A Good Research Question/Goal/Hypothesis(es)/Objectives

Some definitions:
Research Question: a sort of "preamble" to your hypothesis(es). Something that interests you and will drive/guide your research. A single good research question will keep you interested for the duration of research, be grounded in one field or discipline, feasible within the constraints of the available resources, distinguished between what you will research, and is flexible. In qualitative research this might be known as a "research problem". Posing a direct question will make the subsequent hypothesis(es) or research questions more grounded, focused, purposeful, and directional. It is my personal opinion that the larger research question need not be explicitly stated.

Hypothesis(es) (or subsequent research questions): ways of explaining something previously unexplained. It is a form of a research question. It can be verifiable through investigations that can be reproduced. Hypotheses that can be tested are known as "testable hypotheses". The method of trying to provide the opposite of the hypothesis (what you want to show) is known as "null hypothesis".

These definitions follow the practical approach to research (specifically step 1 and 2):
1. Identify a good research question
2. Formulate some questions (or hypotheses) that can be researched
3. Design the research investigation
4. Selected the most appropriate materials or sample to study and the tools to use
5. Gather the data
6. Analyze these data using pre-defined criteria (e.g., statistics)
7. Report on the results in the dissertation

Where goals and objectives fit in is step 3.
Research Goals: outline the strategy that best positions the investigation (research) to confirm or reject the hypothesis.

Research objectives: get you actionable information and knowledge (e.g., recommend, approve, formulate). In qualitative research these might be known as "research tasks".

Adapted from: Dissertation Success

Thus, thereby, and therefore

There isn't a verdict out on what the proper uses are of these. However, I have tried to replace these words with certain phrases to see if they still make sense. Obviously, your context matters, but it seems "thereby" is the least preferred option of the three because it usually implies a process (time-dependent).

So try replacing
therefore with "for this/that",
thus with "consequently",
and
thereby with "by doing so"or "by this/that".

Does your sentence still make sense? If it does then you have a winner! If it does not, reword trying to not use thus, thereby, or therefore, which you should probably be trying to do anyways.

If I don't write it down, does it matter?

If your like me then you read for efficiency and immediacy, kind of like a crime scene investigator. Turns out there is a name for that, "power browsing". If your also like me than you read get most of your information online. Power browsing online is re-engineering the way our brains reads, and therefore thinks. So how does this affect writing.

To the history! When Nietzche was losing his sight he bought a typewriter and learned to touch type (typing without looking at the keyboard). Nietzche's writing style changed because of this new writing medium. Friedrich A. Kittler noted that Nietzsche's prose "changed from arguments to aphorisms, from thoughts to puns, from rehtoric to telegram style".

So we know that our brains (neurologically) are reprogrammed when adapting to new mediums of writing. So what has that done to my writing? When I was a boy I wrote poetry, even through undergraduate school I frequently got the comment, "Too flowery, write like a scientist". It makes sense that I wrote most of my papers in pen on paper until my undergraduate, when I was forced (in order to become a scientist) to adopt the new medium -the computer. If my brain had not reprogrammed I would not be a scientist, but what did I lose?

Bringing me to my big question, "if I don't write it down, does it matter?" I know, very "If a tree falls in the forest......" philosophy. But we did lose something in the transition from pen and paper to computer based (later uploaded online) writing, that being creativity. Thinking like a computer (or the internet) stifles creativity. If I were going to blame someone for my stifled creativity it would be Frederick Winslow Taylor. Freddy will be the topic of another post, because if your like me (a power browser), this is where you would stop reading.

Ideas generated for this post thanks to the stunning article, Is Google making us Stupid?

Criteria versus Criterion

There are several words with Latin or Greek roots whose plural forms ending in A are constantly mistaken for singular ones.

You can have one criterion or many criteria. Don’t confuse them.

-BeeDictionary

Others: Plural/Singular
data/datum
media/medium
phenomena/phenomenon

Single (') versus Double (") quotes

Deciding whether to use single or double quotes is a style issue. Both are common in the English language; however, the single style is considered standard in British English and double style in American English. Being in Canada, this allows you to choose (poach) whichever style you prefer from either English (see post "Queens versus American English").
-wikipedia

p.s., I will now be including labels for posts for easy searching

Empty Words and Phrases

In grading a batch of REM 100 term papers (the class I TA), I have noticed that when students are presented with a lengthy assignment they begin inserting many empty words and phrases. One such example:
"Deforestation is harmful to the environment."

The use of the word "harmful" provides an immediate subjective and emotional response in the reader. In "scientific" writing this is highly frowned upon. What defines "scientific" writing might be the topic for another blog post, but peppering in extremely value-contentious words and phrases is not "scientific".

I recently read a paper that deals with these empty words and phrases. The author had this to say:

"We don’t listen any more. Perhaps this is because words are very cheap and so many are thrown away each day. Our loss of critical listening skills leaves us vulnerable to manipulation by words which have no meaning but seem to describe a desirable situation. These empty words can evoke a strong, reflexive reaction just like the leg movement when the knee is stuck. In both cases the reaction is produced without the stimulus passing through the brain."

"Empty phrases are meaningless and loaded with emotion. Their use takes away the opportunity for calm, objective discussions of risk, time scales, degree of disturbance and the important ecosystem characteristics of recovery and adaptability."

While I don't agree with the author entirely, I think he hit on what empty words and phrases are with that last quote. This may sound a lot like my "ambiguity" post from a while back. That being, REM 100ers using to many ambiguous words, but I think it worth posting again in this incarnation.

Is "different than" incorrect grammar?

Yes, "different than" is bad grammar. The correct phrase is "different from". An amusing blog has this to say:

"A sensible discussion of different from versus different than may be found in Theodore M. Bernstein's The Careful Writer, published in 1965. Bernstein favors the former usage in most instances. So does the usage panel in my 1976 American Heritage Dictionary. The argument has nothing to do with Latin. People say different than out of the mistaken belief that different is a comparative adjective and thus takes than, as with better than, faster than, etc. But it's not a comparative (diff, differ, diffest?), it just looks like one. Different is used to draw a distinction and thus properly takes from, as do separate from, distinct from, apart from, etc. (One recognizes that we say in contrast to; one also concedes that another false comparative, other than, is firmly entrenched in the language. Never mind, this is English. One does the best one can.)"
-The Straight Dope

To summarize:
different= distinction, not comparative.
than = comparison
then = time