Scientific research is a field of study that relies on the integrity of all those involved. As scientific experiments are conducted with other studies in mind, any one mistake or cover-up in an experiment report can lead to disastrous results. Therefore, it is extremely important for scientists to use proper methods of collecting and evaluating data. They must also write down all pertinent information to the study so that it can be closely examined for biased or flawed methods. If a scientist uses a flawed method of data-collection or data-analysis, his entire study could be skewed. If a scientist were to do a study on whether dogs had preferences between different kinds of foods, he would have to make sure that the foods were equidistant from the dog. If he did not, he would have a flawed method of data-collection. If he published a study as proof dogs liked one food better than another without recognizing that the dogs had simply picked the food closest to them, he would have failed at proper data-analysis. Incorrect analysis is very harmful because it can mislead readers and provide distorted views of a conclusion’s scientific merit (“Data analysis.”)
The paper by Morselli and Passini takes into account the autobiographies of three peaceful political activists: Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr., and Mohandas Gandi. The scientists noted that many autobiographies showed signs of bias; the authors picked events that correlated with their current ideals. They claimed that “narrators not only narrate, but also justify themselves” (Morselli & Passini, 2010). They wondered if this key phenomenon would show up in the autobiographies of Mandela, King Jr., and Gandi, so they decided to do a study at micro-level. This meant that their research population was “ a small group of individuals in a particular social context” (Schaffer).
To collect precise data on the autobiographies, Morselli and Passini used an intricate procedure that they adapted from methodology used by K. Keniston. They created different categories of key factors in life (e.g., family, childhood, and adolescence) and used cross-sectional comparison (Morselli & Passini, 2010). QSR-N5 software was used to select relevant passages from the text. Then, two independent coders performed the analysis; they came together to compare results only after both had finished. Morselli and Passini took all the right steps to make sure the collection method was appropriate. Analysis of text can be subjective, so it can be hard to put into concrete results. Morselli and Passini smartly combated this obstacle by having two different coders work independently.
To further analyze the samples collected, Morselli and Passini took the units that the coders identified and divided them into groups based on which autobiography they were from. Then, they compared the passages from different books against each other. Morselli and Passini did a stellar job of documenting exactly what passages led them to come to their conclusions. They managed to show evidence that the three political activists had remarkable similarities in their recollections of their lives, despite the fact that they had grown up in completely different cultures.
Accuracy of data-collection and analysis is very important for any scientific study in order to ensure that misinformation is not spread. In their paper on autobiography analysis, Morselli and Passini used careful methods to ensure the integrity of their results. Using detailed documentation and independent researchers, they proved their results to be truthful and validly obtained.
References
Data analysis. (n.d.). In Responsible Conduct in Data Management Topics. Web.
Morselli, D. & Passini, S. (2010). Avoiding crimes of obedience: A comparative study of the autobiographies of M. K. Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, and Martin Luther King, Jr. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 16(3), 295-319.
Schaffer, S. (n.d.). Analytic tools: The levels of analysis. In Dr. Scott Schaffer – Courses. Web.