Editing Operationalization (section)

==Tying to conceptual frameworks==
{{See also|Conceptual framework}}

The above discussion links operationalization to measurement of [[concept]]s. Many scholars have worked to operationalize concepts like [[job satisfaction]], prejudice, anger etc.  Scale and index construction are forms of operationalization. There is not one perfect way to operationalize. For example, in the United States the concept distance driven would be operationalized as miles, whereas [[kilometers]] would be used in Europe.<ref>[[Patricia M. Shields]] and Nandhini Rangarajan. 2013. [http://store.newforums.com/A-Playbook-for-Research-Methods-SEB005.htm ''A Playbook for Research Methods: Integrating Conceptual Frameworks and Project Management'']. Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press. For a detailed discussion of operationalization extending the example above see Shields & Rangarajan pp. 32 to 41.</ref>

Operationalization is part of the [[empirical research]] process.<ref>[[Patricia M. Shields]] and Nandhini Rangarajan. 2013. [http://store.newforums.com/A-Playbook-for-Research-Methods-SEB005.htm ''A Playbook for Research Methods: Integrating Conceptual Frameworks and Project Management'']. Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press.</ref> An example is the empirical research question of if job satisfaction influences job turnover.  Both job satisfaction and job turnover need to be measured. The concepts and their relationship are important — operationalization occurs within a larger framework of concepts.   When there is a large empirical research question or purpose the conceptual framework that organizes the response to the question must be operationalized before the data collection can begin.  If a scholar constructs a questionnaire based on a conceptual framework, they have operationalized the framework.  Most serious empirical research should involve operationalization that is transparent and linked to a conceptual framework.

Another example, the [[hypothesis]] ''Job satisfaction reduces job turnover'' is one way to connect (or frame) two concepts – job satisfaction and job turnover. The process of moving from the idea ''job satisfaction'' to the set of questionnaire items that form a job satisfaction scale is operationalization. For example, it is possible to measure job satisfaction using only two simple questions: "All in all, I am satisfied with my job", and, "In general, I like my job."<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Feeley|first=Thomas Hugh|date=2000-08-01|title=Testing a communication network model of employee turnover based on centrality|url=https://nca.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00909880009365574|journal=Journal of Applied Communication Research|volume=28|issue=3|pages=262–277|doi=10.1080/00909880009365574|s2cid=145477053|issn=0090-9882}}</ref>

Operationalization uses a different logic when testing a formal (quantitative) hypothesis and testing [[working hypothesis]] (qualitative). For formal hypotheses the [[concept]]s are represented empirically (or operationalized) as numeric variables and tested using [[inferential statistics]]. Working hypotheses (particularly in the social and administrative sciences), however, are tested through evidence collection and the assessment of the evidence.<ref>[[Patricia M. Shields]] and Nandhini Rangarajan (2013). [http://store.newforums.com/A-Playbook-for-Research-Methods-SEB005.htm ''A Playbook for Research Methods: Integrating Conceptual Frameworks and Project Management'']. Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press. pp. 109-158.</ref> The evidence is generally collected within the context of a [[case study]]. The researcher asks if the evidence is sufficient to "support" the working hypothesis. Formal operationalization would specify the kinds of evidence needed to support the hypothesis as well as evidence which would "fail" to support it.<ref>[[Patricia M. Shields]] and Nandhini Rangarajan (2013). [http://store.newforums.com/A-Playbook-for-Research-Methods-SEB005.htm ''A Playbook for Research Methods: Integrating Conceptual Frameworks and Project Management'']</ref> Robert Yin recommends developing a case study protocol as a way to specify the kinds of evidence needed during the data collection phases. He identifies six sources of evidence: documentation; archival records; [[interviews]]; direct observations; [[participant observation]] and physical or  [[cultural artifact]]s.<ref>Robert Yin. 1994. ''Case Study Research: Design and Methods.'' (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. pp. 63–80.</ref>

In the field of public administration, [[Patricia M. Shields|Shields]] and Tajalli (2006) have identified five kinds of conceptual frameworks ([[working hypothesis]], descriptive categories, practical ideal type, operations research, and formal [[hypothesis]]). They explain and illustrate how each of these conceptual frameworks can be operationalized. They also show how to make conceptualization and operationalization more concrete by demonstrating how to form conceptual framework tables that are tied to the literature and operationalization tables that lay out the specifics of how to operationalize the conceptual framework (measure the concepts).<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Shields|first=Patricia|author2=Hassan Tajalli|year=2006|title=Intermediate Theory: The Missing Link to successful Student Scholarship|journal=Journal of Public Affairs Education|volume=12|issue=3|pages=313–334|doi=10.1080/15236803.2006.12001438|s2cid=141201197|url=http://ecommons.txstate.edu/polsfacp/39/}}</ref><ref>[[Patricia M. Shields]] and Nandhini Rangarajan (2013). [http://store.newforums.com/A-Playbook-for-Research-Methods-SEB005.htm ''A Playbook for Research Methods: Integrating Conceptual Frameworks and Project Management'']. Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press.</ref>