Introduction
Research is meant to solve problems and answer questions. It incorporates creativity and systematic improvement of an idea by evidencing its workability (Gauch, 2003). Researches require proper planning and arrangement to warrant their success. Unplanned research aborts before completion or fails or provides information that is out of context. The crucial and fundamental parts in research planning involve setting of a research question and research hypotheses. They are fundamental because they base the entire research process and progress. Using an inappropriate question leads to mistaken entries for the rest of the research (Fleck, 1935). For instance, a wrong question would lead to a wrong hypothesis because the hypothesis is usually derived from the question. It is, therefore, a point of concern to ensure and make the right question and hypotheses (Creswell, 2009). I will create a question and a hypothesis behind the question that will enable me to research in the Baltimore police department practices. In a bid to perform this task, I will rely on the knowledge that I currently possess theoretically.
Research question
It is crucial to point that every research is characterized by a question that requires an answer or a problem that calls for a solution. It is also essential to acknowledge the order in which a viable and successful research follows. When I was investigating the police department in the city and county of Baltimore, I managed to develop a question that I could research to answer. On my study, I realized that there is a demographic variability between the city and county of Baltimore. I noted that the city is far much smaller than the county. I also noted that the ten precincts found in the county police department included the manpower for city police department. The population density differed at different regions of Baltimore. I want to know whether the differences in population density affect the control of crime in the two police departments. Therefore, my study will gather more information that will target at answering the question ‘do differences in population density affect the control of crime?’ This question will assist in the mock study research by explaining some of the variability such as overstaffing and understaffing. It will establish the bases of forming a hypothesis that will provide answers about the differences in practices between the two police departments.
Null and alternative hypothesis
In respect to the question, it is possible to develop a hypothesis. I can suggest that differences in population density do not affect crime control. This hypothesis can only be brought down to nullity (Fisher, 1966). Research will disapprove this hypothesis by providing evidence that there exist one or more effects. For instance, allocation of more staff in the Baltimore city police department than in Baltimore county police department per area as a result of their differences in population density disapproves the null hypothesis. I can, therefore, develop an alternative hypothesis. The alternative hypothesis will be against the null hypothesis and is usually the opposite. In my case, I can say that differences in population density affect crime control. Research will reveal any influence that result due to differences in population density in Baltimore. Each effect will partly approve the hypothesis.
Focus and form justification
The question will enquire and improve the desire to enumerate effects caused by differences in population density within Baltimore. It will seek to know the relationship in crime control between the city which is small but densely populated, and the entire county that is sparsely populated (Sekaran, 2010). It will compare the differences encountered between the two police department such as arrest rates, offenses, clearance from holding and supporting crime victims. I can then form a hypothesis. In respect to question, the null hypotheses will either be wrong or awaiting evidence to confirm that it is not true. This hypothesis can neither be true nor testable for approval. I cannot plan a research to approve this hypothesis. However, planning a research could show that this hypothesis is not true (Neyman, 1967). A null hypothesis enables a researcher to make comparisons. The null hypotheses are against an alternative hypothesis. The alternative hypothesis is testable for approval. It could be right or wrong. When the alternative hypothesis is not true, it cannot portray that the null hypothesis is right. The alternative hypothesis could be tested by listing and assessing the reports of Uniformed Crime Report (UCF) and National Incident -Based Reporting System (NIBRS) of Baltimore county police departments and the Baltimore city police departments. It is possible to gather even more data that could help to make reliable conclusions by using information derived from the reports. This hypothesis will establish a foundation of an argument that will be proven (Hempel, 1952). It is also crucial to point that these two hypotheses are vital. They are vital because they are used when comparing the variances that affect the two police departments.
Type of alternative hypothesis
The alternative hypothesis created aims to support that there are effects arising due to differences in population density. The hypothesis is solely concerned that the null hypothesis is wrong. It suggests that there are certain effects that result from differences in population density. The hypothesis does not say whether the effect is positive or negative. A nondirectional hypothesis states the difference alone. The hypothesis that there are effects on crime control that result from differences in population density does not impact the variable in any direction. I can, therefore, write that this is a nondirectional alternative hypothesis.
One-tailed or two-tailed
It is concise that the hypothesis formed does not specify whether the effects are positive or negative. Exempting the relations between the depending variable and the independent variable provides a freedom to any effect. In this case, any effect can support the hypothesis. If the hypothesis specified that the effects are positive, it could be a one tailed directional alternative hypothesis (Wilson, 1997). In my hypothesis, I will show the positive and negative effects. Therefore, the hypothesis will be two tailed. It will search for any outcome that positively or negatively affect the crime control. The effects determined will be in reference to the differences in population density in Baltimore city po0ice department and Baltimore county police department.
Research order and hope
The efficacy and success of research relies on order and hope to perfect the finding. Order serves as the sole operating factor to a successful research ending. The raised question will allow for a descriptive mock study. It will enable the research to be directed at all instances since there are concise directions. Many people suggest that there is no hope to do a research that is perfect. It is the time that researchers should create hope within their researches and appreciate that hope is a strategy. Hope will always empower the desire to succeed. The desire to succeed will keep us struggling to provide best results from their work.
Conclusion
In conclusion, research seeks to provide answers and solutions for question and problems respectively. Research is continuous (Creswell, 2008). It raises more information that lead to enlightenment. Therefore, research will assist in securing and improving the status of lives and the world a place of numerous achievements. It is a remarkable room for improvement.
References
Creswell, J. (2007). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (3rd edition). Prentice Hall NJ
Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.thousands of oaks. CA Sage Publications.
Fisher, R. A. (1966). The design of experiments. Hafner: Edinburgh.
Fleck, L. (1979). Genesis and Development of a scientific Fact. University of Chicago Press.
Gauch, H. G. (2003) Scientific method in practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Hempel, C. G. (1952). Fundamentals of concept formation in empirical science. Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press.
Neyman, J. and Pearson, E. S. (1967). The testing of statistical hypotheses in relation t probabilities a priori. Cambridge University Press.
Sekaran, U. (2010). Research methods for business: A skill building approach. New York, NY:John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Wilson, G. G. AND Karpagam S. (1997). Environmental Sampling & Monitoring Primer. Virginia Tech.