Research in Information and Communication Sciences , cognitive frameworks and methodology rules
"It is neither easy nor intuitive to do a scientific research, especially in a modern and forked field as in the field of Information and Communication Sciences. The issues addressed by the researchers are mostly familiar to them and this familiarity is a real obstacle in front of them, because it separates them from the general sense and prevents them from bringing about a change in the perception, and getting out of the alienation and prejudices. The novice researcher cannot simply turns from day to day to a maker, and producer or a critic of the knowledge that he stood a long time to receive it and digest it. Here happens a sudden change in the relationship with the knowledge that is impossible to happen without difficulties.
On the other hand, do not forget that scientific research exercise supposes a scientific extensive culture beyond borders, so that the researcher can overcome all the methodological difficulties, with the acquisition of technologies that enable him to do that.
All this does not mean to abide by the diligent speech theorists in methodologies and their types, origins and schools, who talk too long about what the researcher should and should not do, without clarifying their instructions with realistic examples.
Every researcher realizes that the methodology is, in any case, only a mean sand that there is no such ideal and suitable methodology for the application in absolute terms. While the discourse on research, defining fixed rules, forgets that the “appropriate” methodology always remain associated with the research topic, and it is defined as the required equation between the techniques used and the final goal of a research project.
The academic discourse on research methodology in the field of Information has many weaknesses, and among which that he urges the novice researcher to shuts in confortable routine frameworks and habits with a limited scientific output.
The “good” methodology requires complying with the rules, undergoing all forms of follow-up and experimentation, using suitable means,in order to achieve desire knowledge and results, while the outstanding works which produces impressive results more than the others, despite their shortfalls, they are based on unconventional methods and ideas.
Does this mean to abandon the need to consolidate the knowledge and methods of teaching the origins of scientific research to accompany the first steps the new researchers?Does this mean to return to leave it to random research and scattered individual efforts so as not to give in to the habits and canned speech about the methodology?"