A List of 15 Extraordinary Argumentative Topics for Research

Background and Context

In recent years, the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in healthcare has gained significant attention due to its capabilities to analyze vast amounts of data and revolutionize healthcare by enhancing diagnosis, treatment, and overall patient care (Davenport and Kalakota, 2019). It has been identified that nearly 86% of the healthcare institutions including life science companies, healthcare providers and technology vendors use AI in their operation in some type of way (Siwicki, 2017). As per the report of (Tyson et al., 2023), nearly 38% of the US adults believe that the use of AI can lead to better health outcomes and majority of the individuals believed that it can reduce the mistakes made in the healthcare setting. However, the use of AI has raised questions about patient privacy, consent, decision making, unauthorized access and misuse of sensitive information. Although there are potential benefits of AI in terms of improving healthcare outcomes, reducing error rate and reducing cost, there are concerns regarding the responsible use of AI. Understanding whether benefits outweigh risks and ethical issues associated with the AI use in healthcare and how healthcare professionals and patients perceive AI use is still a question. This research aims to address these concerns by exploring the attitudes and perspectives of healthcare professionals and patients regarding the use of AI in healthcare in terms of privacy, ensure informed consent, and optimize decision-making processes. By identifying and analyzing the ethical implications of AI and perceptions of healthcare professionals and patients, this research will provide insights about whether use of AI in healthcare is “blessing or curse” and make recommendations for promoting responsible use of AI.

Research aims & objectives

The primary aim of this research is to examine the ethical implications of using AI in healthcare, particularly in terms of privacy, consent, and decision-making. In addition, the study tends to explore the attitudes and perceptions of patients regarding the use of AI in healthcare and understand how AI technologies affect the decision-making processes of healthcare professionals. To accomplish this, the following objectives are defined:

• To examine the ethical implications associated with AI integration in healthcare and determine attitudes and perceptions of healthcare professionals with a particular emphasis on privacy, consent, and decision-making.
• To eliminate the risk and ethical concerns of patients and healthcare professionals related to AI integration in healthcare.
• To conduct a quantitative survey involving a minimum of 25 healthcare professionals and 200 patients to understand their perception regarding use of AI in healthcare.
• To recommend strategies and practical approaches for addressing ethical implications and promotion of responsible use of AI.
• To complete the survey within a six month time frame.

Research questions

RQ1: What ethical implications arise related to the AI integration in the healthcare setting regarding privacy, consent and decision making?

RQ2: How do healthcare professionals navigate ethical dilemmas while integrating AI in their clinical practices and it is perceived by the patients?

RQ3: What strategies and practical approaches can be adopted by healthcare professionals for addressing the ethical implications and promote responsible use of AI?

Research Methodology

The research methodology chosen for the study is quantitative research methodology to investigate the implications of AI in the healthcare institutions in terms of privacy, consent, and decision-making (Patel and Patel, 2019). A positivist research philosophy is adopted, assuming an objective reality that can be measured and quantified (Zukauskas, Vveinhardt and Andriukaitiene, 2018). Followed by this, the deductive research approach is employed which will involve use of theoretical framework derived from existing literature and theories. The research strategy involves a cross-sectional design, collecting data at a specific point in time to capture current attitudes and perceptions. Further, a structured questionnaire survey is the primary method of data collection, designed to measure healthcare professionals' attitudes, perceptions, and concerns regarding the ethical implications of AI in healthcare. The survey includes closed-ended questions with Likert scales, multiple-choice questions, and demographic information. The quantitative survey data will be analyzed using appropriate statistical techniques, such as descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and regression analysis (Yavuz, 2023). This analysis will provide quantitative evidence to support the Research aims & objectives and answer the research questions. The findings of this study will contribute to the existing body of knowledge on the ethical implications of AI in healthcare and inform policy development and decision-making in the field.

References

• Davenport, T. and Kalakota, R. (2019). The Potential for Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare. Future Healthcare Journal, [online] 6(2), pp.94-98. doi:https://doi.org/10.7861/futurehosp.6-2-94.
• Patel, M. and Patel, N. (2019). Exploring Research Methodology: Review Article. International Journal of Research & Review (www.ijrrjournal.com), [online] 6(3), pp.48-55. Available at: https://www.ijrrjournal.com/IJRR_Vol.6_Issue.3_March2019/IJRR0011.pdf.
• Siwicki, B. (2017). 86% of healthcare companies use some form of AI. [online] Healthcare IT News. Available at: https://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/86-healthcare-companies-use-some-form-ai.
• Tyson, A., Pasquini, G., Spencer, A. and Funk, C. (2023). 60% of Americans Would Be Uncomfortable With Provider Relying on AI in Their Own Health Care. [online] Pew Research Center Science & Society. Available at: https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2023/02/22/60-of-americans-would-be-uncomfortable-with-provider-relying-on-ai-in-their-own-health-care/.
• Yavuz, E.G. (2023). A THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE ON SURVEY METHOD FROM QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS. Universum:Psychology & education, 106(4). doi:https://doi.org/10.32743/unipsy.2023.106.4.15254.
• Zukauskas, P., Vveinhardt, J. and Andriukaitiene, R. (2018). Philosophy and paradigm of scientific research. Management Culture and Corporate Social Responsibility, [online] 1(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.70628.

Background and Context

Telemedicine, the provision of remote healthcare services using telecommunications technology, has emerged as a popular approach in recent years (Haleem et al., 2021). By leveraging technology, telemedicine allows patients to connect with healthcare providers without the need for physical travel, reducing both costs and time constraints.The availability of telemedicine has the potential to improve healthcare access, particularly for vulnerable populations and individuals in remote or underserved area (Gajarawala and Pelkowski, 2021). In this way, telemedicine has the potential to promote healthcare equity and reduce access disparities. However, alongside its benefits, concerns have been raised about patient privacy and the impact on the quality of care. The transmission and storage of medical data raise questions about the security and confidentiality of patient information (Tariq and Hackert, 2023). The use of telecommunication technology introduces potential risks of data breaches and unauthorized access, posing threats to patient privacy. In addition, the remote nature of telemedicine consultations can limit the ability of healthcare providers to conduct comprehensive physical examinations or accurately assess certain conditions (Ftouni et al., 2022). On one hand, telemedicine increases accessibility to healthcare services, on the other hand, the absence of in-person interactions raises legal and regulatory concerns. Several studies have been conducted in the domain of telemedicine highlighting the pros and cons of telemedicine, however there is insignificant research on telemedicine, specifically in legal and regulatory context. As the perceptions of patients regarding telemedicine in terms of privacy and law affects their intention of reaching out to the services, it is imperative to address their concerns. To fill this gap, the current study will be performing law and regulatory analysis on telemedicine to highlight legal and regulatory implications related to telemedicine. By providing detailed information about the law and regulatory landscape of telemedicine, the concerns of patients regarding law and privacy can be addressed which can boost their confidence for utilizing telemedicine and receive quality care.

Research aim and objectives

The study aims to examine the legal and regulatory landscape of telemedicine to identify whether it is increasing accessibility to quality care or jeopardizing patient's privacy and care. For accomplishing the research aim, the following smart objectives are defined:

• To assess the legal and regulatory landscape of telemedicine to understand whether telemedicine increases the access to healthcare or jeopardizes patient privacy and car.
• To minimize the legal and privacy concern of patients related to use of telemedicine for healthcare services.
• To conduct qualitative analysis involving thorough review of existing laws and regulations, policies and guidelines surrounding telemedicine.
• To make recommendations for enhancing the legal and regulatory aspects of telemedicine to address patient's concern and promote adoption of telemedicine services.
• To complete the research within a 6 month time period.

Research Questions

RQ1: How does the current legal and regulatory landscape of telemedicine affect the accessibility to quality healthcare and patient privacy?

RQ2: What are the primary legal and privacy concerns of patients regarding the use of telemedicine for healthcare services?

RQ3: How can the legal and regulatory aspects of telemedicine be enhanced to address patient concerns and promote the adoption of telemedicine services?

Research Methodology

This study adopts a qualitative research method, focusing on legal and regulatory analysis, to investigate the landscape of telemedicine (Patel and Patel, 2019). This method is chosen to understand the subjective viewpoints within the legal framework of telemedicine, aligning with the interpretivist philosophy (Chege and Otieno, 2020). The deductive strategy is employed in the research which begins with a thorough examination of existing laws, regulations, policies, and guidelines related to telemedicine. Data collection techniques include document analysis and legal research methodologies, such as content analysis and comparative analysis, spanning from the inception of telemedicine regulations to the present to ensure a comprehensive understanding of its evolution. The thematic approach to data analysis organizes findings around key themes such as accessibility to healthcare, patient privacy, and legal concerns, facilitating the answering of research questions and achievement of study objectives. The qualitative methodology is justified by its ability to explore complex issues within the legal and regulatory domain of telemedicine thoroughly. It provides a deep understanding of the subject matter, enabling the generation of practical recommendations to address patient concerns and promote the adoption of telemedicine services.

References

• Patel, M. and Patel, N. (2019). Exploring Research Methodology: Review Article. International Journal of Research & Review (www.ijrrjournal.com), [online] 6(3), pp.48-55. Available at: https://www.ijrrjournal.com/IJRR_Vol.6_Issue.3_March2019/IJRR0011.pdf.
• Chege, K.A. and Otieno, O.C. (2020). Research Philosophy Design and Methodologies: A Systematic Review of Research Paradigms in Information Technology. [online] Available at: https://www.globalscientificjournal.com/researchpaper/Research_Philosophy_Design_and_Methodologies_A_Systematic_Review_of_Research_Paradigms_in_Information_Technology_.pdf.
• Ftouni, R., AlJardali, B., Hamdanieh, M., Ftouni, L. and Salem, N. (2022). Challenges of Telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, [online] 22(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-022-01952-0.
• Gajarawala, S. and Pelkowski, J. (2021). Telehealth benefits and barriers. The Journal for Nurse Practitioners, [online] 17(2), pp.218-221. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nurpra.2020.09.013.
• Haleem, A., Javaid, M., Singh, R.P. and Suman, R. (2021). Telemedicine for healthcare: Capabilities, features, barriers, and applications. Sensors International, [online] 2(2). doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sintl.2021.100117.
• Tariq, R.A. and Hackert, P.B. (2023). Patient confidentiality. [online] Nih.gov. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519540/.

Background and Context

Since ancient times, the games have been popular for the cognitive development and enhancing problem solving skills of individuals. As per the study of (Martinez, Gimenes and Lambert, 2023), video games improve the cognitive functioning of the human brain which further helps to foster problem solving skills. However, with the changing time and technology, the dynamics of video games have changed resulting in development of highly engaging games with diverse genres (Jung, 2020). In the current era, violent video games, especially those with violent content, have gained significant popularity (Wei, Liu and Chen, 2022). It has been identified that exposure to violent video games might foster violent behavior among individuals. A research study of (Olejarnik and Romano, 2023) suggests that playing these games can make people less sensitive to real-life violence and more likely to have aggressive thoughts and behaviors. Although it is evident that playing video games improves cognitive functioning of individuals and fosters problem solving skills, the impact of violent video games on cognitive functioning is unclear as exposure to violent content might fuel aggression. Due to these conflicting findings, it is clear that more research is needed to really understand how violent video games can affect cognitive functioning of the human brain and determine whether it can fuel aggression or not. By studying this problem, a better understanding of the impact of video games on cognitive functioning and aggressive behavior can be established. For this purpose, the current study will be performing an observational study to determine whether violent video games improves cognitive functioning or fosters aggressive behavior. This knowledge can help shape public policies, educational programs, and parenting approaches aimed at encouraging healthy and non-aggressive behaviors in people who play these games.

Research aims & objectives

The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of violent video games on cognitive functioning and aggressive behavior in individuals. To achieve the research aim, the following objectives are defined:

• To examine the relationship between exposure to violent video games and cognitive functioning as well as aggressive behavior in individuals.
• To quantify the cognitive functioning and aggressive behavior before and after playing violent video games.
• To analyze the observational data and evaluate the cognitive functioning and aggressive behavior of video gamer exposure group and control group.
• To make evidence-based conclusions and recommendations regarding the impact of violent video games on cognitive functioning and aggressive behavior.
• To complete the research within 6 months.

Research Questions

RQ1: How does exposure to violent video games affect cognitive functioning in individuals compared to non-violent video game exposure?

RQ2: What is the relationship between exposure to violent video games and aggressive behavior in individuals, and how does this compare to individuals exposed to non-violent video games?

RQ3: What are the differences in cognitive functioning and aggressive behavior between the video gamer exposure group (violent video games) and the control group (non-violent video games), based on observational data analysis?

Research Methodology

The qualitative research methodology has been taken into account in this research in which an observational study will be conducted to understand change in an individual's cognitive functioning and aggressive behavior due to playing violent video games (Patel and Patel, 2019). The research will adopt an interpretivist approach, seeking to comprehend the subjective experiences and behaviors of individuals concerning violent video games. An inductive research approach will be employed to gain in-depth insights into the experiences and behaviors of individuals in the context of violent video games. The research strategy will involve an observational study to directly observe and record the behaviors and reactions of individuals while engaging with violent video games (Ramji, 2022). The research is scheduled to be completed within a 6-month time frame to ensure timely completion and analysis of the data. Data collection will primarily involve the observational study, where participants will be observed while playing violent video games, and their behaviors and reactions will be recorded using video recordings and field notes. The data collected from the observational study will be analyzed using thematic analysis to identify recurring themes related to improvements in cognitive functioning and aggressive tendencies in individuals exposed to violent video games. In addition, a comparative analysis will be conducted to compare the cognitive functioning and aggressive behaviors of the video gamer exposure group and the control group, aiming to identify differences and similarities in their responses to the games. Lastly, the evidence-based conclusions will be drawn regarding the impact of violent video games on human behavior, based on the analysis of the observational data and interviews. This comprehensive methodology, structured within the research onion framework, ensures a systematic and rigorous approach to address the research questions and objectives within the specified time frame.

References

• Olejarnik, S.Z. and Romano, D. (2023). Is playing violent video games a risk factor for aggressive behaviour? Adding narcissism, self-esteem and PEGI ratings to the debate. Frontiers in Psychology, [online] 14. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1155807.
• Ramji, S. (2022). Study Design: Observational Studies. Indian Pediatrics, 59(6), pp.493-498. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s13312-022-2541-2.
• University of Oxford (2019). Violent video games found not to be associated with adolescent aggression | University of Oxford. [online] www.ox.ac.uk. Available at: https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2019-02-13-violent-video-games-found-not-be-associated-adolescent-aggression.
• Patel, M. and Patel, N. (2019). Exploring Research Methodology: Review Article. International Journal of Research & Review (www.ijrrjournal.com), [online] 6(3), pp.48-55. Available at: https://www.ijrrjournal.com/IJRR_Vol.6_Issue.3_March2019/IJRR0011.pdf.
• Jung, C.W. (2020). The role of game genres and gamers' communication networks in perceived learning. Palgrave Communications, [online] 6(1), pp.1-8. doi:https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-0439-y.
• Martinez, L., Gimenes, M. and Lambert, E. (2023). Video games and board games: Effects of playing practice on cognition. PLOS ONE, [online] 18(3), p.e0283654. doi:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283654.
• Wei, M., Liu, Y. and Chen, S. (2022). Violent Video Game Exposure and Problem Behaviors among Children and Adolescents: The Mediating Role of Deviant Peer Affiliation for Gender and Grade Differences. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, [online] 19(22), p.15400. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192215400.

Background and Context

Gene editing is a powerful technology that allows for precise modifications of an organism's DNA (Medline Plus, 2022). It has become a promising tool in various fields, including medicine, agriculture and biotechnology (Bayer Global, 2021). The development of the CRISPR-Cas9 system, which enables efficient and cost-effective gene editing, has generated significant interest and raised important ethical concerns (Medline Plus, 2022). While gene editing has the potential to revolutionize medical treatments and address genetic disorders, it also presents significant cultural and ethical challenges. The utilization of gene editing, especially concerning altering human reproductive cells, brings up worries regarding fairness, potential harm, doing good, bias, and acknowledging cultural and religious beliefs (Abuhammad, Khabour and Alzoubi, 2021). Furthermore, diverse communities may hold differing viewpoints on the moral limits of genetic modification. A crucial ethical aspect lies in differentiating between employing gene editing to address medical conditions and using it for enhancement purposes. This differentiation raises questions about determining the boundary between treating genetic disorders and potentially changing human characteristics for non-medical reasons. Gene editing has the potential to widen existing social and economic inequalities which makes it essential to navigate the cultural and ethical considerations associated with gene editing. It has been observed that many researchers have highlighted the ethical concerns regarding gene editing, however they have not covered the cultural dimension. It is crucial to identify and address the cultural implications along with ethical implications of gene editing to ensure ethical use of gene editing technologies within diverse cultural and societal contexts. To cover this gap, the current study will be investigating cultural and ethical implications related to gene editing in terms of medical progression or ethical boundary.

Research aims & objectives

This systematic review aims to thoroughly analyze the cultural and ethical implications of gene editing, particularly focusing on its potential as a tool for medical progression versus its ethical boundaries. The following smart objectives are defined for achieving the research:

• To identify and analyze the cultural and ethical implications of gene editing, encompassing perspectives from diverse cultural and societal contexts.
• To minimize the potential risks and impact of cultural and ethical implications associated with gene editing technologies.
• To conduct a systematic literature review to determine how cultural beliefs and values may influence access to and acceptance of gene editing interventions.
• To provide recommendations for navigating the cultural and ethical complexities associated with gene editing, aiming to foster responsible and culturally sensitive practices in research, clinical applications, and policymaking.
• To complete the research within a 6 months time period.

Research Questions

RQ1: What are the predominant cultural beliefs and values influencing the acceptance or rejection of gene editing technologies across diverse cultural and societal contexts?

RQ2: How can the potential risks and ethical implications associated with gene editing be minimized while maximizing its benefits for medical progression?

Research Methodology

The research methodology for this study will involve a systematic and thorough review of existing literature, employing an interpretivist research philosophy, deductive approach, and thematic analysis to comprehensively explore the ethical considerations of gene editing (Patel and Patel, 2019). The research methodology for this systematic literature review employs the Research Onion framework to guide methodological decisions across various layers. At the philosophical level, the study adopts a positivist approach, focusing on objective analysis of the cultural and ethical implications of gene editing. This choice aligns with the aim of objectively examining the topic. The approach chosen is deductive, starting with defined objectives and hypotheses derived from existing literature and theory. For strategy, a qualitative approach is utilized to delve deeply into the cultural and ethical dimensions of gene editing, enabling exploration of diverse perspectives. The time horizon is set at 6 months to ensure a thorough review process within a reasonable timeframe. Data collection involves systematically searching and selecting relevant literature from academic databases and journals based on established criteria. This ensures the quality and relevance of the gathered literature (Lame, 2019). Analysis employs thematic synthesis to identify key themes and patterns emerging from the literature, facilitating the extraction of meaningful insights regarding cultural and ethical implications. By adopting this methodological framework, the research aims to provide valuable insights and recommendations for navigating the complex cultural and ethical landscape surrounding gene editing, thus contributing to responsible practices in research, clinical applications, and policymaking.

References

• Patel, M. and Patel, N. (2019). Exploring Research Methodology: Review Article. International Journal of Research & Review (www.ijrrjournal.com), [online] 6(3), pp.48-55. Available at: https://www.ijrrjournal.com/IJRR_Vol.6_Issue.3_March2019/IJRR0011.pdf.
• Bayer Global (2021). CRISPR Is Revolutionizing Biotechnology | Bayer. [online] Bayer.com. Available at: https://www.bayer.com/en/news-stories/gene-editing-the-promise-crispr-holds-to-revolutionize-our-world.
• Lame, G. (2019). Systematic Literature Reviews: an Introduction. Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design, 1(1), pp.1633-1642. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.169.
• Medline Plus (2022). What are genome editing and CRISPR-Cas9? [online] medlineplus.gov. Available at: https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/understanding/genomicresearch/genomeediting/.
• Nuffield Bioethics (2018). Genome editing and human reproduction. [online] Available at: https://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/assets/pdfs/Genome-editing-and-human-reproduction-report.pdf.
• Abuhammad, S., Khabour, O.F. and Alzoubi, K.H. (2021). Researchers views about perceived harms and benefits of gene editing: A study from the MENA region. Heliyon, 7(4), p.e06860. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06860.

Background and Context

Genetic modification (GM) in agriculture has been a subject of extensive debate and controversy as it involves altering an organism's genetic material to introduce specific traits, such as increased resistance to pests or improved nutritional content (Raman, 2017). With the projected global population reaching 9.7 billion by 2050, there is a pressing need to increase food production (FAO, 2009). Genetic modification has been proposed as a potential solution by enhancing crop yields, improving nutritional content, and bolstering resistance to pests and diseases (Bailey-Serres et al., 2019). GMO technologies offer faster crop improvement, novel genetic strategies for enhancing crops, and the ability to use genes from diverse sources, irrespective of compatibility (Oliver, 2014). These advancements could contribute to doubling global agricultural production, reducing yield losses from diseases and environmental factors, and addressing changing climate and soil conditions. In addition, genetic modification has the potential to enhance desirable crop traits, leading to increased yields and more efficient utilization of environmental resources (Phillips, 2014). However, concerns exist regarding the potential negative impacts of genetic modification on biodiversity and the environment. While researchers argue that GM technology can enhance food security and tackle global challenges, critics express concerns about its potential adverse effects on biodiversity and ecological equilibrium. Therefore, it is imperative to conduct comprehensive research to evaluate the benefits and risks associated with genetic modification in agriculture and to inform policymakers, stakeholders, and the general public about its implications. This research aims to critically examine the implications of genetic modification in agriculture, considering both its potential benefits and risks. It seeks to foster a balanced understanding of the topic, which is crucial for making informed decisions. The research findings will serve as a valuable resource for policymakers, enabling them to develop robust regulations and policies that promote sustainable agriculture while safeguarding biodiversity.

Research aims & objectives

The research aims to comprehensively explore the implications of genetic modification in agriculture, with a focus on the interplay between enhancing food security and potentially endangering biodiversity.

SMART Objectives

To achieve the research aim, the following SMART objective has been formulated:

• Specific: To identify the implications of genetic modification in agriculture, considering its effects on food security and biodiversity.
• Measurable: To minimize the risks associated with genetic modification in the agricultural sector.
• Achievable: To conduct a systematic literature review to identify potential risks and benefits of genetic modification in agriculture and determine whether it is enhancing food security or endangering biodiversity.
• Relevant: To make evidence-based recommendations and guidelines to policymakers, stakeholders, and the general public regarding the responsible implementation of genetic modification in agriculture.
• Time bound: To complete the research within a 4 month time frame.

Research Questions

The research will be guided by the following research questions:

RQ1: What is the impact of genetic modification on food security and biodiversity in agriculture?

RQ2: What are the potential risks associated with genetic modification in agriculture, and how can they be minimized?

RQ3: How do different genetic modification techniques and traits introduced through GM crops affect food production and quality?

RQ4: What strategies could be applied for successful implementation of genetic modification in agriculture to enhance food security while safeguarding biodiversity?

Research Methodology

This study will use a qualitative research approach, specifically employing a systematic literature review method to investigate the implications of genetic modification in agriculture. The systematic literature review involves carefully selecting and analyzing relevant academic articles, reports, and other sources to gain a comprehensive understanding of the problem (Zukauskas, Vveinhardt and Andriukaitiene, 2018). In this study, the research onion model will guide the different choices made throughout the research process. The research philosophy adopted is interpretivism, which recognizes the subjective nature of human experiences and aims to understand the meanings and interpretations individuals attribute to genetic modification in agriculture. The research strategy is a systematic literature review, where a thorough search for pertinent studies will be conducted, followed by the analysis and synthesis of their findings (Sileyew, 2019). The time horizon for this study is cross-sectional, focusing on the literature available up until 2018. The primary data will be derived from peer-reviewed academic articles, reports, and relevant publications acquired from reputable sources. Thematic analysis will be used to identify common themes and patterns in the selected literature, enabling a comprehensive evaluation of the impacts of genetic modification on food security, biodiversity, ecological consequences, socio-economic implications, and regulatory frameworks (Dawadi, 2020). By following the research onion framework, this study ensures a methodical and rigorous approach to data collection and analysis, enhancing the reliability and validity of the research findings. The systematic literature review method allows for a thorough examination of existing knowledge, providing a solid basis for evidence-based insights and recommendations regarding the implications of genetic modification in agriculture.

References

• Bailey-Serres, J., Parker, J.E., Ainsworth, E.A., Oldroyd, G.E.D. and Schroeder, J.I. (2019). Genetic strategies for improving crop yields. Nature, [online] 575(7781), pp.109-118. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1679-0.
• Dawadi, S. (2020). Thematic analysis approach: A step by step guide for ELT research practitioners. Journal of NELTA, [online] 25(1-2). Available at: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED612353.pdf.
• FAO (2009). Global agriculture towards 2050. [online] Available at: https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/wsfs/docs/Issues_papers/HLEF2050_Global_Agriculture.pdf.
• Oliver, M.J. (2014). Why We Need GMO Crops in Agriculture. Missouri Medicine, [online] 111(6), pp.492-507. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6173531/.
• Phillips, T. (2014). Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) | Learn Science at Scitable. [online] Nature.com. Available at: https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/genetically-modified-organisms-gmos-transgenic-crops-nbsp-732.
• Raman, R. (2017). The impact of Genetically Modified (GM) crops in modern agriculture: A review. GM Crops & Food, [online] 8(4), pp.195-208. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/21645698.2017.1413522.
• Sileyew, K.J. (2019). Research Design and Methodology. Text Mining - Analysis, Programming and Application, [online] pp.1-12. doi:https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.85731.
• Zukauskas, P., Vveinhardt, J. and Andriukaitiene, R. (2018). Philosophy and paradigm of scientific research. Management Culture and Corporate Social Responsibility, [online] 1(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.70628.

Background and Context

Universal basic income (UBI) has gained significant attention as a potential solution to address poverty and income inequality (Tereshchenko, 2023). UBI is a policy proposal that involves providing a regular cash payment to every citizen, regardless of their income or employment status (ProCon, 2021). The underlying idea is to establish a safety net that ensures individuals have enough financial resources to meet their basic needs and to empower them to pursue meaningful work. (Rizvi et al., 2022) argue that UBI can effectively support vulnerable populations, reduce poverty levels, and mitigate income disparities. Implementation of UBI programs can provide a basic income floor to the individuals regardless of their employment status and income to support them fulfill their basic needs. As per the report of (york.ac.uk, 2022), the new UBI is expected to reduce child poverty to approximately 12.5%. However, it can raise questions regarding financial security as it is funded by taxes, governmental funds and funds of discontinued programs. The implementation of UBI can result in increased taxes and reduced funding to the social programs (Fleischer and Hemel, 2020). It has been observed that there is a lack of clarity regarding the impact of the UBI on poverty, income inequality and economic sustainability. As there are divergent perspectives surrounding UBI, it is essential to conduct in-depth research in this area. In order to fill this gap, the current study aims to perform a case based analysis to determine the impact of UBI programs on poverty levels of countries and determine whether it leads to income inequality or a financial burdern. This will help to determine the socio-economic implications associated with UBI and recommend strategies for policy formulation and implementation for addressing the issues.

Research aims & objectives

The primary aim of research is to determine whether “Universal Basic Income (UBI)” minimizes poverty or exacerbates income inequality. In order to accomplish this, the following SMART goals are defined:

• To examine the impact of universal basic income on poverty levels, income inequality and economic sustainability.
• To minimize the socio-economic implications associated with implementation of UBI.
• To conduct a case study based analysis to evaluate poverty rates, income distribution and impact of UBI on economic sustainability.
• To address socio-economic issues related to poverty and income inequality, informing decisions regarding policy formulation and implementation.
• To complete the research within the eight month time frame.

Research Questions

The research will be guided by the following research questions:

RQ1: What is the impact of implementation of Universal Basic Income (UBI) on poverty levels, income inequality, and economic sustainability?

RQ2: What socio-economic implications arise from the implementation of UBI, and how can they be minimized?

RQ3: What effective policies be formulated regarding UBI for addressing socio-economic implications?

Research Methodology

This research employs a qualitative case-based study approach to investigate the impact of Universal Basic Income (UBI) on poverty reduction and income inequality. Following the Research Onion framework, the methodology is guided by several key choices at each layer. The research adopts an interpretivist paradigm, recognizing the subjective nature of human experiences regarding UBI (Zukauskas, Vveinhardt and Andriukaitiene, 2018). Furthermore, a case study strategy is selected to delve deeply into the complexities of UBI implementation and its effects. The chosen approach is exploratory, aiming to uncover various dimensions of UBI and its socio-economic implications (Lame, 2019). To ensure a comprehensive analysis, multiple case studies will be examined, capturing diverse contexts and experiences of UBI implementation. The research adopts a cross-sectional time horizon, focusing on the current status and impacts of UBI within the chosen case study contexts. Data will be collected through qualitative methods such as semi-structured interviews, focus groups, and document analysis, allowing for the gathering of rich, context-specific insights from stakeholders and experts. Thematic analysis will be employed to analyze the qualitative data, facilitating the identification of recurring themes and patterns related to poverty, income inequality, and UBI implementation (Dawadi, 2020). By following this systematic methodological approach, the research aims to provide valuable insights for policy formulation and implementation decisions within the specified timeframe of eight months.

References

• Dawadi, S. (2020). Thematic analysis approach: A step by step guide for ELT research practitioners. Journal of NELTA, [online] 25(1-2). Available at: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED612353.pdf.
• Fleischer, M.P. and Hemel, D. (2020). The Architecture of a Basic Income. The University of Chicago Law Review, [online] 87(3), pp.625-710. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26910602.
• Lame, G. (2019). Systematic Literature Reviews: an Introduction. Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design, 1(1), pp.1633-1642. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.169.
• ProCon (2021). Universal Basic Income - Top 3 Pros and Cons. [online] ProCon.org. Available at: https://www.procon.org/headlines/universal-basic-income-top-3-pros-and-cons/.
• Rizvi, A., Welch, V., Gibson, M., Labelle, P.R., Pollard, C., Wells, G.A. and Kristjansson, E. (2022). PROTOCOL: Effects of guaranteed basic income interventions on poverty-related outcomes in high-income countries: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 18(4). doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1281.
• Tereshchenko, S. (2023). The Global Importance of Universal Basic Income (UBI) Manifestation. [online] papers.ssrn.com. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4368245.
• Zukauskas, P., Vveinhardt, J. and Andriukaitiene, R. (2018). Philosophy and paradigm of scientific research. Management Culture and Corporate Social Responsibility, [online] 1(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.70628.
• york.ac.uk (2022). Basic income could cut poverty to lowest for 60 years at no net cost, according to new research. [online] University of York. Available at: https://www.york.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2022/research/basic-income-could-cut-poverty/.

Background and Context

Cryptocurrency, such as Bitcoin, has emerged as a disruptive financial innovation that has garnered significant attention worldwide (Vora, 2015). As per the report of (Statista, 2023), the adoption rate of cryptocurrency has been increased by approximately 190% between 2018 to 2020 which demonstrates the rapid growth of cryptocurrency. The reason behind the adoption of cryptocurrency is the reason that it has the potential to empower financial autonomy by offering decentralized and efficient financial systems (Sandner, 2021). However, there are concerns regarding its association with enabling illicit behavior and economic volatility, mainly due to factors like high investor losses, scams, hacks, and energy-intensive mining processes (Kerr et al., 2023). The prevalence of illicit activities associated with cryptocurrencies, such as money laundering and ransomware payments, has raised concerns regarding the potential risks it poses to the financial system (Song, Chen and Wang, 2023). This further indicates that there are significant loopholes in the existing cyber and finance related laws which allows the users to perform illicit activities. While some researchers argue that cryptocurrency empowers financial autonomy and fosters economic inclusivity, concerns about its potential to facilitate illicit behavior and economic volatility have been identified due to loopholes in the cyber and finance related laws. This highlights the urgent need to investigate the contradictory role of cryptocurrency to guide regulatory frameworks and inform public discourse and identify the gaps in existing cyber and finance related laws. Therefore, this research aims to investigate the role of cryptocurrency to determine whether it promotes financial independence or enables illicit behavior and economic volatility.

Research aims & objectives

This research aims to examine the role of cryptocurrency in promotion of financial independence, as well as identify whether it contributes to illicit behavior and economic volatility. In addition, the study will be evaluating the existing cyber and finance related laws associated with cryptocurrency to identify the gaps to make recommendations for improvement. To achieve this aim, the study will pursue the following SMART objectives:

• To examine whether cryptocurrency empowers financial autonomy or enables illicit behavior and economic volatility.
• To eliminate the risks of illicit behavior and economic volatility associated with cryptocurrency through identification of the gaps in existing cyber and finance related laws pertaining to cryptocurrency.
• To conduct a survey involving diverse cryptocurrency users to determine their perception regarding the role of cryptocurrency in terms of empowering financial autonomy or enabling illicit behavior and economic volatility.
• To provide evidence-based recommendations for policymakers and regulatory authorities to enhance cyber and finance-related laws regarding cryptocurrency, aiming to mitigate risks while fostering innovation and financial inclusion.
• To complete the research within 9 months of the time frame.

Research Questions

To address these objectives, the study will be guided by the following research questions:

RQ1: How does cryptocurrency promote financial independence, and to what extent does it facilitate illicit behavior and economic volatility?

RQ2: What are the existing gaps in cyber and finance-related laws governing cryptocurrency, and how can these gaps be addressed to mitigate risks associated with illicit behavior and economic instability?

RQ3: How can cyber and finance-related laws regarding cryptocurrency be enhanced, to mitigate risks while fostering innovation and financial inclusion?

Research Methodology

The research methodology for the study on the contradictory role of cryptocurrency will follow a quantitative approach, aiming to gather and analyze numerical data. The research onion framework will guide the choices made at each stage of the methodology. The research philosophy will be positivism, assuming that there is an objective reality that can be measured and analyzed. The deductive approach will be employed, where hypotheses will be derived from existing theories and tested using empirical data (Zukauskas, Vveinhardt and Andriukaitiene, 2018). A survey-based strategy will be implemented, involving the collection of data through a structured questionnaire distributed to a diverse sample of cryptocurrency users. The questionnaire will capture participants' perceptions of financial autonomy, experiences with illicit behavior, and observations of economic volatility related to cryptocurrency usage (Tengli, 2020). Demographic and behavioral information will also be collected to understand the factors influencing individuals' decisions to engage in cryptocurrency-related activities. The data collection will be cross-sectional, providing a snapshot of participants' responses at a specific moment in time. Data analysis will involve the use of statistical techniques, such as descriptive statistics to summarize the data and inferential statistics to examine relationships between variables and test hypotheses (Tengli, 2020). The collected data will be analyzed using software like SPSS or R. Measures will be taken to ensure the validity and reliability of the findings, including piloting the questionnaire and assessing its internal consistency. Ethical considerations, such as obtaining informed consent and protecting participants' privacy, will be adhered to throughout the research process. By following this research methodology, the study aims to provide a systematic and rigorous examination of the contradictory role of cryptocurrency and achieve the research objectives.

References

• Kerr, D.S., Loveland, K.A., Smith, K.T. and Smith, L.M. (2023). Cryptocurrency Risks, Fraud Cases, and Financial Performance. Risks, 11(3), p.51. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/risks11030051.
• Sandner, P. (2021). Decentralized Finance Will Change Your Understanding Of Financial Systems. [online] Forbes. Available at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/philippsandner/2021/02/22/decentralized-finance-will-change-your-understanding-of-financial-systems/?sh=5344ce4d5b52 [Accessed 12 Feb. 2024].
• Song, Y., Chen, B. and Wang, X.-Y. (2023). Cryptocurrency technology revolution: are Bitcoin prices and terrorist attacks related? Financial Innovation, 9(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854-022-00445-3.
• Statista (2023). Cryptocurrency users worldwide 2020. [online] Statista. Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1202503/global-cryptocurrency-user-base/.
• Tengli, M.B. (2020). RESEARCH ONION: A SYSTEMATIC APPROACH TO DESIGNING RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.
• Vora, G. (2015). Cryptocurrencies: Are Disruptive Financial Innovations Here? Modern Economy, 06(07), pp.816-832. doi:https://doi.org/10.4236/me.2015.67077.
• Zukauskas, P., Vveinhardt, J. and Andriukaitiene, R. (2018). Philosophy and paradigm of scientific research. Management Culture and Corporate Social Responsibility, [online] 1(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.70628.

Background and Context

In recent times, social media platforms have become an essential part of the daily lives of millions of individuals, serving as a space for communication, information sharing, and political discussions (Alodat, Al-Qora'n and Abu Hamoud, 2023). While these platforms offer the potential to connect people and facilitate democratic dialogue, concerns have arisen regarding their potential contribution to political extremism and societal divisions (Schleffer and Miller, 2021). The presence of echo chambers and filter bubbles on social media raises questions about the degree to which individuals are exposed to diverse political perspectives and whether these platforms inadvertently reinforce existing beliefs, leading to increased polarization (Arguedas et al., 2022). The influence of social media on political polarization and its potential to foster political extremism and divisions among the population have been subjects of concern. The rapid growth and widespread use of social media have resulted in an influx of political content dissemination and the formation of online echo chambers, where individuals are predominantly exposed to opinions that align with their own (Jiang, Ren and Ferrara, 2021). These phenomena prompt inquiry into the role of social media in shaping political beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors, as well as the extent to which these platforms contribute to heightened polarization and societal rifts. Understanding the role of social media in influencing political polarization is vital for informing policy decisions and developing strategies that mitigate the negative effects of online platforms on societal cohesion and democratic processes. Furthermore, research in this field can yield valuable insights into the intricate relationship between social media usage and political polarization, ultimately contributing to a more comprehensive understanding of this pressing issue.

Research aims & objectives

The primary objective of this study is to investigate the relationship between social media use and political polarization, with a specific focus on whether social media platforms encourage political extremism and divisions among the population. Through this examination, the study aims to provide a deeper understanding of the impact of social media on political discourse and its potential consequences for democratic societies.

SMART Objectives

• Specific: To evaluate the perceived contribution of social media platforms to political polarization and the formation of echo chambers.
• Measurable: To minimize the negative impact of social media in encouraging political extremism and creation of echo chambers.
• Achievable: To conduct survey data to determine the role of social media in political polarization and echo chamber formation.
• Relevant: To determine whether there are differences in political behavior and attitudes between social media users and non-users, suggesting a relationship between social media use and political polarization?
• Time bound: To complete the evaluation within the six month timeframe.

Research Questions

To address the research objective, the study will be guided by the following research questions:

RQ1: What is the impact of social media on political polarization and the formation of echo chambers?

RQ2: What is the relationship between social media usage and political polarization and how does it lead to echo chamber formation?

RQ3: What are the effective strategies to be used for reducing political polarization and its negative impact in encouraging political extremism and creation of echo chambers?

Research Methodology

The research methodology for the study focusing on the relationship between social media use and political polarization will employ a systematic approach known as the Research Onion Framework (Melnikovas, 2018). The framework guides the decision-making process at each layer of the research. The research philosophy chosen for this study is positivism, which aims to establish causal relationships through empirical observation and quantitative analysis. Adopting a deductive research approach, the study will begin with a theory or hypothesis and test it through data collection and analysis (Sileyew, 2019). The research strategy will involve conducting a survey to collect data from a diverse range of participants. The surveys will be self-administered online, allowing for the collection of large-scale data and insights into participants' perceptions and behaviors related to social media use and political polarization. To ensure a representative sample, a probability sampling technique such as stratified random sampling will be used. The collected data will be analyzed using appropriate statistical techniques, including descriptive statistics to summarize participants' perceptions and behaviors and inferential statistics to examine relationships and differences between variables. Ethical considerations will be prioritized, with measures in place to ensure participant confidentiality, informed consent, and protection of participants' rights (Melnikovas, 2018). The study's methodology ensures a rigorous and systematic investigation into the relationship between social media use and political polarization, providing valuable insights into this complex societal issue.

References

• Alodat, A.M., Al-Qora'n, L.F. and Abu Hamoud, M. (2023). Social Media Platforms and Political Participation: A Study of Jordanian Youth Engagement. Social Sciences, [online] 12(7), p.402. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12070402.
• Arguedas, A., Robertson, C., Fletcher, R. and Nielsen, R. (2022). Echo chambers, filter bubbles, and polarisation: a literature review. [online] Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. Available at: https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/echo-chambers-filter-bubbles-and-polarisation-literature-review.
• Jiang, J., Ren, X. and Ferrara, E. (2021). Social Media Polarization and Echo Chambers in the Context of COVID-19: Case Study. arXiv:2103.10979 [cs], [online] 2(3). doi:https://doi.org/10.2196/29570.
• Melnikovas, A. (2018). Towards an Explicit Research Methodology: Adapting Research Onion Model for Futures Studies. Journal of Futures Studies, 23(2), pp.29-44. doi:https://doi.org/10.6531/JFS.201812_23(2).0003.
• Schleffer, G. and Miller, B. (2021). The Political Effects of Social Media Platforms on Different Regime Types (Summer 2021). repositories.lib.utexas.edu. [online] doi:https://doi.org/10.26153/tsw/13987.
• Sileyew, K.J. (2019). Research Design and Methodology. Text Mining - Analysis, Programming and Application, [online] pp.1-12. doi:https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.85731.

Background and Context

In recent years, social media platforms have emerged as powerful tools for communication and information sharing, revolutionizing the way individuals interact and engage with various topics (Edwards, 2015). Within this realm, mental health advocacy has particularly benefited from the potential offered by social media. Individuals and organizations have increasingly utilized social media platforms to raise awareness, provide support, and advocate for improved mental health services (Latha et al., 2020). On social media, the influencers, health care professionals etc. provide advocacy for mental health issues by sharing their experiences and viewpoints. However, whether the shared information and strategies are reliable and effective is questionable as it is not necessary that an advocate has expertise in the domain. As a result of this, the concerns related to potential risks and limitations of these platforms in effectively addressing mental health challenges arises. Therefore, research in this area is crucial to evaluate the effectiveness of mental health advocacy on social media, identify the opportunities it presents for bridging gaps in mental health services, and address associated risks such as misinformation and negative impacts on mental well-being. By investigating the benefits, risks, and opportunities of using social media for mental health advocacy, this research aims to inform the development of evidence-based strategies and guidelines to maximize the potential of social media while mitigating potential harms within the context of mental health advocacy.

Research aims & objectives

The aim of this study is to explore the opportunities and challenges of using social media as a tool for mental health advocacy. By investigating these aspects, the study seeks to provide a deeper understanding of how social media can be leveraged to promote mental health awareness and support, as well as identify the barriers and limitations that need to be addressed.

SMART Objectives

• Specific: To investigate the opportunities and challenges related to the use of social media as a tool for mental health advocacy.
• Measurable: To increase mental health awareness to support the wellbeing of individuals.
• Achievable: To conduct a comprehensive survey to capture diverse perspectives and experiences of mental health advocates using social media for advocacy.
• Relevant: To make recommendations and practices for the effective usage of social media to spread awareness regarding mental health issues and coping strategies.
• Time bound: To complete the survey within 3 months and complete the research within 6 months.

Research Questions

To address the research objective, the following research questions will guide the study:

RQ1: What are the opportunities and challenges associated with the use of social media as a tool for mental health advocacy?

RQ2: How can mental health awareness be increased through the strategic utilization of social media platforms?

RQ3: What are the suitable practices to be followed for effectively utilizing social media as a tool for mental health advocacy?

Research Methodology

This research study aims to examine the opportunities and challenges of using social media as a tool for mental health advocacy. It will follow a systematic approach by implementing the Research Onion Framework. The research philosophy is positivist to gather objective data about the relationships between social media use and advocacy. An existing literature and theories will guide the deductive approach (Sileyew, 2019). A survey design is chosen as the research strategy to collect quantitative information from mental health advocates. It will assess their perceptions and experiences of using different social media platforms. Data will be collected at one time point using a cross-sectional method to understand advocates' current views. Online self-administered surveys will be the primary data collection tool. The sample of advocates will be selected through stratified random sampling to represent different demographics. An appropriate sample size will ensure statistical validity. Descriptive and inferential statistics will analyze the survey responses. Descriptive analysis will summarize views and strategies while regression will examine the impact of platforms on effectiveness. Ethical guidelines on confidentiality, consent and rights will be followed (Zukauskas, Vveinhardt and Andriukaitiene, 2018). Approval from ethics boards is required before data collection. By making systematic choices at each layer of the Research Onion Framework, this study aims to provide valuable insights into opportunities and challenges of social media for mental health advocacy through a rigorous research methodology.

References

• Edwards, M. (2015). How Social Media Has Changed How We Communicate - Future Of Work. [online] Future Of Work. Available at: https://fowmedia.com/social-media-changed-communicate/.
• Latha, K., Meena, K., Pravitha, M., Dasgupta, M. and Chaturvedi, S. (2020). Effective use of social media platforms for promotion of mental health awareness. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, [online] 9(1), p.124. doi:https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_90_20.
• Sileyew, K.J. (2019). Research Design and Methodology. Text Mining - Analysis, Programming and Application, [online] pp.1-12. doi:https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.85731.
• Zukauskas, P., Vveinhardt, J. and Andriukaitiene, R. (2018). Philosophy and paradigm of scientific research. Management Culture and Corporate Social Responsibility, [online] 1(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.70628.

Background and Context

The issue of gun ownership and its effects on public safety has become a highly debated and controversial topic in recent years. (Buttrick, 2020) argues that widespread gun ownership serves as a deterrent to crime, empowering individuals to protect themselves and their belongings. Meanwhile, (Khalil, 2017) assert that the presence of firearms actually contributes to more violence, resulting in higher crime rates and fatalities. Despite the majority of Americans favoring stricter gun laws, the congress has not implemented them, creating a perceived paradox (Jones, 2023). A study by (Morin, 2014) illustrated that Americans who lived with their young children are more likely to own a gun at home as compared to the other adults in the household. A survey data of (Azrael et al., 2018) revealed that around 1/3rd of the Americans living with their children under 18 at homes have a gun, which include 34% families living with the children younger than 12 years old. A study conducted by (Jones and Stone, 2015) reveals that gun ownership is on the rise and is accompanied by an increase in firearm homicides. This conflicting evidence highlights the need for comprehensive research to reconcile these contrasting viewpoints. The ongoing debate over gun ownership necessitates further research, with existing studies facing challenges such as failure to differentiate between legal and illegal gun availability and increasing reluctance among individuals to report firearm ownership (Stolzenberg, 2023). Underscoring these limitations, such research is crucial due to its implications for public policy and safety. Understanding the inconsistencies between public opinion, legislative action, and the actual impact of gun ownership on deterring crime is essential for developing evidence-based gun control policies and addressing public concerns (Loupe and Pierre, 2024). Therefore, the primary objective of this research is to gain a comprehensive understanding of the implications of gun ownership on criminal activity and the effectiveness of gun control measures. By examining the relationship between gun ownership and criminal activity, this study aims to provide valuable insights that can guide efforts towards creating a safer and more secure society.

Research aims & objectives

This research aims to understand the relationship between gun ownership and criminal activity, examining the effectiveness of gun control measures and the implications for public policy and safety.

SMART Objectives

• Specific: To determine the correlation between rates of gun ownership and incidences of criminal activity
• Measurable: To reduce the rate of criminal activities by analyzing the impact of demographic variables such as age, gender, income, and location on the likelihood of gun ownership.
• Achievable: To collect secondary data from an existing dataset for performing statistical analysis to quantify the correlation between gun ownership rates and incidences of criminal activity while considering demographic factors and evaluating the effectiveness of existing gun control measures.
• Relevant: To evaluate the impact of demographic variables on gun ownership and criminal activity rates to inform evidence-based policymaking and enhance public safety measures.
• Time bound: To complete the analysis of the collected data within a six-month timeframe.

Research Questions

RQ1: What are individuals' attitudes and perceptions regarding gun ownership and its impact on personal safety and security?

RQ2: How do demographic factors such as age, gender, income, and location influence the likelihood of gun ownership, and how do these factors correlate with rates of criminal activity involving firearms?

RQ3: How do gun control policies and legislation affect gun ownership and criminal activity and how effective they are in mitigating criminal activity associated with firearms?

RQ4: How do demographic variations in gun ownership and criminal activity rates inform the design and implementation of targeted public safety policies?

Research Methodology

This research will be adopting a quantitative approach to examine the relationship between gun ownership and criminal activity (Sileyew, 2019). The selected methodology follows the research onion framework, involving specific choices at different layers to achieve the research objectives. The research philosophy is positivist, aiming for objectivity and generalizability of findings. A deductive approach is utilized, starting with a theoretical framework and testing hypotheses derived from existing theories and literature (Zukauskas, Vveinhardt and Andriukaitiene, 2018). A cross-sectional design is employed as the research strategy, collecting data at one point in time from a secondary dataset. The time horizon is also cross-sectional, with data collection and analysis completed within six months. For conducting research on the relationship between gun ownership and its potential deterrent effect on criminal activity, there are several possible datasets you can consider using: Gun Violence Data or Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) Datasets. Data analysis will be employing numerous statistical techniques such as descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and inferential statistics. Statistical software like SPSS or R is used for data analysis (Jansen and Warren, 2023). By employing a quantitative methodology, this research aims to gather empirical data from the collected samples to examine the relationship between gun ownership and criminal activity. Data analysis explores correlations, demographic and geographic factors, and aligns findings with existing research and public discourse on the implications of gun ownership on criminal activity (Sileyew, 2019). Additionally, to support these findings, a literature based analysis will be performed using a wide range of reliable scholarly articles and other sources, collected from Google Scholar, MDPI, ACM Library, etc. The research findings will be disseminated through a comprehensive report, contributing to evidence-based recommendations for policymakers, law enforcement, and the public (Tabuena, Hilario and Buenaflor, 2021).

References

• Buttrick, N. (2020). Protective Gun Ownership as a Coping Mechanism. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(4), pp.835-855. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619898847.
• Jones, J. (2023). Majority in U.S. Continues to Favor Stricter Gun Laws. [online] Gallup.com. Available at: https://news.gallup.com/poll/513623/majority-continues-favor-stricter-gun-laws.aspx.
• Jones, M.A. and Stone, G.W. (2015). The U.S. Gun-Control Paradox: Gun Buyer Response To Congressional Gun-Control Initiatives. Journal of Business & Economics Research, 13(4).
• Khalil, U. (2017). Do more guns lead to more crime? Understanding the role of illegal firearms. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 133, pp.342-361. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2016.11.010.
• Loupe, R. and Pierre, S. (2024). The Effects of Situational Access to Firearms on Sensitivity to The Effects of Situational Access to Firearms on Sensitivity to Risk of Criminal Victimization: A Contextual Analysis. Risk of Criminal Victimization: A Contextual Analysis. [online] Available at: https://repository.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6144&context=gradschool_disstheses [Accessed 13 Feb. 2024].
• Sileyew, K.J. (2019). Research Design and Methodology. Text Mining - Analysis, Programming and Application, [online] pp.1-12. doi:https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.85731.
• Zukauskas, P., Vveinhardt, J. and Andriukaitiene, R. (2018). Philosophy and paradigm of scientific research. Management Culture and Corporate Social Responsibility, [online] 1(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.70628.
• Azrael, D., Cohen, J., Salhi, C. and Miller, M. (2018). Firearm Storage in Gun-Owning Households with Children: Results of a 2015 National Survey. Journal of Urban Health, 95(3), pp.295-304. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-018-0261-7.
• Jansen, D. and Warren, K. (2023). What is research methodology? [online] Grad Coach. Available at: https://gradcoach.com/what-is-research-methodology/.
• Morin, R. (2014). The demographics and politics of gun-owning households. [online] Pew Research Center. Available at: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2014/07/15/the-demographics-and-politics-of-gun-owning-households/.
• Sileyew, K.J. (2019). Research Design and Methodology. [online] www.intechopen.com. IntechOpen. doi:https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.85731.
• Stolzenberg, S.J.D., Lisa (2023). The Paradox of Gun Availability and Gun Violence. [online] The Crime Report. Available at: https://thecrimereport.org/2023/02/22/the-paradox-of-gun-availability-and-gun-violence [Accessed 20 Feb. 2024].
• Tabuena, A.C., Hilario, Y.M.C. and Buenaflor, M.P. (2021). Overview and Exemplar Components of the Research Methodology on the Research Writing Process for Senior High School Students. [online] papers.ssrn.com. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3802722.

Background and Context

Social entrepreneurship, situated at the crossroads of market-based strategies and social transformation, has gained considerable attention as a vehicle for addressing urgent social and environmental issues (García-Jurado, Pérez-Barea and Nova, 2021). The proliferation of social innovations has prompted calls for a transformative paradigm to counter the pervasive perception of social innovations and their impact. The risk of co-optation is a genuine concern, as evidenced in various studies, where capitalism seeks to co-opt radical alternatives and promote a softer model that appeals to the concept of the commons as a counterbalance to neoliberal dominance (Ul-Haq, Lone and Ashraf, 2020). Power dynamics play a pivotal role in the development of technology and social and civic innovation, influencing the trajectory of change and societal impact (VOGELS, RAINIE and ANDERSON, 2020). However, as the field continues to evolve, scholars and practitioners are increasingly recognizing the importance of understanding how various social identities intersect with entrepreneurial endeavors. The concept of intersectionality, originally introduced by 'Kimberlé Crenshaw', emphasizes the interconnected nature of social categorizations such as race, gender, class, sexuality, and disability, and how they shape individuals' experiences and opportunities within society (Xie, Wang and Lee, 2021). Despite the growing emphasis on diversity and inclusion in entrepreneurship discourse, there remains a significant gap in understanding how intersectionality influences the dynamics of social innovation and co-optation. Studies reveal that marginalized communities encounter unique obstacles in accessing resources for entrepreneurial ventures. Similarly, (Grindstaff, 2021) found that racial and ethnic minorities confront systemic barriers like funding discrimination. Moreover, social identities intersect to shape the values and motivations of entrepreneurs; women and people of color often prioritize community empowerment (Xie, Wang and Lee, 2021). However, capitalist co-optation threatens these ventures, potentially diluting their original mission. Addressing this gap requires research into how intersectionality impacts ethical considerations and efficacy in social entrepreneurship. Integrating intersectional perspectives can unveil hidden inequalities, informing policy interventions for a more inclusive entrepreneurial environment that prioritizes social justice (Qureshi et al., 2023). The purpose of this study is to investigate how intersectionality influences the ethical considerations and efficacy of social entrepreneurship. By examining the nuanced ways in which social identities intersect with entrepreneurial efforts, the study aims to uncover hidden dynamics and inequalities within the field. The significance lies in informing policy and practice interventions to foster a more inclusive and equitable environment for social innovation, addressing the needs and voices of marginalized communities.

Research aims & objectives

The aim of this study is to investigate the intersectionality of social identities within the realm of social entrepreneurship and its influence on the effectiveness of entrepreneurial efforts.

SMART Objectives

• Specific: To analyze data on the intersectionality of social identities in social entrepreneurship to provide concrete recommendations for policy and practice interventions.
• Measurable: To quantify and improve the intersectionality of marginalized communities to create a more inclusive and equitable environment for social innovation.
• Achievable: To collect primary data from stakeholders and organizations to implement recommended interventions and measure their impact on marginalized communities.
• Relevant: To align recommendations with the identified needs and voices of marginalized communities within the context of social entrepreneurship.
• Time bound: To complete this analysis within the period of 3-4 months.

Research Questions

RQ1: What are the specific barriers encountered by individuals from marginalized communities in accessing resources for entrepreneurial ventures?

RQ2: How do intersecting social identities influence the motivations and strategies of social entrepreneurs?

RQ3: What is the impact of intersecting social identities on the scalability and sustainability of social entrepreneurship initiatives led by marginalized individuals?

RQ4: How can understanding the intersectionality of social identities in social entrepreneurship inform policy and practice to create a more inclusive and equitable environment for fostering social innovation and amplifying the voices of marginalized communities?

Research Methodology

The research will use an interpretivist approach to understand the experiences and perspectives of social entrepreneurs and the communities they serve. This approach will help explore the ethical and practical implications of social entrepreneurship and its interaction with capitalist interests (Kuckertz and Block, 2021). A qualitative case study design will be used to investigate at least five prominent social entrepreneurship initiatives, allowing for a detailed examination of their operations (Mbanaso, Abrahams and Kennedy Chinedu Okafor, 2023). The study will have a cross-sectional time horizon, focusing on a specific period to capture the current ethical and practical challenges faced by social entrepreneurs and the communities they serve. Primary data would be gathered through semi-structured interviews, and surveys to gain firsthand accounts and experiences, offering a comprehensive understanding of the challenges and impacts of social entrepreneurship initiatives (Zukauskas, Vveinhardt and Andriukaitiene, 2018). Thematic analysis will be employed to identify recurring patterns and themes within the qualitative data, allowing for the systematic exploration of ethical and practical challenges, as well as the assessment of the alignment of social entrepreneurship initiatives with social impact and sustainability goals (Mbanaso, Abrahams and Kennedy Chinedu Okafor, 2023). This methodology aims to achieve a comprehensive understanding of the interplay between social innovation and capitalist co-optation within the context of social entrepreneurship. The qualitative case study approach will provide rich, detailed insights into the intersectionality and practical implications of social entrepreneurship, contributing significantly to the ongoing discourse on this subject (Snyder, 2019).

References

• Garcia-Jurado, A., Perez-Barea, J.J. and Nova, R.J. (2021). A New Approach to Social Entrepreneurship: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sustainability, 13(5), p.2754. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052754.
• Grindstaff, L. (2021). Barriers to Inclusion: Social Roots and Current Concerns. Uprooting Bias in the Academy, 1(1), pp.19-44. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85668-7_2.
• Kuckertz, A. and Block, J. (2021). Reviewing systematic literature reviews: ten key questions and criteria for reviewers. Management Review Quarterly, 71(3), pp.519-524. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-021-00228-7.
• Mbanaso, U.M., Abrahams, L. and Kennedy Chinedu Okafor (2023). Research Philosophy, Design and Methodology. Research Philosophy, Design and Methodology, pp.81-113. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30031-8_6.
• Qureshi, I., Bhatt, B., Sutter, C. and Dhirendra Mani Shukla (2023). Social entrepreneurship and intersectionality: Mitigating extreme exclusion. Journal of Business Venturing, 38(2), pp.106283-106283. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2022.106283.
• Snyder, H. (2019). Literature Review as a Research methodology: an Overview and Guidelines. Journal of Business Research, [online] 104(1), pp.333-339. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039.
• Ul-Haq, S., Lone, R.A. and Ashraf, N. (2020). A theory of capitalist co-optation of radical alternatives: The case of Islamic banking industry. Organization, p.135050842093924. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508420939245.
• VOGELS, E.A., RAINIE, L. and ANDERSON, J. (2020). 3. Power dynamics play a key role in problems and innovation. [online] Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech. Available at: https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2020/06/30/power-dynamics-play-a-key-role-in-problems-and-innovation/.
• Xie, G., Wang, L. and Lee, B. (2021). Understanding the Impact of Social Capital on Entrepreneurship Performance: The Moderation Effects of Opportunity Recognition and Operational Competency. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.687205.
• Zukauskas, P., Vveinhardt, J. and Andriukaitiene, R. (2018). Philosophy and Paradigm of Scientific Research. [online] www.intechopen.com. IntechOpen. doi:https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.70628.

Background and Context

Online learning has emerged as a transformative force in education, often hailed as a revolutionizing agent that expands access to knowledge and breaks down traditional barriers to learning. However, it also faces scrutiny for potentially diluting academic standards and compromising academic integrity. Various studies have advocated that accessibility is a key advantage of online learning (Ladyshewsky, 2014). It has opened up educational opportunities to individuals who may have previously faced limitations due to geography, physical disabilities, or financial constraints. According to (Peck, 2023), the online learning market is expected to increase with a CAGR of 9.1% by the year 2026, as 49% of the students worldwide have enrolled into the online courses. With this growing trend in the education and learning field, around 80% of the businesses are now offering online learning and training solutions (Jain, 2022). This indicates a significant increase in accessibility, enabling a broader segment of the population to pursue education. However, concerns about diluting academic standards persist, as various critics argue that online learning lacks the rigor and personal interaction present in traditional classrooms, potentially leading to a decline in educational quality (Pak et al., 2020). While online courses can be designed to be rigorous, it is challenging to ensure consistent standards across diverse platforms and institutions. A study by (Paul and Jefferson, 2019) found that the perceived quality of online courses varied significantly, with some courses being less effective than their traditional counterparts. Other than that, academic integrity is another area of concern. The flexibility and anonymity of online learning can create opportunities for cheating and plagiarism (Holden, Norris and Kuhlmeier, 2021). A survey conducted by (International Center for Academic Integrity, 2020) revealed that 64% of students reported cheating on assignments in online courses, compared to 32% in face-to-face courses, while 58% of them have reported plagiarism. This highlights the need for robust measures to maintain academic integrity in the online learning environment. However, several academic institutions have implemented several solutions to analyze and monitor the behavior of the students in online classes and exams such as biometric, behavioral analytics and recognition of keystrokes, but these solutions are just limited to specific interactions, that keystroke is only effective when the student is typing (Ladyshewsky, 2014). Thus, to understand and acknowledge these issues is vital for understanding the fundamental values of academic integrity in online learning. The problem at hand is the potential dilution of academic standards and compromised academic integrity in online learning. The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of online learning on accessibility and academic integrity. It aims to explore whether online learning truly revolutionizes education by providing broader access to learning opportunities or if it compromises academic standards. By examining these factors, the study aims to provide insights into the potential advantages and challenges associated with online education. The findings can guide the development of strategies and measures to enhance the quality, rigor, and integrity of online courses. Ultimately, the study aims to contribute to the ongoing discourse on the role of online learning in educational systems and provide recommendations for maintaining academic standards and integrity in the digital learning environment (Holden, Norris and Kuhlmeier, 2021).

Research aims & objectives

The aim of this study is to explore whether online learning truly revolutionizes education by providing broader access to learning opportunities or if it compromises academic standards.

SMART Objectives

• Specific: To analyze the correlations between accessibility and academic integrity in online learning and its impacts on the academic standards.
• Measurable: To reduce the concerns related to academic integrity and academic standards in online learning.
• Achievable: To perform a statistical analysis on a secondary dataset to determine the impact of academic integrity on student's online learning and academic achievements supported with existing literature.
• Relevant: To provide relevant insights through this study to provide recommendations for maintaining academic standards and integrity in the digital learning environment.
• Time bound: To accomplish this study within the specified timeframe of 105 days.

Research Questions

RQ1: How does online learning impact accessibility to educational opportunities compared to traditional in-person learning?

RQ2: What are the key factors that contribute to academic integrity in online learning environments and what are the potential compromises to academic standards in online learning compared to traditional in-person learning?

RQ3: What are the existing strategies and measures employed to address academic integrity concerns in online learning and how effective are these existing strategies and measures?

RQ4: In what ways can academic standards and integrity be sustained and advanced in the digital learning environment?

Research Methodology

For the purpose of determining the potentials of online learning with respect to accessibility and academic integrity, a quantitative research methodology will be taken into account. The main motive of adopting this research methodology for performing this study is that it helps in exploring and identifying the correlations between online learning and academic standards (Zukauskas, Vveinhardt and Andriukaitiene, 2018). Under the chosen research methodology, an experimental analysis will be performed in which a secondary dataset will be retrieved from Mendeley.com. In addition, the chosen philosophical approach for this study is positivist, aiming to understand the objective experiences of students and teachers with online learning and its impact on academic integrity and standards (Zukauskas, Vveinhardt and Andriukaitiene, 2018). The research strategy will be a quantitative with mono-method experimental approach, allowing for an in-depth investigation of crisis leadership and organizational resilience in diverse contexts. For collecting data for this study, a cross-sectional study design will be followed (Kraus, Breier and Dasi-Rodriguez, 2020). The collected data will be analyzed using statistical analysis (descriptive and inferential statistics) and thematic analysis to identify common themes and patterns in how online learning will dilute the academic standards and academic integrity (Zukauskas, Vveinhardt and Andriukaitiene, 2018).

References

• Holden, O.L., Norris, M.E. and Kuhlmeier, V.A. (2021). Academic Integrity in Online Assessment: A Research Review. Frontiers in Education, [online] 6. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.639814.
• International Center for Academic Integrity (2020). Facts and Statistics. [online] academicintegrity.org. Available at: https://academicintegrity.org/resources/facts-and-statistics.
• Jain, S. (2022). Why eLearning Is Ideal For SMEs And Start-Ups. [online] eLearning Industry. Available at: https://elearningindustry.com/why-elearning-is-ideal-for-smes-and-start-ups.
• Kraus, S., Breier, M. and Dasi-Rodriguez, S. (2020). The Art of Crafting a Systematic Literature Review in Entrepreneurship Research. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, [online] 16(16). doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00635-4.
• Ladyshewsky, R.K. (2014). Post-graduate student performance in 'supervised in-class' vs. 'unsupervised online' multiple choice tests: implications for cheating and test security. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(7), pp.883-897. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.956683.
• Pak, K., Polikoff, M.S., Desimone, L.M. and Salivar Garcia, E. (2020). The Adaptive Challenges of Curriculum Implementation: Insights for Educational Leaders Driving Standards-Based Reform. AERA Open, 6(2), p.233285842093282. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858420932828.
• Paul, J. and Jefferson, F. (2019). A Comparative Analysis of Student Performance in an Online vs. Face-to-Face Environmental Science Course From 2009 to 2016. Frontiers in Computer Science, [online] 1(7). doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomp.2019.00007.
• Peck, D. (2023). Online Learning Statistics: The Ultimate List in 2023 | Devlin Peck. [online] www.devlinpeck.com. Available at: https://www.devlinpeck.com/content/online-learning-statistics.
• Zukauskas, P., Vveinhardt, J. and Andriukaitiene, R. (2018). Philosophy and Paradigm of Scientific Research. [online] www.intechopen.com. IntechOpen. doi:https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.70628.

Background and Context

In recent years, there has been a notable shift towards remote work, facilitated by advancements in technology and a growing recognition among organizations of the benefits linked to flexibility and cost efficiency inherent in allowing employees to work from locations beyond the traditional office setup (Choudhury, 2020). This trend has been further propelled by the COVID-19 pandemic, which compelled many organizations to swiftly implement remote work arrangements to ensure operational continuity and prioritize employee safety. Remote work presents various potential advantages, including heightened productivity, diminished commuting time and expenses, and enhanced work-life balance for employees. Nonetheless, several studies have revealed that remote work also raises apprehensions about potential adverse effects, particularly regarding social isolation, diminished collaboration, and the blurring of boundaries between professional responsibilities and personal life (Walz et al., 2023). One such study by (Laker, 2023) highlighted that employees, fully remote workers, have shown 10-20% decreased productivity than, which has represented several implications for the employers, employees and for the policy makers. Such stances have made the organizations and policymakers reevaluate and re-imagine their models pertaining to the embarrassment of permanent remote work models (Laker, 2023). As organizations and policymakers grapple with the impacts of remote work, it's crucial to consider its broader effects beyond individual productivity. One area receiving less attention is its environmental impact. Studying how remote work policies influence commuting emissions, energy consumption, and sustainability can provide valuable insights into both benefits and challenges (Shreedhar, Laffan and Giurge, 2022). While research on productivity and social aspects of remote work is abundant, its environmental impact remains understudied, with some evidence from (Kacapyr , 2023) which revealed that remote workers can have 54% lower carbon footprint in comparison to remote workers. Addressing this gap, this study aims to offer a comprehensive understanding and guide policy and organizational strategies. It is essential to quantify the environmental advantages of remote work, including reduced commuting emissions and energy conservation. Additionally, this study will highlight potential challenges like increased home office energy consumption and shifts in travel behaviors, informing urban planning and infrastructure decisions. Ultimately, this research is vital for shaping policies and organizational practices in a remote and interconnected world, emphasizing environmental sustainability (Laker, 2023).

Research aims & objectives

The aim of this study is to comprehensively examine the impacts of remote work beyond the office walls, specifically focusing on productivity, isolation, and environmental repercussions, with the overarching goal of informing policy and organizational strategies in a remote and interconnected world.

SMART Objectives

• Specific: To investigate the relationship between remote work and productivity, isolation, and environmental repercussions.
• Measurable: To assess the perceptions and opinions of employees regarding remote work and its wide ranging implications on productivity, isolation and environment.
• Achievable: To recruit a representative sample of remote workers through social media platforms such as LinkedIn and administer an online survey to perform this analysis.
• Relevant: To contribute to the existing body of knowledge by addressing gaps in understanding the environmental impacts of remote work.
• Time bound: To complete data collection, analysis, and reporting within a specified timeframe of 3 months.

Research Questions

RQ1: How does remote work influence productivity levels among employees, and what factors contribute to variations in productivity?

RQ2: What are the perceived effects of remote work on feelings of isolation and social connectedness among employees, and how do these perceptions differ across demographic groups?

RQ3: What is the environmental footprint of remote work, particularly in terms of commuting emissions, energy consumption, and sustainability practices?

RQ4: What organizational and policy interventions can be implemented to maximize the benefits of remote work while mitigating its challenges and environmental impact?

Research Methodology

The selected methodology for this research will be quantitative, in which a survey based analysis will be performed to analyze and explore the opinions and perceptions of the employees regarding remote work and its impact on their productivity, isolation and environmental repercussions (Taherdoost, 2021). By following the research onion model, an interpretivist research philosophy will be taken into account, due to the reason that it allows for a deep exploration of employees' subjective experiences with remote work, aligning with the complex and context-dependent nature of the topic (Phair and Warren, 2021). An inductive approach facilitates the generation of insights directly from survey data, enabling the discovery of new patterns and relationships. Employing a quantitative mono-method research strategy ensures methodological consistency and reliability in data collection and analysis. By considering a cross-cultural time horizon, the study acknowledges the influence of culture and temporal dynamics on perceptions of remote work, enhancing the depth and breadth of understanding regarding its impact on productivity, isolation, and environmental repercussions (Seuring, Stella and Stella, 2021). Data for this study will be collected from the participants (employees at remote work), who will be sampled randomly from social media platforms such as LinkedIn by sharing a post related to this survey (Ponto, 2015). The targeted audience of this survey will be the employees, mainly the remote workers so that they can share their valuable views on how remote work affects their productivity, isolation and environmental repercussions (Taherdoost, 2016)s. The ones who will respond positively to this survey related post, they will be contacted through personal emails and contacts and then provided with the online survey questionnaire and a consent form with withdrawal from (Taherdoost, 2016). After this, the final selection of the participants will be done and the survey will be conducted through Google Forms. The responses of the employees will be analyzed and interpreted in graphical format supported with existing literature under the thematic analysis method. Different themes will be defined relevant to the objectives to discuss the study outcomes and provide a robust conclusion (Taherdoost, 2021).

References

• Choudhury, P. (2020). Our Work-from-Anywhere Future. [online] Harvard Business Review. Available at: https://hbr.org/2020/11/our-work-from-anywhere-future.
• Kacapyr , S. (2023). Lifestyle impacts green benefits of remote work | Cornell Chronicle. [online] news.cornell.edu. Available at: https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2023/09/lifestyle-impacts-green-benefits-remote-work.
• Laker, B. (2023). Working From Home Leads To Decreased Productivity, Research Suggests. [online] Forbes. Available at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/benjaminlaker/2023/08/02/working-from-home-leads-to-decreased-productivity-research-suggests/?sh=7a75d5cb2afe [Accessed 20 Feb. 2024].
• Phair, D. and Warren, K. (2021). Saunders' Research Onion: Explained Simply. [online] Grad Coach. Available at: https://gradcoach.com/saunders-research-onion/.
• Ponto, J. (2015). Understanding and Evaluating Survey Research. Journal of the Advanced Practitioner in Oncology, [online] 6(2), pp.168-171. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4601897/.
• Seuring, S., Stella, T. and Stella, M. (2021). Developing and Publishing Strong Empirical Research in Sustainability Management-Addressing the Intersection of Theory, Method, and Empirical Field. Frontiers in Sustainability, [online] 1, pp.1-9. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2020.617870.
• Shreedhar, G., Laffan, K. and Giurge, L.M. (2022). Is Remote Work Actually Better for the Environment? [online] Harvard Business Review. Available at: https://hbr.org/2022/03/is-remote-work-actually-better-for-the-environment.
• Taherdoost, H. (2016). Sampling Methods in Research Methodology; How to Choose a Sampling Technique for Research. International Journal of Academic Research in Management, [online] 5(2), pp.18-27. doi:https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3205035.
• Taherdoost, H. (2021). Data Collection Methods and Tools for Research; a Step-by-Step Guide to Choose Data Collection Technique for Academic and Business Research Projects. International Journal of Academic Research in Management (IJARM), [online] 10(1), pp.10-38. Available at: https://hal.science/hal-03741847/document.
• Walz, T., Kensbock, J.M., de Jong, S.B. and Kunze, F. (2023). Lonely@Work@Home? The impact of work/home demands and support on workplace loneliness during remote work. European Management Journal. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2023.05.001.