Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Theories, theoretical and conceptual frameworks...

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Theories, theoretical and conceptual frameworks, models and constructs: Limiting research outcomes through misconceptions and misunderstandings

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Theories, theoretical and conceptual frameworks, models and constructs : Limiting research outcomes through misconceptions and misunderstandings. / Passey, Don.

In: Studies in Technology Enhanced Learning, Vol. 1, No. 1, 24.06.2020.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{ebd9f2fa1b5a4e10810aac7ad5a67cfc,
title = "Theories, theoretical and conceptual frameworks, models and constructs: Limiting research outcomes through misconceptions and misunderstandings",
abstract = "Contributing to knowledge or theory is generally a standard requirement for research and doctoral studies. Whether that contribution should be from a research, policy or practice perspective is often not specifically stated as a requirement, yet one or all are certainly possible. A doctoral study (or indeed any research study) is usually quite firmly cast or framed within a form of theoretical or conceptual framework. Yet, even the definition, selection and formulation of a framework that is appropriate and that can inform a study throughout its various phases and stages is sometimes considered a {\textquoteleft}doctoral or research challenge{\textquoteright} in itself. This paper will argue that the way models, frameworks or theories - all of which in this current paper are collectively termed underpinnings - are conceived and used could well determine whether, how and to what extent a thesis or research study might contribute to a wider knowledge base. The paper offers a theoretical strategic analysis of the issue. It will explore what a conceptual or theoretical framework for a doctoral or wider research study is, what role or roles it can take, and whether, how and to what extent a study might contribute to knowledge or theory. The paper will conclude with ways to question approaches to roles of conceptual or theoretical underpinnings that do not limit the potential of a thesis or study to contribute to theory. ",
keywords = "theories, theoretical frameworks, conceptual frameworks, models, research studies, underpinning constructs",
author = "Don Passey",
year = "2020",
month = jun,
day = "24",
doi = "10.21428/8c225f6e.56810a1a",
language = "English",
volume = "1",
journal = "Studies in Technology Enhanced Learning",
publisher = "PubPub",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Theories, theoretical and conceptual frameworks, models and constructs

T2 - Limiting research outcomes through misconceptions and misunderstandings

AU - Passey, Don

PY - 2020/6/24

Y1 - 2020/6/24

N2 - Contributing to knowledge or theory is generally a standard requirement for research and doctoral studies. Whether that contribution should be from a research, policy or practice perspective is often not specifically stated as a requirement, yet one or all are certainly possible. A doctoral study (or indeed any research study) is usually quite firmly cast or framed within a form of theoretical or conceptual framework. Yet, even the definition, selection and formulation of a framework that is appropriate and that can inform a study throughout its various phases and stages is sometimes considered a ‘doctoral or research challenge’ in itself. This paper will argue that the way models, frameworks or theories - all of which in this current paper are collectively termed underpinnings - are conceived and used could well determine whether, how and to what extent a thesis or research study might contribute to a wider knowledge base. The paper offers a theoretical strategic analysis of the issue. It will explore what a conceptual or theoretical framework for a doctoral or wider research study is, what role or roles it can take, and whether, how and to what extent a study might contribute to knowledge or theory. The paper will conclude with ways to question approaches to roles of conceptual or theoretical underpinnings that do not limit the potential of a thesis or study to contribute to theory.

AB - Contributing to knowledge or theory is generally a standard requirement for research and doctoral studies. Whether that contribution should be from a research, policy or practice perspective is often not specifically stated as a requirement, yet one or all are certainly possible. A doctoral study (or indeed any research study) is usually quite firmly cast or framed within a form of theoretical or conceptual framework. Yet, even the definition, selection and formulation of a framework that is appropriate and that can inform a study throughout its various phases and stages is sometimes considered a ‘doctoral or research challenge’ in itself. This paper will argue that the way models, frameworks or theories - all of which in this current paper are collectively termed underpinnings - are conceived and used could well determine whether, how and to what extent a thesis or research study might contribute to a wider knowledge base. The paper offers a theoretical strategic analysis of the issue. It will explore what a conceptual or theoretical framework for a doctoral or wider research study is, what role or roles it can take, and whether, how and to what extent a study might contribute to knowledge or theory. The paper will conclude with ways to question approaches to roles of conceptual or theoretical underpinnings that do not limit the potential of a thesis or study to contribute to theory.

KW - theories

KW - theoretical frameworks

KW - conceptual frameworks

KW - models

KW - research studies

KW - underpinning constructs

U2 - 10.21428/8c225f6e.56810a1a

DO - 10.21428/8c225f6e.56810a1a

M3 - Journal article

VL - 1

JO - Studies in Technology Enhanced Learning

JF - Studies in Technology Enhanced Learning

IS - 1

ER -