Narrowing and Defining the Problem
Chapter -Six
Syllabus topic 6, "Identification of Research Problem and formulation of Hypothesis."
Pages 421 to 423 of 543
In one line
Narrowing is done by adding restrictions until the problem can be answered, and the statement of the problem is the paragraph that records where the restrictions ended up.
In the wording a student can write in an exam: narrowing a research problem consists in progressively restricting its scope by reference to subject matter, population, place, time and aspect, until the problem is small enough to be resolved by the evidence the researcher can obtain; the statement of the problem is the formal expression of the narrowed problem, setting out the context, the specific difficulty, its scope and the evidence that will resolve it.
The five dimensions on which to narrow
Subject matter. From legal aid, to legal aid at the pre-trial stage, to the duty to inform an accused at first production.
Population. From accused persons, to accused persons produced for remand, to those produced in one court.
Place. From India, to Maharashtra, to one district, to one court.
Time. From always, to the last five years, to six weeks.
Aspect. From everything about the duty, to whether it is performed, leaving why to a later study or to a subsidiary question.
A student should narrow on all five deliberately, and record what was excluded at each step, because those exclusions become the scope and limitations, chapter 1280.
A worked example: the five steps
Start. Legal aid in India.
Step one, subject matter. Not the whole of legal aid but the criminal side, and within it the stage before trial, because that is where Khatri and Suk Das place the duty, chapter 630.
Now: legal aid at the pre-trial stage.
Step two, aspect. Not whether the law is adequate, which is normative, chapter 1050, but whether an existing duty is performed.
Now: whether the duty to inform an accused of the right to free legal services is performed.
Step three, population and place. Not all accused persons in India, but those produced for remand in one named court.
Now: whether accused persons produced for remand in one named court are informed of the right.
Step four, time. A defined period, six consecutive weeks, with the dates stated.
Step five, operational definition. What counts as informed, chapter 1050: words addressed to the accused, in a language they appear to follow, stating that a lawyer can be provided at State cost, whether spoken by the magistrate or by a court officer.
The narrowed problem. Whether, in the remand proceedings of one named court over six named weeks, accused persons were informed, in the sense defined, of the right to free legal services at State cost.
Notice what narrowing did. It did not make the problem trivial. It made it answerable, and the answer bears directly on a right the Supreme Court created and on a trial's validity.
Narrowing and Defining the Problem
The statement of the problem
What it is. A short passage, usually three or four paragraphs, that appears early in the dissertation and states the problem formally. MU requires the identification of the research problem as part of the research methodology component, chapter 1310.
Its four parts.
The context. What the law is, briefly and with authority. Here: that the duty exists, arises at first production and at every remand, and that a trial in breach is vitiated.
The difficulty. What is not known. Here: whether the duty is performed, which no source establishes.
Why it matters. Here: because the right is otherwise illusory, which Khatri itself says, and because a breach affects the validity of the trial.
And the scope. What is included and what is excluded, with the operational definition.
What it must not contain. The answer; a recommendation; or rhetoric. It states the problem, and it is the paragraph a supervisor reads first.
A specimen, written out
Context. The Supreme Court has held that the right to free legal services is implicit in Article 21, that the obligation arises when an accused is first produced before a magistrate and at every remand, that the State cannot plead financial or administrative inability, and that the right is illusory unless the court informs the accused of it; failure to inform vitiates the trial.
The difficulty. Whether that duty is in fact performed is not established by any published source. The reported decisions state the obligation; the annual returns of the legal services authorities record assignments but not the stage at which they arose; and no study has recorded what is said at first production.
Why it matters. If the duty is not performed the constitutional right does not reach the persons for whom it was created, and every trial conducted in breach is open to challenge. The remedy, if the failure is one of practice, is administrative rather than judicial, so establishing the fact is the necessary first step.
Scope. This study is confined to remand proceedings in one named court over six named consecutive weeks. Informed means words addressed to the accused, in a language they appear to follow, conveying that a lawyer may be provided at State cost, whether spoken by the magistrate or by a court officer. The study does not examine why the duty is or is not performed, does not cover proceedings other than remand, and does not extend to any other court.
Four paragraphs, and a reader now knows exactly what the dissertation will and will not do.
The common failures
Narrowing on one dimension only. A student narrows the subject matter and leaves the place as India.
Narrowing and Defining the Problem
Narrowing after collection has begun, which wastes the material already gathered.
A statement of the problem that argues. It should state, not persuade.
No operational definition, so nobody can tell what was counted.
And a scope that excludes nothing, which means nothing was narrowed.
Quick revision
Narrow on five dimensions: subject matter, population, place, time and aspect, deliberately, recording what was excluded at each step because the exclusions become the scope and limitations.
The statement of the problem has four parts: the context, being the law briefly and with authority; the difficulty, being what is not known; why it matters; and the scope, including the operational definition.
It must not contain the answer, a recommendation, or rhetoric.
Common failures: narrowing on one dimension only; narrowing after collection has begun; a statement that argues rather than states; no operational definition; and a scope that excludes nothing.
Test yourself
1. Name the five dimensions on which a problem is narrowed. Subject matter, population, place, time and aspect. A researcher should narrow deliberately on all five and record what was excluded at each step, since those exclusions become the scope and limitations of the study.
2. Set out the four parts of a statement of the problem. The context, stating the law briefly and with authority; the difficulty, stating what is not known; why it matters, showing what turns on the answer; and the scope, stating what is included and excluded together with the operational definition of the key term.
3. Why must the statement of the problem contain an operational definition? Because without it nobody can tell what was counted, so the study cannot be repeated and two researchers can reach different figures about the same court without either being wrong.
4. Show, in one line, the difference between the unnarrowed and the narrowed version of a problem. Unnarrowed: legal aid in India. Narrowed: whether, in the remand proceedings of one named court over six named weeks, accused persons were informed, in a defined sense, of the right to free legal services at State cost.
The rest of this subject
These notes are cut from the University's printed syllabus. Open the syllabus itself, or the past papers, for the same subject.