistakes.

Exercise 1.8

How does scientific inquiry differ from everyday learning in giving you the tools to fail upward? You may find helpful perspectives on this question in other resources on science and scientific inquiry (e.g., Failure: Why Science is So Successful by Firestein, 2015).

Exercise 1.9

Use what you have learned in this chapter to write a new definition of scientific inquiry. Compare this definition with the one you wrote before reading this chapter. If you are reading this book as part of a course, compare your definition with your colleagues’ definitions. Develop a consensus definition with everyone in the course.

Part IV. Preview of Chap. 2

Now that you have a good idea of what research is, at least of what we believe research is, the next step is to think about how to actually begin doing research. This means how to begin formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses. As for all phases of scientific inquiry, there are lots of things to think about. Because it is critical to start well, we devote Chap. 2 to getting started with formulating hypotheses.

Agnes, M., & Guralnik, D. B. (Eds.). (2008). Hypothesis. In Webster’s new world college dictionary (4th ed.). Wiley.

Google Scholar  

Britannica. (n.d.). Scientific method. In Encyclopaedia Britannica . Retrieved July 15, 2022 from https://www.britannica.com/science/scientific-method

Brownell, W. A., & Moser, H. E. (1949). Meaningful vs. mechanical learning: A study in grade III subtraction . Duke University Press..

Cai, J., Morris, A., Hohensee, C., Hwang, S., Robison, V., Cirillo, M., Kramer, S. L., & Hiebert, J. (2019b). Posing significant research questions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 50 (2), 114–120. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.50.2.0114

Article   Google Scholar  

Cambridge University Press. (n.d.). Hypothesis. In Cambridge dictionary . Retrieved July 15, 2022 from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/hypothesis

Cronbach, J. L. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12 , 671–684.

Cronbach, L. J. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30 , 116–127.

Cronbach, L. J. (1986). Social inquiry by and for earthlings. In D. W. Fiske & R. A. Shweder (Eds.), Metatheory in social science: Pluralisms and subjectivities (pp. 83–107). University of Chicago Press.

Hay, C. M. (Ed.). (2016). Methods that matter: Integrating mixed methods for more effective social science research . University of Chicago Press.

Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Explain. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary . Retrieved July 15, 2022, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/explain

National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education . National Academy Press.

Weis, L., Eisenhart, M., Duncan, G. J., Albro, E., Bueschel, A. C., Cobb, P., Eccles, J., Mendenhall, R., Moss, P., Penuel, W., Ream, R. K., Rumbaut, R. G., Sloane, F., Weisner, T. S., & Wilson, J. (2019a). Mixed methods for studies that address broad and enduring issues in education research. Teachers College Record, 121 , 100307.

Weisner, T. S. (Ed.). (2005). Discovering successful pathways in children’s development: Mixed methods in the study of childhood and family life . University of Chicago Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Education, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA

James Hiebert, Anne K Morris & Charles Hohensee

Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA

Jinfa Cai & Stephen Hwang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Hiebert, J., Cai, J., Hwang, S., Morris, A.K., Hohensee, C. (2023). What Is Research, and Why Do People Do It?. In: Doing Research: A New Researcher’s Guide. Research in Mathematics Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19078-0_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19078-0_1

Published : 03 December 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-19077-3

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-19078-0

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Words and phrases

Personal account.

• Access or purchase personal subscriptions
• Get our newsletter
• Save searches
• Set display preferences

Institutional access

Sign in with library card

Sign in with username / password

Recommend to your librarian

Institutional account management

Sign in as administrator on Oxford Academic

research noun 1

• Hide all quotations

What does the noun research mean?

There are seven meanings listed in OED's entry for the noun research , three of which are labelled obsolete. See ‘Meaning & use’ for definitions, usage, and quotation evidence.

How common is the noun research ?

How is the noun research pronounced, british english, u.s. english, where does the noun research come from.

Earliest known use

The earliest known use of the noun research is in the late 1500s.

OED's earliest evidence for research is from 1577, in ‘F. de L'Isle’'s Legendarie .

research is apparently formed within English, by derivation; modelled on a French lexical item.

Etymons: re- prefix , search n.

Nearby entries

• rescuing, adj. 1574–
• resculpt, v. 1926–
• resculpting, n. 1940–
• rescussee, n. 1652–1823
• rescusser, n. 1632–1704
• rese, n. Old English–1600
• rese, v.¹ Old English–1450
• rese, v.² Old English–1582
• reseal, v. 1624–
• resealable, adj. 1926–
• research, n.¹ 1577–
• re-search, n.² 1605–
• research, v.¹ 1588–
• re-search, v.² 1708–
• researchable, adj. 1927–
• research and development, n. 1892–
• researched, adj. 1636–
• researcher, n. 1615–
• researchful, adj. a1834–
• research hospital, n. 1900–
• researching, n. 1611–

Thank you for visiting Oxford English Dictionary

To continue reading, please sign in below or purchase a subscription. After purchasing, please sign in below to access the content.

Meaning & use

Pronunciation, compounds & derived words, entry history for research, n.¹.

research, n.¹ was revised in March 2010.

research, n.¹ was last modified in September 2023.

oed.com is a living text, updated every three months. Modifications may include:

• further revisions to definitions, pronunciation, etymology, headwords, variant spellings, quotations, and dates;
• new senses, phrases, and quotations.

Revisions and additions of this kind were last incorporated into research, n.¹ in September 2023.

Earlier versions of this entry were published in:

OED First Edition (1906)

• Find out more

OED Second Edition (1989)

• View research, n.¹ in OED Second Edition

Please submit your feedback for research, n.¹

Please include your email address if you are happy to be contacted about your feedback. OUP will not use this email address for any other purpose.

Citation details

Factsheet for research, n.¹, browse entry.

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case NPS+ Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Market Research

What is Research: Definition, Methods, Types & Examples

The search for knowledge is closely linked to the object of study; that is, to the reconstruction of the facts that will provide an explanation to an observed event and that at first sight can be considered as a problem. It is very human to seek answers and satisfy our curiosity. Let’s talk about research.

Content Index

What is Research?

What are the characteristics of research.

• Comparative analysis chart

Qualitative methods

Quantitative methods, 8 tips for conducting accurate research.

Research is the careful consideration of study regarding a particular concern or research problem using scientific methods. According to the American sociologist Earl Robert Babbie, “research is a systematic inquiry to describe, explain, predict, and control the observed phenomenon. It involves inductive and deductive methods.”

Inductive methods analyze an observed event, while deductive methods verify the observed event. Inductive approaches are associated with qualitative research , and deductive methods are more commonly associated with quantitative analysis .

Research is conducted with a purpose to:

• Identify potential and new customers
• Understand existing customers
• Set pragmatic goals
• Develop productive market strategies
• Address business challenges
• Put together a business expansion plan
• Identify new business opportunities
• Good research follows a systematic approach to capture accurate data. Researchers need to practice ethics and a code of conduct while making observations or drawing conclusions.
• The analysis is based on logical reasoning and involves both inductive and deductive methods.
• Real-time data and knowledge is derived from actual observations in natural settings.
• There is an in-depth analysis of all data collected so that there are no anomalies associated with it.
• It creates a path for generating new questions. Existing data helps create more research opportunities.
• It is analytical and uses all the available data so that there is no ambiguity in inference.
• Accuracy is one of the most critical aspects of research. The information must be accurate and correct. For example, laboratories provide a controlled environment to collect data. Accuracy is measured in the instruments used, the calibrations of instruments or tools, and the experiment’s final result.

What is the purpose of research?

There are three main purposes:

• Exploratory: As the name suggests, researchers conduct exploratory studies to explore a group of questions. The answers and analytics may not offer a conclusion to the perceived problem. It is undertaken to handle new problem areas that haven’t been explored before. This exploratory data analysis process lays the foundation for more conclusive data collection and analysis.

LEARN ABOUT: Descriptive Analysis

• Descriptive: It focuses on expanding knowledge on current issues through a process of data collection. Descriptive research describe the behavior of a sample population. Only one variable is required to conduct the study. The three primary purposes of descriptive studies are describing, explaining, and validating the findings. For example, a study conducted to know if top-level management leaders in the 21st century possess the moral right to receive a considerable sum of money from the company profit.

LEARN ABOUT: Best Data Collection Tools

• Explanatory: Causal research or explanatory research is conducted to understand the impact of specific changes in existing standard procedures. Running experiments is the most popular form. For example, a study that is conducted to understand the effect of rebranding on customer loyalty.

Here is a comparative analysis chart for a better understanding:

It begins by asking the right questions and choosing an appropriate method to investigate the problem. After collecting answers to your questions, you can analyze the findings or observations to draw reasonable conclusions.

When it comes to customers and market studies, the more thorough your questions, the better the analysis. You get essential insights into brand perception and product needs by thoroughly collecting customer data through surveys and questionnaires . You can use this data to make smart decisions about your marketing strategies to position your business effectively.

To make sense of your study and get insights faster, it helps to use a research repository as a single source of truth in your organization and manage your research data in one centralized data repository .

Types of research methods and Examples

Research methods are broadly classified as Qualitative and Quantitative .

Both methods have distinctive properties and data collection methods .

Qualitative research is a method that collects data using conversational methods, usually open-ended questions . The responses collected are essentially non-numerical. This method helps a researcher understand what participants think and why they think in a particular way.

Types of qualitative methods include:

• One-to-one Interview
• Focus Groups
• Ethnographic studies
• Text Analysis

Quantitative methods deal with numbers and measurable forms . It uses a systematic way of investigating events or data. It answers questions to justify relationships with measurable variables to either explain, predict, or control a phenomenon.

Types of quantitative methods include:

• Survey research
• Descriptive research
• Correlational research

LEARN MORE: Descriptive Research vs Correlational Research

Remember, it is only valuable and useful when it is valid, accurate, and reliable. Incorrect results can lead to customer churn and a decrease in sales.

It is essential to ensure that your data is:

• Valid – founded, logical, rigorous, and impartial.
• Accurate – free of errors and including required details.
• Reliable – other people who investigate in the same way can produce similar results.
• Timely – current and collected within an appropriate time frame.
• Complete – includes all the data you need to support your business decisions.

Gather insights

• Identify the main trends and issues, opportunities, and problems you observe. Write a sentence describing each one.
• Keep track of the frequency with which each of the main findings appears.
• Make a list of your findings from the most common to the least common.
• Evaluate a list of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats identified in a SWOT analysis .
• Prepare conclusions and recommendations about your study.
• Act on your strategies
• Look for gaps in the information, and consider doing additional inquiry if necessary
• Plan to review the results and consider efficient methods to analyze and interpret results.

Review your goals before making any conclusions about your study. Remember how the process you have completed and the data you have gathered help answer your questions. Ask yourself if what your analysis revealed facilitates the identification of your conclusions and recommendations.

LEARN MORE ABOUT OUR SOFTWARE         FREE TRIAL

MORE LIKE THIS

Top 20 Employee Engagement Software Solutions

May 3, 2024

15 Best Customer Experience Software of 2024

May 2, 2024

Journey Orchestration Platforms: Top 11 Platforms in 2024

Top 12 Employee Pulse Survey Tools Unlocking Insights in 2024

May 1, 2024

Other categories

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Uncategorized
• Video Learning Series
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

Cannabis in Tennessee: What push to reclassify marijuana to Schedule III may mean

The Drug Enforcement Agency could move to reclassify marijuana to a lesser severity in what's being reported as the " biggest change in marijuana policy" since the drug was first outlawed.

The proposal, first reported by The Associated Press , would follow a Department of Justice recommendation and lead the DEA to take public comments on a plan to recategorize marijuana, USA TODAY reports .

In this reclassification, marijuana would move from a Schedule I drug which is believed to be highly dangerous, addictive and not for medical use to a Schedule III drug that can be lawfully prescribed as medication. Marijuana has been a Schedule I drug since the Controlled Substances Act was signed in 1970 by President Richard Nixon.

Here is what we know about the reclassification.

What does rescheduling cannabis mean for Tennessee?

While this would be a landmark change, it would not change the state's current cannabis regulations. It would still be a controlled substance even with the new classification. That said, 24 states have legalized marijuana for recreational use and 14 have legalized it for medical use.

In 2022, President Joe Biden directed the Department of Health and Human Services, or the HHS, to conduct a review of how marijuana is scheduled. In the review, the HHS recommended that the drug be rescheduled to a Schedule III .

What to know: Marijuana could soon be reclassified. So just what is a Schedule 3 drug?

Marijuana being classified as a Schedule III drug means it would be classified alongside drugs including ketamine, testosterone, anabolic steroids and Tylenol with codeine, USA TODAY reports . These drugs have "moderate to low potential for physical and psychological dependence," according to the DEA.

The laws regarding Schedule III drugs in Tennessee vary as some drugs are legal with limitations and others are not. Therefore, it is hard to tell if the reclassification of marijuana to a lower schedule would sway Tennessee lawmakers to legalize the drug in any way.

Is marijuana legal in Tennessee?

There is no short answer to the question of whether marijuana is legal in Tennessee for a couple of reasons. Part of the confusion can stem from the various terms − cannabis, marijuana and weed − that might seem interchangeable but are not, at least not as Tennessee defines them.  Hemp  just adds to the confusion.

The defining difference between hemp and marijuana is their psychoactive component: tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC. Hemp has 0.3% or less THC, meaning hemp-derived products don’t contain enough THC to create the “high” traditionally associated with marijuana.

Tennessee has legalized the cultivation of hemp  and defined hemp as cannabis sativa containing less than 0.3% THC. Cannabis sativa containing greater than 0.3% THC, which is defined by Tennessee as marijuana, is still illegal.

While marijuana is not legal, in Tennessee you can buy products containing CBD, or cannabidiol, an active ingredient in cannabis that is derived from the hemp plant but does not cause a high and is not addictive.

Is marijuana a dangerous drug?

Marijuana has been hard to study because of its classification. However, the move to reschedule the drug is largely due to the lower public health risks, federal scientists have said. The rescheduling of marijuana to a Schedule III drug would allow for further studies to be done.

In a leaked HHS document , officials wrote to the DEA in support of rescheduling the drug. Marijuana's risk for addiction is similar to that of tobacco and has relatively mild withdrawal symptoms compared to alcohol. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse , or NIDA, there are no known deaths from a marijuana overdose.

Despite the less intense symptoms, the drug does affect physical and mental health. According to NIDA, it can cause permanent IQ loss for people who begin using it at a young age. Long-term use has been associated with temporary paranoia and hallucinations. Marijuana can exacerbate symptoms with disorders like schizophrenia.

NIDA found that marijuana smoke has a similar health impacts to tobacco smoke. People who smoke marijuana frequently develop issues with breathing similar to those of tobacco smokers.

Respiratory issues include daily cough, phlegm and a higher risk of lung infections, however, the American Heart Association said it’s unclear if marijuana causes a greater risk of lung cancer. 

Health benefits of marijuana

The cannabis plant has been used for medicinal purposes for centuries, if not millennia. It appears to help with  treating pain , insomnia, anxiety, and glaucoma, among other health conditions. Still, evidence is mixed and more research into its health benefits is needed, researchers at  Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health  said in August.

While cannabis is not approved for any medical use by the FDA, several drugs containing cannabinoids, or substances such as THC or CBD, have been approved according to the National Institutes of Health .

USA TODAY and Tennessee Connect reporter Liz Kellar contributed to this report

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

https://www.nist.gov/blogs/taking-measure/nist-physicists-once-obscure-work-now-helping-researchers-learn-about-origins

Taking Measure

Just a Standard Blog

NIST Physicist’s Once Obscure Work Is Now Helping Researchers Learn About the Origins of the Universe

When physicist John “Ben” Mates completed his doctoral thesis in 2011, he figured few people would read it. 

It’s not that Mates, who conducted his Ph.D. research at NIST while a graduate student at the University of Colorado, thought his work unimportant. 

Mates was just being realistic. Most scientists don’t bother to wade through doctoral dissertations, which can run more than 100 pages. Dissertations tend to focus on highly specialized topics. 

And for several years of his career at NIST, Mates was right.

He had devised a novel method to read out the signals from an array of exquisitely sensitive sensors that measure tiny changes in the intensity of thermal radiation (heat), including the afterglow of the Big Bang, known as the cosmic microwave background (CMB).

Reading out data from the detectors, developed at NIST and known as transition edge sensor (TES) bolometers, had proved challenging. That’s because the bolometers can only operate at temperatures a fraction of a degree above  absolute zero , which is about minus 273 degrees Celsius or minus 459 degrees Fahrenheit. If too many wires link the ultracold detectors to room-temperature equipment, the sensors will heat up and stop functioning.

Mates’ dissertation described a way to minimize the number of these wires, enabling the sensors to maintain their chilly operating temperature. 

After completing his thesis, Mates pursued another research project at NIST. 

(Many) Bolometers Needed 

In late 2013, however, his NIST supervisor, Joel Ullom, asked him if he’d like to return to his original study. His dissertation, Ullom told Mates, had taken on added importance. 

Mates had previously demonstrated that signals from two of the TES bolometers could be read out using a single wire connected to a room-temperature device rather than using a separate wire for each sensor. 

Although he had designed the method to minimize the room-temperature connections for a much larger number of sensors, he had not actually shown it could work.

Now, that demonstration was urgently needed — and on a massive scale. 

Astronomers wanted to use not just two but thousands of the TES bolometers on a set of ground-based telescopes to examine the CMB with 10 times more sensitivity than ever before. Although researchers have studied the CMB for decades, the bolometers are able to capture details of the tiny temperature variations in the radiation that may put to the test the leading theory of how the universe was born.

With thousands of bolometers, however, it would be virtually impossible to attach a separate room-temperature wire to each one without heating the sensors beyond their operating temperature.

Over the next 10 years, Mates perfected his technique, showing how the signal from each TES — a change in a tiny current — could be converted to a unique frequency. Thousands of those frequencies, he showed, could be carried on a single room-temperature cable, dramatically reducing the flow of heat back to the detectors.

Using his method, known as microwave multiplexing, astronomers recently installed 67,080  bolometers on the  Simons Observatory , a suite of four telescopes in Chile devoted to studying the CMB. 

The NIST-designed sensors act like miniature thermometers and can discern tiny temperature variations — as small as ten-millionths of a degree — in the CMB over more than 40% of the sky. 

The minuscule hot and cold spots correspond to slight variations in the density of the universe in its infancy, 380,000 years after its violent birth. Studying those variations reveals how and where tiny clumps of matter, the seeds of the galaxies we see in the sky today, first formed in the cosmos.

The bolometers also record patterns of different polarizations in the CMB — wiggles in the electric field of the radiation. Those wiggles encode a wealth of information about the universe an instant after the Big Bang and could hold clues about its mysterious beginning.

Multiplexing Research Goes Mainstream 

Now Mates’ dissertation is a hot topic — required reading for many scientists interested in multiplexing. He’s gotten hundreds of requests for reprints and has traveled around the world, recently installing instrumentation at the Japan Proton Accelerator Research Complex in Tokai. 

“It’s sort of freakish how it all worked out,” Mates said. “I never imagined the work would have such an impact.”

His thesis is so popular that Mates said he’s considering publishing an updated version of his manuscript.

In the future, Mates hopes to keep refining the technique and reducing the cost, so there can be many more projects over the next decade or longer. 

While he appreciates the attention his work is currently receiving, for Mates, the measurement problems were motivation to keep researching. 

“I think I also find most of the problems of developing and improving the system to be interesting on their own,” he said. 

Measuring the Cosmos 

Many NIST technologies have found homes among the stars. Learn more about how this research is helping to better understand our world on our Measuring the Cosmos site . 

About the author

Ron Cowen has been a science writer and editor at NIST since 2016. When not working at NIST, he’s a freelance writer specializing in physics and astronomy. In 2019, he authored his first book, a popular-level account of the 100-year struggle to understand the general theory of relativity, Gravity’s Century: From Einstein’s Eclipse to Images of Black Holes . Cowen has written for Scientific American , The New York Times , U.S. News & World Report , The Washington Post , National Geographic and the news sections of Science and Nature . He was also a staff reporter for 21 years at Science News magazine. Cowen has twice won several awards: the American Institute of Physics' excellence in science writing award, the American Astronomical Society's science writing award in solar physics and the Society's David Schramm science writing award for feature articles on high-energy astrophysics. He has a master's in physics from the University of Maryland.

Related posts

Demystifying Quantum: It’s Here, There and Everywhere

Leap Day Is Here: It Doesn’t Have to Be Your Standard Weekday

From Pokémon to Physics: My Journey of Perseverance Into Research

Intriguing story of the CMB radiation, though I missed any reference to the presumed dark matter scaffold on which galaxies were formed.

Hi, Dan. Thanks for your comment. Here's some additional information from the author:

Details in the structure of the cosmic microwave background reveal, indirectly, the composition of the universe, including the amount of dark matter. This video from Fermilab explains it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ri2LIEjXhmE .

Add new comment

• No HTML tags allowed.
• Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.
• Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Newsletters
• Photography
• Personal Finance
• AP Investigations
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Shopping
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Election Results
• Delegate Tracker
• AP & Elections
• Auto Racing
• 2024 Paris Olympic Games
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Personal finance
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

What marijuana reclassification means for the United States

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration will move to reclassify marijuana as a less dangerous drug, a historic shift to generations of American drug policy that could have wide ripple effects across the country.

FILE - Marijuana plants are seen at a secured growing facility in Washington County, N.Y., May 12, 2023. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration will move to reclassify marijuana as a less dangerous drug, a historic shift to generations of American drug policy that could have wide ripple effects across the country. (AP Photo/Hans Pennink, File)

• Copy Link copied

Budtender Rey Cruz weighs cannabis for a customer at the Marijuana Paradise on Friday, April 19, 2024, in Portland, Ore. (AP Photo/Jenny Kane)

Cloud 9 Cannabis employee Beau McQueen, right, helps a customer, Saturday, April 13, 2024, in Arlington, Wash. The shop is one of the first dispensaries to open under the Washington Liquor and Cannabis Board’s social equity program, established in efforts to remedy some of the disproportionate effects marijuana prohibition had on communities of color. (AP Photo/Lindsey Wasson)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration is moving toward reclassifying marijuana as a less dangerous drug. The Justice Department proposal would recognize the medical uses of cannabis , but wouldn’t legalize it for recreational use.

The proposal would move marijuana from the “Schedule I” group to the less tightly regulated “Schedule III.”

So what does that mean, and what are the implications?

WHAT HAS ACTUALLY CHANGED? WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

Technically, nothing yet. The proposal must be reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget, and then undergo a public-comment period and review from an administrative judge, a potentially lengthy process.

Still, the switch is considered “paradigm-shifting, and it’s very exciting,” Vince Sliwoski, a Portland, Oregon-based cannabis and psychedelics attorney who runs well-known legal blogs on those topics, told The Associated Press when the federal Health and Human Services Department recommended the change.

“I can’t emphasize enough how big of news it is,” he said.

It came after President Joe Biden asked both HHS and the attorney general, who oversees the DEA, last year to review how marijuana was classified. Schedule I put it on par, legally, with heroin, LSD, quaaludes and ecstasy, among others.

Biden, a Democrat, supports legalizing medical marijuana for use “where appropriate, consistent with medical and scientific evidence,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Thursday. “That is why it is important for this independent review to go through.”

Cloud 9 Cannabis employee Beau McQueen, right, helps a customer, Saturday, April 13, 2024, in Arlington, Wash. (AP Photo/Lindsey Wasson)

IF MARIJUANA GETS RECLASSIFIED, WOULD IT LEGALIZE RECREATIONAL CANNABIS NATIONWIDE?

Ap audio: what marijuana reclassification means for the united states.

AP correspondent Haya Panjwani reports on a proposal for the federal government to reclassify marijuana in what would be a historic shift that could have wide ripple effects across the country.

No. Schedule III drugs — which include ketamine, anabolic steroids and some acetaminophen-codeine combinations — are still controlled substances.

They’re subject to various rules that allow for some medical uses, and for federal criminal prosecution of anyone who traffics in the drugs without permission.

No changes are expected to the medical marijuana programs now licensed in 38 states or the legal recreational cannabis markets in 23 states, but it’s unlikely they would meet the federal production, record-keeping, prescribing and other requirements for Schedule III drugs.

There haven’t been many federal prosecutions for simply possessing marijuana in recent years, even under marijuana’s current Schedule I status, but the reclassification wouldn’t have an immediate impact on people already in the criminal justice system.

“Put simple, this move from Schedule I to Schedule III is not getting people out of jail,” said David Culver, senior vice president of public affairs at the U.S. Cannabis Council.

But rescheduling in itself would have some impact, particularly on research and marijuana business taxes.

WHAT WOULD THIS MEAN FOR RESEARCH?

Because marijuana is on Schedule I, it’s been very difficult to conduct authorized clinical studies that involve administering the drug. That has created something of a Catch-22: calls for more research, but barriers to doing it. (Scientists sometimes rely instead on people’s own reports of their marijuana use.)

Marijuana plants are seen at a secured growing facility in Washington County, N.Y., May 12, 2023. (AP Photo/Hans Pennink, File)

Schedule III drugs are easier to study, though the reclassification wouldn’t immediately reverse all barriers to study.

“It’s going to be really confusing for a long time,” said Ziva Cooper, director of the University of California, Los Angeles Center for Cannabis and Cannabinoids. “When the dust has settled, I don’t know how many years from now, research will be easier.”

Among the unknowns: whether researchers will be able to study marijuana from state-licensed dispensaries and how the federal Food and Drug Administration might oversee that.

Some researchers are optimistic.

“Reducing the schedule to schedule 3 will open up the door for us to be able to conduct research with human subjects with cannabis,” said Susan Ferguson, director of University of Washington’s Addictions, Drug & Alcohol Institute in Seattle.

WHAT ABOUT TAXES (AND BANKING)?

Under the federal tax code, businesses involved in “trafficking” in marijuana or any other Schedule I or II drug can’t deduct rent, payroll or various other expenses that other businesses can write off. (Yes, at least some cannabis businesses, particularly state-licensed ones, do pay taxes to the federal government, despite its prohibition on marijuana.) Industry groups say the tax rate often ends up at 70% or more.

The deduction rule doesn’t apply to Schedule III drugs, so the proposed change would cut cannabis companies’ taxes substantially.

They say it would treat them like other industries and help them compete against illegal competitors that are frustrating licensees and officials in places such as New York .

“You’re going to make these state-legal programs stronger,” says Adam Goers, of The Cannabist Company, formerly Columbia Care. He co-chairs a coalition of corporate and other players that’s pushing for rescheduling.

It could also mean more cannabis promotion and advertising if those costs could be deducted, according to Beau Kilmer, co-director of the RAND Drug Policy Center.

Rescheduling wouldn’t directly affect another marijuana business problem: difficulty accessing banks, particularly for loans, because the federally regulated institutions are wary of the drug’s legal status. The industry has been looking instead to a measure called the SAFE Banking Act . It has repeatedly passed the House but stalled in the Senate.

ARE THERE CRITICS? WHAT DO THEY SAY?

Indeed, there are, including the national anti-legalization group Smart Approaches to Marijuana. President Kevin Sabet, a former Obama administration drug policy official, said the HHS recommendation “flies in the face of science, reeks of politics” and gives a regrettable nod to an industry “desperately looking for legitimacy.”

Some legalization advocates say rescheduling weed is too incremental. They want to keep the focus on removing it completely from the controlled substances list, which doesn’t include such items as alcohol or tobacco (they’re regulated, but that’s not the same).

Paul Armentano, the deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, said that simply reclassifying marijuana would be “perpetuating the existing divide between state and federal marijuana policies.” Kaliko Castille, a past president of the Minority Cannabis Business Association, said rescheduling just “re-brands prohibition,” rather than giving an all-clear to state licensees and putting a definitive close to decades of arrests that disproportionately pulled in people of color.

“Schedule III is going to leave it in this kind of amorphous, mucky middle where people are not going to understand the danger of it still being federally illegal,” he said.

This story has been corrected to show that Kaliko Castille is a past president, not president, of the Minority Cannabis Business Association and that Columbia Care is now The Cannabist Company.

___ Peltz reported from New York. Associated Press writers Colleen Long in Washington and Carla K. Johnson in Seattle contributed to this report.

What Marijuana Reclassification Means for the United States

(WASHINGTON) — The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration is moving toward reclassifying marijuana as a less dangerous drug. The Justice Department proposal would recognize the medical uses of cannabis, but wouldn't legalize it for recreational use.

The proposal would move marijuana from the “Schedule I” group to the less tightly regulated “Schedule III."

So what does that mean, and what are the implications?

What has actually changed? What happens next?

Technically, nothing yet. The proposal must be reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget, and then undergo a public-comment period and review from an administrative judge, a potentially lengthy process.

Still, the switch is considered “paradigm-shifting, and it’s very exciting,” Vince Sliwoski, a Portland, Oregon-based cannabis and psychedelics attorney who runs well-known legal blogs on those topics, told The Associated Press when the federal Health and Human Services Department recommended the change.

“I can’t emphasize enough how big of news it is,” he said.

It came after President Joe Biden asked both HHS and the attorney general, who oversees the DEA, last year to review how marijuana was classified. Schedule I put it on par, legally, with heroin, LSD, quaaludes and ecstasy, among others.

Biden, a Democrat, supports legalizing medical marijuana for use “where appropriate, consistent with medical and scientific evidence,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Thursday. “That is why it is important for this independent review to go through.”

Read More: Where Marijuana Laws Stand in the U.S. as Biden Pardons Thousands

If marijuana gets reclassified, would it legalize recreational cannabis nationwide?

No. Schedule III drugs — which include ketamine, anabolic steroids and some acetaminophen-codeine combinations — are still controlled substances.

They're subject to various rules that allow for some medical uses, and for federal criminal prosecution of anyone who traffics in the drugs without permission.

No changes are expected to the medical marijuana programs now licensed in 38 states or the legal recreational cannabis markets in 23 states, but it's unlikely they would meet the federal production, record-keeping, prescribing and other requirements for Schedule III drugs.

There haven't been many federal prosecutions for simply possessing marijuana in recent years, even under marijuana’s current Schedule I status, but the reclassification wouldn't have an immediate impact on people already in the criminal justice system.

Read More: Do Americans Have a Constitutional Right to Use Drugs?

“Put simple, this move from Schedule I to Schedule III is not getting people out of jail,” said David Culver, senior vice president of public affairs at the U.S. Cannabis Council.

But rescheduling in itself would have some impact, particularly on research and marijuana business taxes.

What would this mean for research?

Because marijuana is on Schedule I, it's been very difficult to conduct authorized clinical studies that involve administering the drug. That has created something of a Catch-22: calls for more research, but barriers to doing it. (Scientists sometimes rely instead on people’s own reports of their marijuana use.)

Schedule III drugs are easier to study, though the reclassification wouldn't immediately reverse all barriers to study.

“It’s going to be really confusing for a long time,” said Ziva Cooper, director of the University of California, Los Angeles Center for Cannabis and Cannabinoids. “When the dust has settled, I don’t know how many years from now, research will be easier.”

Among the unknowns: whether researchers will be able to study marijuana from state-licensed dispensaries and how the federal Food and Drug Administration might oversee that.

Some researchers are optimistic.

“Reducing the schedule to schedule 3 will open up the door for us to be able to conduct research with human subjects with cannabis,” said Susan Ferguson, director of University of Washington’s Addictions, Drug & Alcohol Institute in Seattle.

What about taxes (and banking)?

Under the federal tax code, businesses involved in “trafficking” in marijuana or any other Schedule I or II drug can't deduct rent, payroll or various other expenses that other businesses can write off. (Yes, at least some cannabis businesses, particularly state-licensed ones, do pay taxes to the federal government, despite its prohibition on marijuana.) Industry groups say the tax rate often ends up at 70% or more.

The deduction rule doesn't apply to Schedule III drugs, so the proposed change would cut cannabis companies' taxes substantially.

They say it would treat them like other industries and help them compete against illegal competitors that are frustrating licensees and officials in places such as New York.

“You’re going to make these state-legal programs stronger,” says Adam Goers, an executive at medical and recreational cannabis giant Columbia Care. He co-chairs a coalition of corporate and other players that’s pushing for rescheduling.

It could also mean more cannabis promotion and advertising if those costs could be deducted, according to Beau Kilmer, co-director of the RAND Drug Policy Center.

Rescheduling wouldn't directly affect another marijuana business problem: difficulty accessing banks, particularly for loans, because the federally regulated institutions are wary of the drug's legal status. The industry has been looking instead to a measure called the SAFE Banking Act. It has repeatedly passed the House but stalled in the Senate.

Are there critics? What do they say?

Indeed, there are, including the national anti-legalization group Smart Approaches to Marijuana. President Kevin Sabet, a former Obama administration drug policy official, said the HHS recommendation “flies in the face of science, reeks of politics” and gives a regrettable nod to an industry “desperately looking for legitimacy.”

Some legalization advocates say rescheduling weed is too incremental. They want to keep the focus on removing it completely from the controlled substances list, which doesn't include such items as alcohol or tobacco (they're regulated, but that's not the same).

Paul Armentano, the deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, said that simply reclassifying marijuana would be “perpetuating the existing divide between state and federal marijuana policies.” Minority Cannabis Business Association President Kaliko Castille said rescheduling just "re-brands prohibition," rather than giving an all-clear to state licensees and putting a definitive close to decades of arrests that disproportionately pulled in people of color.

“Schedule III is going to leave it in this kind of amorphous, mucky middle where people are not going to understand the danger of it still being federally illegal,” he said.

___ Peltz reported from New York. Associated Press writers Colleen Long in Washington and Carla K. Johnson in Seattle contributed to this report.

More Must-Reads From TIME

• The 100 Most Influential People of 2024
• How Far Trump Would Go
• Scenes From Pro-Palestinian Encampments Across U.S. Universities
• Saving Seconds Is Better Than Hours
• Why Your Breakfast Should Start with a Vegetable
• 6 Compliments That Land Every Time
• Welcome to the Golden Age of Ryan Gosling
• Want Weekly Recs on What to Watch, Read, and More? Sign Up for Worth Your Time

Contact us at [email protected]

Synonyms of researcher

• as in investigator
• More from M-W
• To save this word, you'll need to log in. Log In

Thesaurus Definition of researcher

Synonyms & Similar Words

• investigator
• experimenter
• fact finder
• field - worker

Thesaurus Entries Near researcher

researchers

Cite this Entry

“Researcher.” Merriam-Webster.com Thesaurus , Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/researcher. Accessed 4 May. 2024.

More from Merriam-Webster on researcher

Nglish: Translation of researcher for Spanish Speakers

Britannica English: Translation of researcher for Arabic Speakers

Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free!

Can you solve 4 words at once?

Word of the day.

See Definitions and Examples »

Get Word of the Day daily email!

Popular in Grammar & Usage

More commonly misspelled words, commonly misspelled words, how to use em dashes (—), en dashes (–) , and hyphens (-), absent letters that are heard anyway, how to use accents and diacritical marks, popular in wordplay, 12 star wars words, the words of the week - may 3, 9 superb owl words, 10 words for lesser-known games and sports, your favorite band is in the dictionary, games & quizzes.

• Cambridge Dictionary +Plus

Meaning of research – Learner’s Dictionary

Your browser doesn't support HTML5 audio

• There is the potential for some really interesting research.
• She has done research into how children acquire language .
• The appeal raised over £2 million for AIDS research.
• This report echoes some of the earlier research I've read .
• The government has committed thousands of pounds to the research.

(Definition of research from the Cambridge Learner's Dictionary © Cambridge University Press)

Translations of research

Get a quick, free translation!

Word of the Day

my lips are sealed

said when you are promising to keep a secret

Hidden in plain sight: words and phrases connected with hiding

Learn more with +Plus

• Recent and Recommended {{#preferredDictionaries}} {{name}} {{/preferredDictionaries}}
• Definitions Clear explanations of natural written and spoken English English Learner’s Dictionary Essential British English Essential American English
• Grammar and thesaurus Usage explanations of natural written and spoken English Grammar Thesaurus
• Pronunciation British and American pronunciations with audio English Pronunciation
• English–Chinese (Simplified) Chinese (Simplified)–English
• English–Chinese (Traditional) Chinese (Traditional)–English
• English–Dutch Dutch–English
• English–French French–English
• English–German German–English
• English–Indonesian Indonesian–English
• English–Italian Italian–English
• English–Japanese Japanese–English
• English–Norwegian Norwegian–English
• English–Polish Polish–English
• English–Portuguese Portuguese–English
• English–Spanish Spanish–English
• English–Swedish Swedish–English
• Dictionary +Plus Word Lists
• Translations
• All translations

To add research to a word list please sign up or log in.

Add research to one of your lists below, or create a new one.

{{message}}

Something went wrong.

There was a problem sending your report.

The Research Error That Gave Us the Phrase ‘Missionary Position’

Missionaries have no direct involvement in this origin story. Alfred Kinsey, on the other hand ...

By Ellen Gutoskey | 8:05 AM EDT

In his 1972 sex manual The Joy of Sex , author Alex Comfort described “matrimonial” sex, in which a man is on top of a supine woman, as “the good old Adam and Eve missionary position.”

Though missionary is by no means exclusive to that gender pairing, the fact that some people just recently learned so while watching 2023’s Red, White & Royal Blue proves that Comfort’s representation from over half a century ago still has some gas in the cultural relevance tank.

Missionary position, if in stereotype only, is the kind of vanilla sex favored by husbands and wives either too in love to unlock eyes or too lazy to try something else. It’s chaste enough to have made the final cut of a Marvel movie and so strongly associated with baby-making ( sans scientific evidence , mind you) that even the medieval Catholic Church gave it a gold stamp . 

With that perception in mind, you can see how the position, in all its Adam-and-Eve glory, ended up with a religious nickname.

But that’s not how it happened. In fact, missionaries were mostly involved in this christening by mistake.

“The Way Squares Peg Round Holes”

Many a modern reader could glance at some datasets from Alfred Kinsey ’s 1948 book Sexual Behavior in the Human Male or its 1953 follow-up, Sexual Behavior in the Human Female , and spot flaws in the research (e.g. nearly all the survey participants were white). But for an American society starved for candid discussions about sex , the Kinsey reports were easy to take at face value when they first hit shelves. Both volumes achieved something not many statistical studies ever aspire to, let alone accomplish: They became bestsellers.

Even as researchers turned a critic’s eye on Kinsey’s work during the back half of the 20th century, certain details escaped further interrogation. One of them was the origin of the phrase missionary position .

In Sexual Behavior in the Human Male , to illustrate that the missionary position—or “the English-American position”—was far from global, Kinsey referenced anthropologist Bronisław Malinowski’s 1929 text about the Indigenous communities of Papua New Guinea’s Trobriand Islands. Malinowski, Kinsey wrote , “notes that caricatures of the English-American position are performed around the communal campfires, to the great amusement of the natives who refer to the position as the ‘missionary position.’” The implication was that the Indigenous islanders had learned this ridiculous copulation formation from Christian missionaries.

By the time English speakers embraced the term missionary position in full force during the sexual revolution, some had also begun to scorn the thing itself. Plenty of sexually liberated women continued to favor the bottom spot, but reactionaries tended to fixate on the notion that all this experimentation made missionary seem stuffy and uncool. One 1970 piece in The Guardian called it “the tatty old missionary position,” while a 1973 one in The Montreal Star described it as “the way squares peg round holes.”

It wasn’t just the phrase that got picked up from the Kinsey reports. Its origin story did, too, repeated (and often embellished) in everything from academic articles to newspaper advice columns. In a 1976 edition of The Ottawa Citizen , for example, advisor Dr. Aaron Rutledge asserted that missionary “was taught to Pacific Islanders and African tribespeople as the one religiously approved approach to husband-wife sexuality.”

But even if the good doctor hadn’t botched Kinsey’s account, he still would have accidentally been spreading misinformation —because Kinsey’s account wasn’t accurate in the first place.

“Sketchy and Flabby Movements”

Around the early 2000s, anthropologist and missiologist Robert J. Priest did something that countless scholars before him apparently hadn’t troubled to do: He read Malinowski’s 1929 book to locate the original reference to missionary position .

Curiously, not once does that exact term appear in the text. What Priest did find, which he laid out in a 2001 paper published in Current Anthropology , were other elements of Kinsey’s anecdote.

At one point, Malinowski chronicled the Trobriand people convening under a full moon (not around campfires, as Kinsey said) to play games and sing songs that sometimes involved sexual jokes . At another point, while outlining the islanders’ customary sex positions, Malinowski mentioned that they “despise the European position and consider it unpractical and improper.” He wasn’t talking about all arrangements wherein a woman is lying on her back—many of which were popular in the community—but specifically the one where the man subjects her to his whole body weight. In their words, per Malinowski, “he presses her heavily downwards, she cannot respond.”

“Altogether the natives are certain that white men do not know how to carry out intercourse effectively,” he wrote. They did, as Kinsey alluded to, enjoy caricaturing what Malinowski described as “the sketchy and flabby movements” and “the brevity and lack of vigour of the European performance.” 

Though they reportedly learned those ways from “white traders, planters, or officials,” Malinowski did mention missionaries in a later section about public displays of affection like “holding hands, leaning against each other, [and] embracing.” A man named Tokolibeba told him that this frowned-upon behavior, which some Trobriander couples had adopted from missionaries, was called “ misinari si bubunela ,” or “missionary fashion.”

In short, it seems that Kinsey may have conflated several true stories into one succinct and specious one. As Priest put it, “Kinsey apparently invented a legend while believing himself to be reporting historical fact and coined a new expression while thinking he was reporting an old one.”

It’s a mark of Kinsey’s influence that the expression’s origin went more or less unquestioned for so long. And also an indicator that most people thinking about sex probably aren’t too hung up on how any given position got its name.

Discover More Fascinating Phrase Origins:

School of Criminal Justice College of Social Science

Dr. ed mcgarrell receives lifetime achievement award.

May 6, 2024

For his dedication to teaching, research, service, and advancing justice, Dr. Ed McGarrell has been recognized with the College of Social Science Lifetime Achievement Award. This award is the highest recognition given by the College.

In addition to his commitment to community engagement, Dr. McGarrell has dedicated himself to mentoring the next generation of Criminal Justice scholars. Dr. McGarrell has chaired 18 dissertations and mentored dozens of masters and doctoral students – many of whom have gone on to have prestigious careers themselves.

While serving as the Director of the School of Criminal Justice, Dr. McGarrell oversaw initiatives that allowed the School to experience rapid growth in both global reputation and reach. These initiatives expanded the School’s educational footprint both on campus and online, increased training opportunities for law enforcement agencies, and enabled faculty to collaborate with researchers across the globe and work with practitioners in communities around the country.

Dr. Chris Melde, current Director of the School, says “Dr. McGarrell’s stellar career as a scholar, mentor to graduate students and faculty alike, and service to the profession over the last 30 years, strengthened the School’s national and international reputation for high quality and impactful community engaged research. Dr. McGarrell’s career exemplifies the ideals of the University and this lifetime achievement award.”

Congratulations, Dr. McGarrell – this award is well earned!

We sat down with Dr. McGarrell to discuss his career, what it means to receive this award, and his advice for anyone interested in a career in Criminal Justice research.

What initially drew you to becoming a Professor and researching Criminal Justice?

My interest in criminal justice arose out of a practicum experience at the Elmira Correctional Facility in my hometown of Elmira, New York. Although I did not appreciate it at the time, the Elmira facility had historical importance as the first correctional facility intended for young inmates with the goal of "reform", hence its original name of the Elmira Reformatory. Initially, I was able to work with institutional parole officers and later in a direct service role in a newly created mental health unit. This experience led to me applying to graduate study in criminal justice, though my plans were to earn a master's degree and then pursue a professional career. I was fortunate to have been provided the opportunity to become involved in some faculty research projects. This generated an interest in research and teaching, and I thus decided to pursue a Ph.D.  Although my research interests evolved over the years, issues related to crime, justice, victimization, and public safety, strike me as endlessly interesting from both a teaching and research perspective.

What has been the most rewarding part of your career?

A couple of thoughts come to mind. First, I have always enjoyed and been stimulated by my faculty role. I am fortunate to have found a rewarding profession. Second, the relationships that have been forged through the years. This includes relationships with faculty colleagues, with students, and with criminal justice professionals and community members that allowed me to collaborate on research-based, community-engaged endeavors. 

During a fair portion of my academic career I have served in administrative roles, including the privilege of serving as Director of the School of Criminal Justice. Maintaining a research agenda can be challenging given the demands of the Director role and thus I learned the need and the value of collaboration. I have been blessed by having a large network of faculty and student collaborators who have improved the quality of my research and enabled the pursuit of numerous research projects. Similarly, I count as friends criminal justice practitioners and community members in places like Detroit, Flint, Lansing, and beyond, who have taught me about these issues and improved my research and teaching. Seeing these relationships continue to have a positive impact on individuals, families, and communities, as well as seeing former students become leaders, has been extremely rewarding.

What does it mean to you to have received this award?

It is certainly humbling. There are so many outstanding faculty in the School of Criminal Justice and in the College of Social Science, that it is truly humbling. It is also very meaningful because it comes from my peers in social science. As faculty, all of our important work be it publications, grants, or promotions involve peer review.  Receiving this award from the recommendation of peers, makes this very rewarding.

Do you have any advice for students who are interested in a career in academia and researching criminal justice?

Take a chance and take advantage of opportunities. The key events that influenced my career came out of unexpected opportunities. It was a former baseball coach that let me know about the practicum opportunity at the Elmira Correctional facility. It was a professor asking me if I'd be interested in working on a research project that resulted me in pursuing doctoral study and finding a very satisfying career of teaching and research. When opportunities arise, it is important to take advantage, even when it may get us out of our comfort zone. When MSU offered the opportunity to move to MSU and become Director of the School of Criminal Justice, I was happy in my prior University. But, I was intrigued by the history of MSU's School of Criminal Justice and MSU's land grant mission that encouraged community-engaged research. That turned out to be an excellent decision that resulted in the collaboration and friendships with faculty, staff, and students mentioned above.