There Is No Such Thing as a Neutral Question - Essay Example

There is No Such Thing as a Neutral Question Grade (Feb. 16th, There is no such thing as a neutral question Introduction Neutral question refers to questions that are not biased in any way, such that when a neutral question is posed, the person to whom the question is asked can be in a position to respond without having been influenced to adapt a certain perspective, or being swayed towards any direction by the questioner. Simply put therefore, a neutral question is a question where the questioner has no vested interest in the answer (Coopman & Lull, 2014). A neutral question is not a closed question. This is because, a closed question will require that an individual has to select among the possible choices that are given, meaning that the person to whom the question is asked has to adapt some form of bias. A neutral question simply takes the form of an open-ended question, where the person to whom the question is asked can take any approach to respond to the question, without being limited to focus in a certain predetermined framework (Monsen & Van, 2008). Defined from the point of view of moral-ethical neutrality as the primary lens, neutrality would apply to mean that all people are born morally neutral in, which in this case would mean that all people are born good, and thus by nature every human being is good at birth (Plotnik & Haig, 2013). This simply means that when an individual enters into this world, they enter without any form of positive or negative influences. The principle that all people are good prior to their birth since they are born without any positive or negative influences might hold true. However, the question becomes who influences those people in a bad way, and how were those bad influencers also influenced in a bad way in the first place? At this point, we are then left at loss, since we are not able to get to the actual first person who was influenced badly so he/she continued to influence others badly, and we are also unable to get to the person who influenced that person. Therefore, moral-ethical neutrality does not hold, and so the concept of neutral; question also does not hold. Therefore, there is nothing like a neutral question. Argument with Justification Neutral questions are contrasted with leading questions. Passive observation and active experimentation are the two key terms associated with the neutral question and the leading question concepts respectively. The underlying principle is that all questions; neutral or leading, emanate from an underlying theoretical-laden observation, which then means that questions are not neutral (McMurray, Scott & Pace, 2004). Further, the attempt to establish whether there is anything like a neutral question takes us to the point where we need to question what is the need for any research study in natural sciences? There are two concepts that are related to this question. The first is the passive observation and the second is the active experimentation knowledge. The passive observation concept means that the observer makes no knowledge impact on the phenomenon he/she is studying (Durand, 2013). This simply means that the researcher involved in a natural scientific study will not generate any new knowledge out of the research study being undertaken. Thus the researcher has no interest in the outcome of the research questions, and therefore passive knowledge applies neutral questions. On the other hand, the concept of active experimentation means that the researcher is actively involved in the determination of the outcome of the knowledge being created by the study, through the testing of a predetermined theoretical position (Verderber & Sellnow, 2010). In assessing these two concepts of knowledge creation, it can easily be concluded that the relevance of undertaking any given study is so that new knowledge can be created, which will either approve or disapprove a previously held position regarding the study phenomenon. In this respect, the researcher is already interested in the outcome of the participants’ responses, and at the same time already holds a certain predetermined position, which is the basis of asking the questions (Coopman & Lull, 2014). This therefore means that there is nothing like a neutral question, since every study is undertaken with the aim of actively creating new knowledge, and thus there is already a previously held position or framework of mind, which the question seeks to answer through confirming or disapproving. Thus, all research applies leading questions. The fact that any question that is ever asked is meant to measure a certain phenomena poses the challenge of the possibility of ever being able to formulate questions that are neutral. There is simply no question that is asked, which is not meant to measure some phenomena that have been preconceived in the mind of the questioner (Gamer, 2014). The justification to the fact that there is nothing like a neutral question can be derived from the natural science point of view. Research in natural sciences follows the question route in order to produce findings to different aspects that research studies are designed to measure. The definition of a neutral question is that question in which the questioner has no vested interest in the answer to the question (Coopman & Lull, 2014). Thus, if the neutrality of a question derives from the lack of vested interest in the answer to the question by the questioner, then, there is simply nothing like a neutral question in natural sciences, since the researchers in natural sciences have a vested interested in the answers given by their respondents; to prove or disapprove a point (Sedivy & Carlson, 2011). Nevertheless, while the natural science researches apply questions to arrive at the findings, the questions are supposed to be neutral, so that the participants into the study are not influenced by the researcher in anyway, thus eliminating the possible chances of bias (Hunt, 2001). However, even when a researcher formulates neutral questions that will not sway or influence the participant in any given way, the researcher already has a theoretical framework that guides the research, which seeks to prove one thing and not the other, through the research study. This simply means that the natural science researcher is not neutral in his frame of mind, which then means that there is no such thing as a neutral question (Gunlogson, 2004). This is because, despite the fact that the natural science researcher may formulate the research questions in such a way as to ensure they do not influence the study participants to respond in a certain predetermined way, the researcher’s framework of mind is not neutral, which then means that the overall study is not neutral too. The framing of all research questions in natural science is done on the basis of a certain theoretical framework, which then applies the hypothesis or research questions with the view of developing certain predicted outcomes (Brantmeier, 2009). Counter-Claim with Justification The counter argument to this position holds that all true questions are neutral (Hunt, 2001). The argument behind this position is that; if a question is not neutral, then, it no longer qualifies to be considered a question, but rather becomes a statement. The genuine curiosity and need for a better understanding is the root cause of a neutral question, since a neutral question creates and expands knowledge, as opposed to limiting the respondents to a certain frame of mind that they are supposed to confine. The neutral questions create and expand knowledge, since they force the questioner to think deeply before posing the question, so as to eliminate any form of influence or bias in the question (Sedivy & Carlson, 2011). Thus, neutral questions do exist, and they are the basis on which wide knowledge on different phenomena of life is created, since the neutral questions do not limit the extent of thought of the researcher or the respondent. Instead, they grant the freedom to focus on a wide array of issues within an open mind, which in itself is a prerequisite for knowledge creation (Monsen & Van, 2008). However, this argument can be countered by the fact that there is no open mind while undertaking any research, due to the fact that the collection of research data, where the questions play the role of the tool for collecting the data, is preceded by the formulation of a research problem (McMurray, Scott & Pace, 2004). This simply means that; by the time the researcher is formulating the research questions, there is already a pre-conceived problem that needs to be measured through the questions. This is an indication that the questions are not neutral but rather targeted at fulfilling a certain confirmation bias (Durand, 2013). Conclusion In conclusion, the question as to whether there is anything like neutral questions is a challenging question to respond to, due to the fact that there are parallel arguments holding for their existence and nonexistence. The proponents of the existence of neutral questions will hold that true questions are neutral, since they have the genuine curiosity aspect of gathering information without being biased in anyway. On the other hand, the opponents of the existence of neutral questions will counter the argument through offering that there is always a frame of mind that is associated with any question that is ever asked. This simply means that any question that is asked is theory-laden or at least associated to certain predetermined positions, such that the question simply seeks either to approve or disapprove these positions. Thus, it can be concluded that there is nothing like neutral questions. References Brantmeier, C. (2009). Crossing languages and research methods: Analyses of adult foreign language reading. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Pub. Coopman, S. & Lull, J. (2014). Public Speaking: The Evolving Art. Cengage Learning. Durand, M. (2013). Principles of social research. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Gamer, M. (2014). Basic and applied research on deception and its detection. Frontiers E-books. Gunlogson, C. (2004).True to Form: Rising and Falling Declaratives as Questions in English. Routledge. Hunt, T. L. (2001). Posing questions for a scientific archaeology. Westport, Conn. [u.a.: Bergin & Garvey. McMurray, A., Scott, D., & Pace, R. W. (2004). Research: A commonsense approach. Southbank, Vic: Thomson/Social Science Press. Monsen, E. R., Van, H. L. (2008). Research: Successful approaches. Chicago: American Dietetic Association. Plotnik, R. & Haig K. (2013). Introduction to Psychology. Cengage Learning. Sedivy, J., & Carlson, G. N. (2011). Sold on language: How advertisers talk to you and what this says about you. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. Verderber, R. F. & Sellnow, D. D. (2010). Communicate!. Boston, MA: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning. Read More