Full Transcript

·YouTLDR

Conferencia Magistral. El Planteamiento del Problema Define la Ruta de la Investigación

2:16:04EnglishTranscribed Jul 21, 2026
0:29

Good afternoon everyone,

0:31

warm greetings from the Pontifical

0:32

Catholic University of Argentina, from the

0:35

Central Library here in Buenos Aires.

0:38

In commemoration of the 20th anniversary of the CBCA (UCA

0:40

Library System),

0:42

we will now begin

0:45

the keynote address.

1:12

Opening remarks will be given by

1:14

Soledad Lago, Director of the

1:16

UCA Library System and

1:18

Coordinator of the UCA Library Network,

1:20

Organization of

1:22

Catholic Universities of Latin America and the

1:25

Caribbean. Good afternoon everyone, today, on

1:29

International Book Day, we are delighted to

1:34

welcome you to the keynote address: "The

1:36

Problem Statement Defines the

1:39

Path of Quantitative,

1:41

Qualitative, or Mixed Research." We

1:44

sincerely thank everyone for registering and

1:46

participating in this event. We are

1:49

thrilled to have the presence

1:51

of distinguished experts in the

1:54

academic field who are joining us today:

1:57

Dr. Roberto Hernández Sampieri,

2:00

Dr. Cristian Paulina Mendoza Torres, and

2:03

Dr. Sergio Méndez Valencia.

2:06

We also thank our

2:08

business partners, Elida Ramírez of Magril and

2:11

Susana of Silvestre Digital Content, who

2:14

have supported us in making this event possible.

2:19

We hope this

2:23

conference will be an

2:25

enriching space where we can delve

2:27

into fundamental topics for

2:30

academic innovation and

2:32

knowledge generation. Without further ado, let's

2:34

begin the conference. Good afternoon,

2:40

everyone. Thank you very much, Soledad. Now

2:43

we have the problem statement, which

2:44

defines the research path, by

2:48

Dr. Roberto Hernández

2:54

Sampieri. Good morning/afternoon, everyone. On

2:59

behalf of the three of us

3:03

who will be speaking today, we

3:06

want to

3:10

thank Dr. Soledad Lago,

3:14

director of the library system at

3:16

the Catholic University of Argentina, and

3:20

Professor Joselix Bermúdez from

3:25

content management at the same

3:28

institution for this invitation, as well as

3:31

our publishing house and

3:36

our speakers,

3:39

Dr. Cristian Paulina

3:41

Mendoza Torres and Dr. Sergio Méndez

3:45

Valencia. I will share my screen

3:48

first; I will speak.

3:51

Afterward, Dr. Cristian

3:53

Paulina will present software that

3:56

translates our ideas into reality.

4:00

Finally, Dr.

4:04

Sergio Méndez will talk about some

4:09

artificial intelligence tools applied to research methods

4:13

and

4:15

research methodology. Thank you so much to each

4:18

and every one of you who are here

4:22

today from all over the continent, from

4:25

Tijuana, Mexico, in northern Mexico on the

4:29

border with the United States,

4:31

to areas far south

4:36

of

4:37

Argentina and other

4:41

countries. I'd like to

4:43

share the presentation, and we'll

4:48

begin with great pleasure. It's an honor to

4:53

be here with

4:58

you. Congratulations to the

5:01

library system on its 20th anniversary and to

5:04

all the readers on this International Day. We all

5:10

know that to research

5:14

any topic, in any area, in

5:17

all sciences, in all

5:19

disciplines, we have three main

5:23

approaches or methodological paths:

5:30

qualitative, mixed, and non-qualitative. None of

5:34

the three is

5:37

superior to the others; all are very

5:41

valuable and have made

5:44

significant contributions to the

5:47

generation of knowledge in

5:49

different

5:52

sciences. The

5:55

quantitative path is based on the epistemology

6:00

of positivism and post-positivism. The

6:03

qualitative path is rooted in

6:07

constructivism, critical theory, and

6:10

hermeneutics. More recently, the

6:13

mixed methods approach is

6:17

based on

6:19

pragmatism. Throughout the 20th century, and I

6:23

want to point this out with all

6:26

humility, the sequence for conducting

6:30

research was: first, the

6:33

paradigm, the worldview, my

6:37

epistemology; from there, an approach was derived,

6:40

and a research problem was posed. And that's how we

6:43

all did it in the 20th century. What we

6:49

have been maintaining and

6:51

proposing in recent years is that,

6:56

for us, the sequence

6:59

begins with the problem statement. The problem statement is the

7:02

first step; it is, so to

7:05

speak, the king or

7:09

queen of

7:11

research. The problem is posed,

7:13

analyzed within its

7:15

context, the available resources are evaluated,

7:19

and, according to our

7:21

training, we choose the

7:24

most appropriate approach for that

7:27

statement. The

7:30

epistemological paradigm is what nourishes

7:33

the

7:35

process and the interpretation of

7:38

the results.

7:41

Whenever we pose a problem,

7:45

we are studying a reality or a

7:47

phenomenon, which can be social, economic,

7:50

health-related, etc. And that reality, from

7:55

the quantitative approach (quantitative route),

8:00

is conceived as something rather objective,

8:04

measurable, and that can be analyzed

8:07

numerically,

8:11

statistically. The

8:14

qualitative approach conceives of a

8:18

multiple reality understood through narratives

8:22

and expressions of human perceptions.

8:25

And the mixed route... It conceives of a

8:30

reality that has both an

8:34

objective, or more or less objective, dimension and a

8:38

more or less subjective dimension that is measurable

8:45

and is also captured by narratives,

8:49

by expressions of

8:51

perception. Thus, the reality of a

8:55

phenomenon or a research problem

9:00

has an objective dimension. For example,

9:05

a

9:06

university, a factory, or a company

9:11

has an objective dimension; we can

9:13

see it, we can appreciate it through our senses, we

9:16

can touch it, we can touch its

9:19

walls. For example, the

9:22

Catholic University of Argentina, a large

9:25

university—well, there are the buildings, we

9:28

see them, they're there. Or a factory, or

9:31

Stanford University, or any

9:34

company—well, we can

9:39

know how many people work there, we could

9:44

even weigh it, the

9:48

weight of its buildings, its

9:51

infrastructure. And the same with a

9:54

company: we can appreciate it, we see the

9:57

machinery there; we see it. This is the

10:00

objective part. And in the case of companies, we

10:03

can also quantify what they

10:06

sell per month, per year. If they are listed on a

10:11

stock exchange like the one in Buenos Aires, the one

10:14

in Bogotá in Colombia, or the one in

10:17

Mexico City, we can also

10:20

measure how much their shares are worth, how much their

10:24

market size is growing.

10:27

This is the

10:30

organizational aspect, but it also has a

10:36

qualitative dimension. What is it? Qualitative: Well, in a

10:39

university or a company, there are

10:43

people who develop, who have feelings,

10:46

emotions,

10:49

perceptions, attitudes, and

10:52

knowledge. There can be relationships,

10:55

for example, of love between two

10:58

people who work at the company or

11:01

between two university students. There is

11:04

solidarity, there is teamwork, there is enjoyment, there is

11:08

joy. This is the

11:11

qualitative aspect of the

11:15

organization. The same applies to a physical phenomenon,

11:18

such as

11:21

an earthquake. For example, the earthquakes

11:25

last year in Turkey and

11:29

Morocco. What is the

11:33

quantitative aspect of the earthquake, and what is the

11:37

qualitative aspect? The quantitative aspect, for example,

11:40

in Syria and Turkey, resulted in more than

11:43

8,000 deaths, more than 20,000 injuries,

11:48

more than 4,000 buildings affected, a

11:51

measurable magnitude of 7.4 on

11:56

the Ritter or Mercalli scale, with

11:58

an aftershock of 7.6, and a

12:03

horizontal seismic acceleration slightly greater than

12:06

196 cm per second squared. What does this

12:11

tell us? Well, imagine a

12:15

seismic wave traveling on the surface at

12:20

one-fifth the acceleration of

12:23

gravity. It travels very fast because it travels

12:26

underground and hits the Furthermore,

12:30

buildings not prepared for earthquakes,

12:34

lacking support beams and

12:37

vertical structures, instead have

12:40

heavy horizontal slabs

12:43

with a hypocenter 18

12:46

km deep, the same as in

12:48

Morocco or any other earthquake. These are the

12:53

quantitative figures, but there is also the

12:57

qualitative aspect. And what is the qualitative aspect? Well,

13:04

all the human suffering:

13:07

the people who lost their homes, who see their workplaces

13:12

destroyed,

13:14

or

13:18

worse, the pain of losing a

13:23

loved one, or having a well-

13:28

known person trapped in the rubble.

13:31

That human suffering is the

13:34

qualitative aspect. And ultimately, an earthquake is

13:37

the sum of both dimensions, the

13:41

quantitative and the qualitative. Or in

13:43

war, for example, the invasion of

13:46

Russia by Ukraine, the quantitative aspect is the number of

13:50

displaced people, the number of soldiers

13:52

fighting, the type of weapons, the

13:55

value of the weapons, etc. But there is

13:58

also the qualitative aspect: the child who is

14:02

orphaned and all the pain of being

14:06

displaced from the city where they

14:08

lived. All that human suffering is the

14:11

qualitative aspect. Or in

14:13

learning, the

14:16

quantitative aspect is the averages. of

14:18

learning in

14:21

courses, etc.

14:24

Quantitative evaluations exist, but there is also the

14:26

qualitative aspect: the joy of learning,

14:30

the pride of parents when they are

14:32

told that their children are doing very well in

14:35

school, or the frustration of a teacher

14:38

who cannot transmit their

14:41

teachings to the students, or the pride of

14:45

graduating from an undergraduate degree at a

14:48

university anywhere in the world.

14:54

Even in physical phenomena,

14:57

these two dimensions, quantitative and

15:00

qualitative, are present. For example,

15:02

human blood pressure has a

15:06

quantitative dimension; we can measure it, we can

15:08

evaluate it:

15:09

systolic, diastolic, high,

15:14

low, etc. And someone might say, "

15:17

That is totally quantitative. Where

15:20

is the qualitative aspect? If it is measured on a

15:23

scale through a very

15:25

precise instrument, which is the sphygmomanometer or the

15:29

blood pressure monitor, you are

15:31

mistaken. There is only something

15:34

quantitative there." But then one might say, "Yes, it is

15:38

measured, but is the

15:41

blood pressure of a newborn baby the same as that of

15:44

a teenager, a

15:47

young adult, a 60-65

15:52

year old, or an 85 year old?" Well, no, it

15:57

is not the same. Similarly,

16:03

blood pressure at sea level, like in Buenos

16:08

Aires, certain areas like Puerto Madero, or

16:14

Guayaquil (a low-lying city), or Cancun,

16:19

Mexico, is not the same as in a high-altitude city like

16:22

Huancayo at 3800 mph, Cusco in

16:27

Peru at

16:30

3300 mph, or Mexico City.

16:37

There's also a

16:39

subjective dimension, and time is another

16:42

example. I'm not talking about the perception of

16:45

time, which is quite subjective, and we all

16:48

see it in a soccer match or

16:50

any other sport. One

16:53

team is winning, and

16:56

the game is about to end.

16:59

The last five minutes seem incredibly

17:08

long to the fans of the winning team, while for the fans of the

17:11

losing team, time flies by. Or, I don't

17:15

know if you know this, but if I'm in

17:18

a large structure like

17:21

a pyramid or a

17:23

skyscraper, and I measure time inside

17:26

the building and someone else measures it outside with a

17:31

stopwatch, there will be differences, even if they're just

17:34

microseconds or milliseconds. There will be

17:36

a small difference, and everything is...

17:39

Relatively speaking, time at the

17:43

speed of light is another situation.

17:46

So even physical facts have

17:49

these two dimensions: quantitative and

17:52

qualitative. The birth of a baby

17:55

has a quantitative part: the baby has

17:58

a weight, a height, a

18:01

hair color. But it also has

18:04

temperament. Therein lies the qualitative aspect: the

18:07

way it looks, etc. So, the more objective and the more subjective parts are

18:12

always present in reality, in any

18:16

phenomenon we study.

18:19

And they

18:23

exist in the universe. That's why we

18:26

've always asked, why can't we have the

18:29

objective quantitative view and the subjective

18:32

qualitative view, thus giving rise to

18:35

mixed methods? So,

18:39

phenomena and

18:41

research problems in any science

18:44

have this quantitative dimension—

18:47

numerical variables—and a

18:52

qualitative dimension—narrative and

18:56

symbolic data. Therefore, should a study

19:00

be quantitative or should it be

19:03

qualitative? Well, it all depends on the

19:06

research problem. And we always

19:10

want to draw an analogy

19:13

between household chores, challenges at

19:16

home, and

19:19

research itself. When I have a challenge at

19:21

home, for example, hanging a picture,

19:25

something as simple as hanging a picture, then I

19:28

need... Well, I need a nail and

19:33

a hammer. I put

19:36

the nail in the wall, I use the hammer.

19:39

I hang the picture and I've already fulfilled that

19:42

function with that domestic challenge. But on the

19:46

other hand, if the challenge is different, for example,

19:49

that the dining room or

19:54

kitchen table is made of wood and is splintered and rough, and

19:57

children or the

20:00

elderly hurt themselves on it, what tool do I need

20:03

to solve this problem? A

20:07

nail and a

20:11

hammer are useless. I need a

20:14

different tool, like

20:16

a polisher or sandpaper, and then I sand the

20:21

table, solve the problem, and remove

20:25

the splinters that hurt.

20:29

But

20:31

if the domestic challenge is very different,

20:36

like, for example, that the bathroom faucets

20:41

have come loose and water is leaking, a

20:45

nail, a hammer, a

20:52

polisher, or sandpaper are useless. I need a

20:55

very different tool, a wrench, to

20:59

reconnect the pipes and solve the

21:01

problem. And if the window is broken, that's a

21:04

different challenge and requires different tools.

21:06

That's how

21:09

research works too. It's like going on a

21:12

trip. What clothes do I take on a trip? Well, it

21:18

depends on where I'm going. If I'm going to the

21:22

mountains, to a very high area, to Cusco

21:27

in Peru, then I'll... I wear

21:31

jackets, coats, sweaters,

21:35

scarves, and gloves for the cold. On the

21:40

other hand,

21:42

if I'm going to the beach, I need a

21:46

different kind of clothing,

21:49

light clothes. If I'm going to play sports, I need

21:52

certain clothes, like

21:56

sneakers or athletic shoes. Or if I'm going

22:00

to the stadium to see my favorite soccer team, whatever it may be, I

22:03

wear the

22:06

team's jersey. Yes, it all depends on

22:11

where I'm going.

22:12

That's how research works because

22:19

quantitative ideas and approaches respond to the need to

22:22

measure and estimate magnitudes or quantities

22:26

of the phenomena or

22:28

research problems that will be studied. This is when I'm

22:31

going to determine how often

22:36

a phenomenon or problem occurs (frequency,

22:42

magnitude, quantity), and when the phenomenon or

22:46

research problem is

22:48

viewed as something objective,

22:51

measurable, and concrete, although we've already seen that

22:54

total objectivity doesn't exist. It's also when

22:57

the intention is not

23:02

only to measure the phenomenon and its

23:05

components but also to measure its

23:09

relationship with other phenomena,

23:12

its causes, effects, impacts, and

23:19

consequences.

23:24

Qualitative approaches, on the other hand, respond to the need to

23:27

understand and

23:29

interpret phenomena or

23:32

research problems from the narratives of

23:35

the people involved. This is when I

23:38

want to discover Patterns behind

23:42

verbal or oral narratives, visual narratives

23:45

such as photographs, paintings, written

23:50

documents, or those captured by other

23:52

means, for example, audiovisual media like

23:55

videos, when the

23:59

research problem is viewed

24:01

as something subjective, or rather, subjective and

24:05

not measurable. Although its essence can be

24:08

understood and is more abstract, and when

24:11

the intention is not only to capture the

24:15

essence of the phenomenon but also its

24:18

meanings, we seek to interpret it and

24:21

understand its relationship with other

24:24

phenomena. Therefore, in

24:27

quantitative approaches,

24:30

the problem is posed, the literature is reviewed, and the

24:37

problem statement is evaluated and revised and adjusted. In contrast,

24:40

qualitative approaches are

24:42

inductive: the problem is posed,

24:44

the literature is reviewed, the

24:47

context is understood, and if the context changes,

24:51

adjustments are made and the problem statement is revised.

24:57

Quantitative approaches

24:59

include variables, that is, aspects that

25:04

can be measured, which become

25:07

constructs. Hypotheses are tested

25:10

through a

25:12

design using quantitative measurements and

25:15

data collection instruments,

25:18

and statistical analysis is performed.

25:22

In contrast,

25:24

qualitative approaches are based initially on

25:27

concepts, categories, themes, and patterns that

25:31

become constructs and,

25:33

through a Approach: A design that

25:36

collects narrative and

25:38

symbolic data. We conduct

25:42

thematic analyses, and let's look at some

25:48

real examples. Imagine you are on

25:52

a research team, and

25:55

a group of

25:56

companies arrives. They could be from any

26:00

region within the

26:05

Buenos Aires metropolitan area, or from

26:09

Guatemala City, or the state of

26:12

Guanajuato in Mexico.

26:15

People from the automotive industry came to us

26:17

and

26:19

asked us to determine the

26:24

state of the

26:27

organizational climate in our companies. They asked us to

26:29

measure how we are doing in terms of climate, and

26:32

also to measure the different

26:35

dimensions of

26:38

organizational climate and analyze and evaluate

26:41

differences in climate based on

26:44

company size. They also asked us to evaluate the impact of

26:49

organizational climate and its variables on

26:53

productivity.

26:56

Impact measurements: What type of study

26:58

do we require for such a request? A

27:04

quantitative one? A qualitative one? Well, a

27:06

quantitative one because we have

27:09

climate variables such as job satisfaction,

27:12

motivation, autonomy at work,

27:16

perception of leadership, and the

27:17

feeling of pride in working for

27:20

the company. Measurements of

27:23

company size: number of employees, number of

27:25

subunits, and geographical dispersion.

27:28

The most appropriate approach is

27:30

quantitative. We measure

27:34

climate variables, calculate

27:36

descriptive statistics, then

27:39

link the variables using correlation coefficients,

27:42

and finally, through a

27:47

multiple linear regression model, establish the

27:50

impact of each dimension

27:53

on productivity. If we had

27:58

an ordinal measurement, we would use least

28:00

squares

28:02

statistical analysis. However, as happened

28:06

with a

28:10

Coca-Cola bottling company, a plant in

28:13

Cuernavaca, Mexico, the

28:15

general manager came to us and said, "I have

28:19

many problems in my company, a large

28:23

number of conflicts between the

28:25

production, quality control, and

28:29

maintenance departments, and I want to know what has

28:33

caused these conflicts and what

28:36

the solutions could be." They gave us

28:38

an example of how far

28:41

the level of conflict had gone. As you know, the

28:46

production of a soft drink—we call them

28:48

sodas or refreshing drinks in Mexico—

28:52

is relatively

28:55

simple. And although there are newer

28:58

production methods, most still follow

29:01

this process: you have the

29:05

container, the

29:08

product concentrate (in this case, Coca-Cola) is

29:11

added, then

29:14

water (distilled water), then

29:20

sweetener is added, and if it's a beverage... Soda, well,

29:23

gas is added, and for the

29:29

products to go through this simple

29:32

production process, conveyor belts are used

29:36

where the containers

29:41

go through each stage of this process. For

29:44

the bottles to slide

29:47

properly, certain

29:50

high-quality lubricants are required so that there are no

29:53

problems and they slide

29:55

properly.

29:59

The maintenance department is in charge of buying the lubricants.

30:04

Well, in order to make

30:07

the production department look bad,

30:10

they bought the worst and

30:13

incorrect lubricants with the objective that

30:17

the production line would jam all the time,

30:21

the bottles would get stuck, fall, and

30:24

break. And since the cost of breakage is

30:27

very high in a bottling plant, and also,

30:30

every time a bottle or

30:33

some bottles fell and broke, the

30:36

production line had to be stopped, and this is

30:38

very expensive. And then stopping the

30:41

production line and cleaning

30:44

took time and the cost was very high.

30:47

That was the level of conflict. To

30:51

analyze the causes and possible

30:54

solutions, what kind of study do

30:56

we need here? Measuring the

30:59

organizational climate no longer makes sense

31:01

because we already know that it will be terrible,

31:04

that the organizational climate is... The situation

31:07

here is very broken down; what is required is to

31:10

understand why these

31:14

levels of conflict were reached and how we can

31:17

address them through a collaborative approach. We conducted qualitative research, and

31:22

that's what we did. We interviewed all the

31:25

company's staff, especially those from

31:27

these three areas, in in-

31:30

depth interviews. We also held focus groups,

31:35

and it turns out that the origin of the conflict was

31:39

that the three managers had been in conflict with each other for about 20 years. They

31:45

verbally assaulted each other, and there were even

31:48

physical altercations. One of them couldn't even remember

31:51

why they had

31:54

clashed to that degree. And from then on,

31:57

consciously and

32:00

unconsciously, they transmitted

32:03

a kind of hatred to the staff under their supervision, which

32:07

grew and escalated to other

32:10

areas. The only solution was to

32:13

change the managers. It's one of those

32:16

situations where the conflicts

32:19

are so great that a

32:21

separation is necessary; it's no longer possible to

32:25

resolve them. Fortunately, the three

32:28

managers were eligible for retirement, and they

32:29

retired. But

32:32

if not, there was no other option.

32:35

New managers arrived, and the entire organization

32:38

entered a process of

32:40

organizational development. And I want to tell you that

32:43

two years later, this Coca-Cola bottling plant located in

32:46

the city of Cuernavaca

32:49

received productivity awards throughout

32:52

the entire global system of this brand, of this

32:55

company. This corporation won

32:58

marketing awards, and

33:01

the problem was solved. The appropriate approach here was

33:04

qualitative; if we had

33:07

added

33:10

measurements and impact on

33:13

productivity from quality indicators, we would have already

33:15

taken a

33:17

mixed approach. Similarly, if what I want

33:20

is to identify the

33:23

financial variables that affect the

33:26

profitability of companies listed

33:28

on the stock exchanges of Buenos Aires,

33:31

Bogotá, Lima, or

33:36

Mexico City, as well as the degree of correlation

33:39

between them in a given

33:43

period, this last fiscal year in the

33:48

corresponding country, here I am looking for

33:51

impacts and I have variables. What is most

33:54

appropriate? Of course, a

33:56

quantitative study where I have the

34:00

dependent variable or effect, which is

34:02

financial profitability, and the

34:05

independent variables, which are the

34:08

company's performance, the acid test, which is the

34:11

liquidity indicator, the Alpha variable,

34:15

which measures the effects of the

34:17

financing structure, and the net margin, and I

34:20

can analyze it by industrial sector, by

34:24

commercial sector, etc. Here I

34:28

require something quantitative because I am

34:32

measuring and seeing

34:35

impacts. The same applies if I am testing a

34:39

drug, the efficacy and safety of

34:42

a drug, as was the case with the vaccines

34:45

for SARS-CoV-2. 2. During the

34:55

COVID-19 pandemic, to evaluate

34:58

how well they prevent and neutralize

35:01

infection in human cells to

35:03

generate an immune response and

35:06

antibodies that neutralize the

35:08

coronavirus. What type of study do I require? Well,

35:11

something quantitative, and, to use the

35:15

expression, the most quantitative of the

35:18

quantitative, such as an experiment

35:21

where one group of people receives

35:24

the medical treatment, the

35:27

vaccine, and the other group does not, and I

35:30

compare them. What I have, or what I need,

35:34

is a quantitative study according to

35:37

this problem statement. On the other hand, it is

35:40

a study that we

35:43

did in Mexico. If my

35:46

research question is: What are the fears and

35:49

anxieties that adults are experiencing or

35:52

experienced upon

35:55

receiving a positive COVID diagnosis?

35:58

That is, how did they feel when they were

36:00

told, "Unfortunately,

36:04

you have COVID-19," or "You tested positive"?

36:09

And we want to analyze these fears,

36:12

the appropriate thing here is a qualitative study, and that is what we

36:18

did with health personnel and the general

36:21

population. Categories

36:24

of people's perceptions emerged:

36:27

specific fears,

36:29

insomnia, general

36:32

health concerns, psychological distress, post-traumatic stress disorder,

36:38

somatization,

36:40

depression, anxieties, and In the case of

36:44

healthcare workers, for example, many

36:47

people suffered from

36:50

burnout because they were

36:53

working there and felt

36:56

valued. And yes, we must

37:00

recognize the great work

37:02

done worldwide by healthcare workers—

37:05

doctors,

37:08

nurses,

37:11

administrative staff, and so on—because they were

37:14

true heroes. That's why we

37:21

dedicated our latest book edition, in part, to these

37:24

workers, and I believe they deserve all the

37:27

recognition. But, well, the appropriate approach here was a

37:32

qualitative study to understand

37:35

these fears and concerns. The

37:37

main fear that emerged in our

37:41

study was infecting loved ones; in fact,

37:44

the fear of

37:47

infecting a loved one, especially

37:49

someone at high risk, was greater than the fear

37:52

of losing one's own life. We categorized the perspectives on the

37:55

future, the lessons learned, and so on.

38:01

We examined how

38:04

broad these categories were, and there is

38:08

a certain degree of quantification in a

38:11

qualitative study of this nature.

38:16

We linked the categories to each other to

38:19

obtain a grounded theory of

38:21

perceptions of

38:24

COVID-19. If we had added

38:28

variables such as stress or depression,

38:32

and Associated with

38:35

qualitative categories, we would have already taken it to

38:38

a mixed plane, or for example, a study

38:42

we did with INAF, the

38:44

National Institute of

38:46

Sport and Physical Activity of Chile, to

38:49

see how professional soccer players

38:52

from different leagues in

38:55

Spain, from teams like Real Madrid and

38:59

Barcelona, ​​and from various countries like

39:05

Argentina, Paraguay, Chile,

39:09

Ecuador, Peru, Mexico, etc., Costa

39:13

Rica, well, to see how they used

39:16

social networks and for what purpose. Well, here

39:19

something

39:21

quantitative and

39:23

descriptive is required: through what devices

39:25

they connect, what

39:27

social networks they use on

39:31

average, which social networks they

39:34

use, which are the most

39:37

important, and

39:40

what is the purpose of using these

39:44

social networks, for example, to find

39:46

sponsors, to facilitate the search for a

39:48

club, to increase their market value,

39:52

to approach the sports press,

39:54

to project their future, to develop their

39:57

own brand, and so we did with these

40:00

professional soccer players. In

40:03

this sample, for example, the famous

40:06

Spanish player Jenny Hermosillo was included, who

40:10

led the Spanish national team to the World Championship,

40:13

which later, well, was

40:17

the situation with the former president of

40:20

the Spanish Football Federation, but

40:23

here what was required was Something

40:26

quantitative changed, like a

40:29

doctoral thesis study directed by Sergio

40:32

Méndez Valencia, where the student

40:37

analyzed

40:41

the perceptions of

40:44

Colombian businesspeople in the chemical sector

40:47

regarding the

40:50

Mercosur economic integration agreements. Here,

40:52

something qualitative is needed, or another study,

40:56

as we mentioned, to estimate which

41:01

methods

41:03

exist for calculating the mass of

41:07

environmental control systems in

41:09

turbofan and

41:13

turbojet aircraft during the design phase. What are

41:17

the methods, and how can a

41:20

more efficient method be developed to calculate the

41:23

size and quantity of mass

41:28

in these aircraft? What is

41:30

required is

41:31

something quantitative, and so it was done.

41:35

An algorithm was developed

41:37

to see which parameters should be

41:40

included and which method was the most

41:43

efficient, and to propose a new method

41:46

for calculating the mass of these

41:49

aircraft. Here, something quantitative is needed if what

41:52

I want is to test the degree of

41:54

learning using different

41:57

teaching methods. Well, also quantitative, or

42:01

like a study that was done in Salta,

42:05

Argentina, where

42:08

the student of the thesis we directed was looking for...

42:12

We aim to

42:14

understand what young people feel

42:16

when they are about to undergo

42:19

high-risk surgery in order to design a therapy

42:23

tailored to them and alleviate their fears

42:26

and anxieties. Well, here, to understand what it

42:30

means for a

42:35

young person to undergo

42:38

high-risk surgery, such as

42:40

open-heart surgery,

42:45

aneurysm repair,

42:50

hip replacement, etc., a qualitative approach was

42:54

required. And so,

42:57

to conclude my presentation, we also have the

43:03

mixed methods approach, where we collect and

43:05

analyze both quantitative and qualitative data, blending and

43:12

merging them to obtain insights and

43:15

conclusions from the entire study. Because, as we've

43:18

seen, no study is

43:21

purely quantitative, since

43:24

numbers are interpreted, nor purely

43:27

qualitative, because categorization is

43:29

also important; the frequency of

43:32

each category matters to see its significance.

43:35

And so, we have the possibility today,

43:39

and this is what we have been

43:41

proposing, of

43:44

mixing quantitative and

43:46

qualitative approaches to understand phenomena

43:49

from both objective and

43:52

subjective dimensions, and their interactions.

43:55

Mixed methods are not meant

43:57

to replace... to

43:59

quantitative OR qualitative research, but to

44:02

add to

44:04

it. A very clear example we had

44:08

in the

44:10

pandemic. How the pandemic began to be

44:13

studied: the first

44:15

cases appeared in December, November, and December

44:18

2019 in the city of Gujan,

44:21

Jube province, in China. Imagine the first

44:25

doctors who received the patients.

44:28

Well, they began to

44:32

study them qualitatively,

44:34

observing them and inducing categories: what

44:37

the patients had, what

44:39

their symptoms were, qualitatively, and

44:43

they began to categorize them as

44:47

atypical pneumonias. But there was already a need to

44:51

start measuring what the symptoms were, like

44:54

fever, and they began to study them

44:58

quantitatively through

45:01

deduction and verification, as

45:04

Dr. Lean and Dr. Aen did

45:08

in the manual that we have available, and which we

45:11

will mention in the questions section. These are

45:13

free resources that

45:15

you have in our online resource centers,

45:21

the manual of

45:24

epidemiological research. And well, the

45:27

categorization begins. If the quantitative part begins,

45:30

analyzing the genome of this

45:36

new coronavirus, comparing it with others,

45:39

theories begin to emerge, the

45:42

theoretical framework about Taking into account

45:45

previous pandemics and epidemics, especially

45:48

MERS and SARS,

45:51

and how

45:54

the virus spreads, how it

45:58

disperses, forms of contagion, it becomes

46:01

a mixed part, for example,

46:04

for symptomatology with

46:07

qualitative issues, we analyze, well, headache, sore

46:10

throat, the famous

46:13

loss of smell and taste, nausea, through

46:16

qualitative observation,

46:19

skin lesions, and also with measurements of

46:21

fever and other symptoms,

46:24

the famous indicators of

46:27

inflammation in the blood, and so it

46:29

moves between the inductive

46:32

qualitative and the deductive until we

46:34

reach the

46:35

comorbidities that we all know:

46:37

hypertension, diabetes, the presence

46:40

of cancer cells,

46:44

chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or what

46:49

some discovered about these

46:51

indicators of inflammation in the blood,

46:54

among them my father, who is one of

46:56

the founders of epidemiology in

46:58

Mexico, who passed away two years ago, not

47:01

from COVID, but from old age, but well,

47:04

issues arose to

47:07

analyze complex phenomena such as the

47:09

automotive industry, where we are

47:12

doing an analysis that involves

47:14

quantitative and qualitative issues,

47:16

or the study of Learning in robotics,

47:20

and with that I'll be wrapping up my

47:23

presentation. It's a study we're

47:25

conducting in Abu Dhabi, the United Arab Emirates, and

47:29

in Mexico, comparing the factors that

47:33

influence robotics education

47:35

for children. We started with the

47:38

qualitative part, interviewing experts

47:40

and teachers, reviewing experiences until we

47:44

arrived at a model that includes

47:47

the variables and factors influencing

47:49

teaching competencies. These variables include the

47:52

student's prior knowledge of

47:55

computing and robotics, the teacher's knowledge,

47:58

teachers' attitudes toward

48:00

technology, educational change,

48:03

computing and robotics, access to

48:07

coworking spaces, peer work, and

48:10

mentoring. We discovered in the process

48:13

that holding tournaments is very

48:18

important. And with the new

48:22

tools of

48:25

artificial intelligence, Big Reality,

48:28

data visualization, and revitalizing methods, what I

48:33

want to get at is that when

48:37

we have a household problem like

48:39

hanging a picture, sanding a

48:43

table, or fixing a window or the roof,

48:48

etc., what we should have at

48:50

home is a room where we keep

48:53

different tools, or a

48:56

tool board where we keep nails,

49:00

hammers, and so on. The context changes; for

49:03

example, if the wall is thicker,

49:05

we'll need wall

49:06

plugs and a

49:09

drill. We need drills, wall plugs,

49:14

cables, etc., to fix or

49:17

face any domestic challenge. In

49:21

research, we must have a kind

49:24

of methodological framework

49:28

where we know different methods,

49:31

from the most quantitative, such as

49:34

experiments,

49:37

network analysis, and quantitative evaluation, to

49:39

the most qualitative, such as

49:42

narrative life histories and qualitative case studies, all the way to

49:45

the middle

49:48

ground, such as grounded theory and

49:52

participatory research. And when faced with a

49:55

problem, we choose the method or

49:59

mix of methods and designs to

50:02

address it. So, how is

50:04

research practiced in

50:08

reality? We have a problem statement, and

50:11

according to this methodological framework,

50:13

we choose the most appropriate methods to

50:16

study or address that

50:19

problem statement and implement a

50:24

research process using three types of

50:27

thinking: critical thinking,

50:30

creative thinking, and

50:33

dynamic thinking. Even more so nowadays, with so much

50:38

information, and through analysis and

50:42

synthesis—because

50:47

synthesis is also very important in

50:50

research—

50:52

we solve research problems.

50:55

We ask ourselves,

50:58

for example, in industry, we

51:00

have a problem, the question of...

51:03

Research: What is the problem? What

51:05

are its causes? What is the cost? How

51:07

can it be solved? With what investment and

51:09

profitability? We have a

51:12

quality problem; we can conduct an experiment and

51:15

focus groups to understand it,

51:17

apply the research process, and

51:20

confront the problem. That's why we say

51:23

that the problem statement defines

51:26

the research path. And I

51:29

conclude: God, that great researcher,

51:33

granted humanity the capacity to

51:36

investigate. Now it is up to us to make it

51:40

a tool to create a

51:43

better world and facilitate the

51:45

integral well-being of all human beings.

51:49

Thank you very much, and I give the floor to

51:52

Dr. Cristian

51:54

Paulina. Thank you very much.

52:02

Thank you to Dr. Roberto

52:05

Hernández Sampieri. Let us remember that he holds a

52:07

degree in

52:08

communication sciences from

52:09

Anahuac University, a master's degree in administration from the

52:12

Institute of University Studies, a

52:14

diploma in consulting, a specialization in

52:16

organizational communication from the

52:18

Edenberg School for Communication and

52:21

Journalism at the University of Southern

52:23

California, and a doctorate in administration

52:26

from the University of Celaya. For

52:28

44 years, he has been a professor in

52:30

higher education, mainly in

52:32

research methodology courses, at

52:35

institutions such as the University of Anahuac, the

52:37

National Polytechnic Institute, and

52:39

the University of [unclear - possibly "University ... Celaya. Furthermore, for over

52:42

30 years he has taught courses,

52:44

seminars, and workshops in Mexico,

52:46

Guatemala, Ecuador, Honduras, Costa Rica, Colombia, Peru, the

52:49

Dominican Republic,

52:51

Panama, Chile, Spain, and Argentina. He is

52:54

currently the director of the

52:56

research center and coordinator of the

52:58

doctoral program in administration at the

52:59

University of Celaya. He also

53:02

teaches doctoral research seminars

53:03

and the research methodology diploma program

53:06

at the University of

53:08

Celaya. Thank you very much, Dr.

53:11

Sampieri. We will continue the talk with

53:14

the presentation of the Idea software, a

53:16

research project generator,

53:18

by Dr. Cristian Paulina

53:21

Mendoza Torres, who holds a degree in Administrative

53:24

Sciences, a master's degree in

53:25

Administration with a specialization in

53:27

market research, and a doctorate in

53:29

Administration with a focus on

53:32

organizational development. She is a member of various

53:34

research networks and

53:36

editorial committees in Latin America,

53:38

research coordinator for the

53:40

Radar network in Latin America, and co-author of

53:42

Magrao Hill's works:

53:45

Research Methodology for High School,

53:46

Fundamentals of Research Methodology, and

53:50

Research Methodology: Quantitative,

53:52

Qualitative, and Mixed Methods, as well as the

53:55

online resource center for these works. She has

53:57

published book chapters, articles,

53:59

and other scientific works on

54:02

SME administration, marketing, and

54:03

education. She has also been a consultant for... She has been a

54:10

professor at the

54:12

undergraduate and graduate levels since 2012

54:14

at various public and

54:16

private universities, as well as a lecturer and

54:19

workshop facilitator in Latin America and Spain. She

54:21

received an honorary title as a

54:23

professor in the category of

54:25

female research

54:27

from the Private Technological University

54:29

of Santa Cruz, Bolivia, and an honorary doctorate

54:31

from the Autonomous University of Ica in Lima,

54:34

Peru. Currently, she works as a professor at the

54:37

National Technological Institute of Mexico and the

54:39

University of Celaya at the

54:42

undergraduate and graduate levels, respectively. She

54:44

participates in the

54:46

British Consult Mentoring in Science program directed

54:48

by Dr. Hernández

54:54

Navarro. Well, thank you very much,

54:57

everyone. And well, let's

55:01

talk for a moment about the S

55:04

software idea, following up on

55:06

this first conversation with

55:07

Dr. Roberto Hernández Sampieri. So, I'll now

55:10

share my

55:14

presentation to explain

55:17

this software, which emphatically

55:19

seeks to facilitate the development of

55:24

research projects. Yes, so, well,

55:26

in particular,

55:28

the software arose from all these

55:32

situations that occurred with professors,

55:34

which really happen on a daily basis.

55:36

Also with students, and well,

55:39

we were collecting opinions and

55:42

experiences in some

55:44

Latin American countries where the constant was...

55:46

Well, I want to see an example of what

55:49

a protocol would be, with

55:53

elements that can be consistent

55:56

universally regardless of

55:58

the institution. And others

56:03

shared situations with us where they

56:05

pointed out that it takes a lot of time to do the

56:07

style review itself, and in the

56:11

background, the

56:14

substantive review is overlooked when it should be

56:18

the opposite. So,

56:21

these concerns gave rise to what is

56:23

the idea research software, which

56:26

is nothing more than an

56:28

add-in program because it attaches to the

56:31

Microsoft Word toolbar.

56:33

So, it will guide us step by step in

56:35

the development of a

56:36

research project, which is properly a

56:38

protocol. And well, of course, we

56:41

see it as a tool that

56:43

complements all the

56:45

electronic and printed material on

56:47

research methodology, the quantitative,

56:50

qualitative, and mixed approaches that you, of

56:51

course, already know: research fundamentals

56:54

and research methodology

56:55

for high school.

56:57

So, we see that we will find the program

57:00

in these three works that

57:02

appear on your screen at this moment,

57:05

which are precisely the... That I just

57:07

mentioned, and I reiterate, well, it seeks to

57:09

be a

57:11

technological research tool that

57:14

assists them in the development but also guides them

57:16

step by step with their

57:18

students so that they develop what

57:21

is a research protocol.

57:24

So, Idea works under three

57:26

approaches, which are, of course, the ones that

57:28

Dr. Roberto just explained to us. It

57:30

is precisely the researcher who

57:34

determines which path to choose in order to

57:37

develop the protocol.

57:40

So we have quantitative,

57:43

qualitative, and mixed; that is to say, Idea will be

57:45

able to work with these. Three approaches.

57:48

Of course, once we

57:50

have clarity regarding the

57:53

problem and the approach,

57:55

we will tell the software

57:59

which approach we want to work with. So,

58:01

that's important to

58:03

point out. Now, what other issue

58:06

should we consider? Is it compatible

58:08

with our equipment? This software

58:11

will be compatible with the

58:14

Microsoft Office 365 suite for both

58:17

Microsoft Windows

58:20

and macOS operating systems. iOS, which would be

58:23

Apple, in both versions. This is

58:26

offline; we can work with it, but we

58:27

can also do it online.

58:29

So, this is what we can

58:32

consider before installation. On

58:34

how many devices can we use it?

58:37

Once we have our

58:39

code to work with, we will

58:43

see that we

58:44

can install it on up to two

58:46

devices. Although it can only be used

58:49

on one at a time, we

58:51

can install it on our

58:53

desktop computer and our

58:55

smartphone, but

58:57

we will only be able to work on one at a time

59:00

to carry out each of the

59:02

stages that the software will guide us through

59:04

in terms of developing

59:06

our protocol. How are we going to

59:10

download this

59:12

application? Well, once you... Whether

59:14

you purchase the printed book or

59:18

the electronic version, you will find

59:20

these instructions. In the case of the

59:23

printed book, they are on the first page. In the case of

59:24

the electronic version,

59:26

the information is shared so

59:28

you can make the

59:30

necessary download. So, we're going to open

59:33

Microsoft 365, open Microsoft Word, and

59:37

in the File menu, we're going to create a

59:39

new document. In the Insert menu,

59:42

we're going to choose the Add-ins option.

59:45

This will allow us to locate the

59:48

Office Add-ins window, where we're going

59:50

to look for the

59:52

Idea application. This is how we're going to add it

59:55

to our add-ins.

59:58

Once we've added it,

1:00:01

where will it be installed or where will we

1:00:03

see it? In the Word toolbar,

1:00:06

where all the menus are,

1:00:08

Idea will also be there. In a moment,

1:00:10

we'll see an example, and when you click

1:00:12

Start, it will ask for a

1:00:15

code number. That's where you

1:00:17

have to write to the email address that

1:00:19

appears on your screen. Again,

1:00:21

you can also

1:00:23

find this email address in the instructions of the

1:00:26

printed book and also in the electronic version. I

1:00:28

know you're purchasing an

1:00:30

ebook, which is the one we're looking at right now,

1:00:34

and in the email we need

1:00:37

to include the invoice or receipt of

1:00:40

our purchase along with, let's say,

1:00:44

some other element they request

1:00:47

to verify that we

1:00:49

are indeed purchasing an original book. Yes,

1:00:51

in the case of the digital book, they ask for

1:00:53

the purchase order number. So, let's say

1:00:57

those would be the elements they would be

1:01:00

requesting. They will

1:01:02

automatically send us the code,

1:01:05

and that's how

1:01:07

we can finish downloading

1:01:09

the program. Yes, so that

1:01:12

would be the installation part, and as

1:01:15

you can see here on the screen, we'll

1:01:17

have it installed along with the rest

1:01:20

of the Microsoft Word menu. Now, how does this program

1:01:25

work? This program, which, I

1:01:27

reiterate, seeks to facilitate the

1:01:29

creation of protocols. Once

1:01:32

we have it installed, we

1:01:35

click, and at that moment we'll

1:01:37

identify the three approaches that

1:01:39

we were talking about, which Dr. Roberto already explained.

1:01:42

Well,

1:01:43

definitely, the issue here is the

1:01:45

approach so that we can

1:01:48

align, select, and identify the one that

1:01:50

best suits our needs.

1:01:53

So, let's say that would be

1:01:56

the first stage. The second stage, a key

1:02:00

moment, is identifying that the software

1:02:03

works in three stages. So, let's

1:02:07

say the first stage will be to

1:02:09

develop the

1:02:11

problem statement and the literature review. That would be the

1:02:13

first stage. The second stage

1:02:15

would be the method, which in this case... Well,

1:02:17

the stages will vary

1:02:20

depending on the approach we have

1:02:21

selected. And finally, the third

1:02:24

stage, which would be our

1:02:27

proposal. So, as we already

1:02:29

mentioned, the first stage, where

1:02:32

we will work with the entire

1:02:34

problem statement and the

1:02:36

literature review, will consider the steps

1:02:39

you already know. And here we

1:02:40

can go hand in hand with the material from

1:02:43

printed works, which would be the

1:02:45

purpose of our research, the

1:02:47

objective of the

1:02:48

research, our

1:02:50

research question, the justification, the

1:02:53

feasibility, and the

1:02:56

literature review. Let's say those are the

1:02:58

first six steps that

1:02:59

the Idea software will ask us to

1:03:01

develop. The second

1:03:06

stage, let's say, if our choice

1:03:08

was quantitative, the quantitative approach

1:03:10

under which we will develop our

1:03:12

project, then it asks us for other steps.

1:03:15

Yes. What would those steps be? Well, the research

1:03:17

approach, the scope of the research.

1:03:19

The

1:03:21

hypothesis, the research design,

1:03:24

the sampling and analysis unit, the

1:03:27

population, the sample, the

1:03:30

data collection instrument, the pilot test, and

1:03:32

everything that would be the

1:03:35

analysis strategy. Of course, that will

1:03:37

depend on the research question and

1:03:39

the hypothesis. So, let's say those

1:03:41

would be the steps for

1:03:44

developing the method if our

1:03:46

choice were a quantitative approach. The

1:03:50

last point I

1:03:53

mentioned a few moments ago was

1:03:55

precisely the one that refers to the whole

1:03:57

issue of formatting.

1:04:00

And at this point, what

1:04:03

the software will ask us to do is put together our

1:04:05

timeline, have a visualization

1:04:08

of what the general index of a

1:04:12

results report would be, our profile,

1:04:15

the references, the appendix, the cover page,

1:04:20

which will also depend a lot on the

1:04:21

criteria requested by the

1:04:23

institution or the journal or the place to which

1:04:26

we are going to send the

1:04:29

document, the summary, the abstract, of

1:04:32

course, the keywords, the table of

1:04:35

contents, and the introduction. So, let's

1:04:37

say this would be the second big

1:04:41

moment. Well, or rather the third, as we

1:04:43

mentioned earlier, the

1:04:45

research question and the method. The third would be

1:04:47

the whole formatting structure. Well,

1:04:51

this last one isn't going to change either,

1:04:53

regardless of the approach we

1:04:55

set. Yes, so, let's say it

1:04:59

wasn't quantitative, but rather the

1:05:03

approach was going to be qualitative. We reflected, we recapped,

1:05:06

and

1:05:09

then, well, we realized that

1:05:10

the approach we wanted to

1:05:12

work with was qualitative. So

1:05:14

we can change it without any problem,

1:05:17

except that it's going to send us a notification. It's

1:05:20

going to say, "Change of

1:05:22

method detected. If you continue, all these

1:05:26

changes you made in your

1:05:27

document will be lost. Do you wish to

1:05:29

continue?" Well, let's say

1:05:31

yes. Then everything that has already been

1:05:34

done would be lost. Similarly, we

1:05:36

can copy and paste into another

1:05:39

document, save what has already been done, if at

1:05:42

some point

1:05:44

we want to rectify it again

1:05:47

and continue with the protocol.

1:05:51

So, let's say here we say yes.

1:05:53

Okay, we're going to work with a

1:05:56

qualitative approach. What would the

1:05:58

stages be? Or what changes here in

1:06:00

our method? We're going to consider

1:06:02

other steps that would have to

1:06:05

be linked to the

1:06:09

research approach, the context, or the environment.

1:06:12

The design or approach itself, the unit

1:06:15

of sample and/or analysis, the population, the

1:06:19

initial sample, data collection,

1:06:22

data analysis, and the

1:06:24

qualitative rigor with which we will work on

1:06:26

our project. So, let's say

1:06:29

these would be the steps if

1:06:31

we decide that our

1:06:33

protocol will be approached using a

1:06:37

qualitative method. Well, then, let's say

1:06:39

those would be the elements that

1:06:41

change. In the other two, we continue

1:06:44

working under the same dynamics.

1:06:46

Remember: the problem statement and

1:06:48

finally, the proposal format. But

1:06:51

here we again

1:06:54

consider that we will probably not

1:06:56

work with a quantitative or

1:06:58

qualitative approach, but rather with a

1:07:00

mixed approach. So, what would happen?

1:07:03

We see that the steps also

1:07:06

change. Yes, I reiterate, that is what will

1:07:09

change between approaches.

1:07:11

So, here we have the first

1:07:14

step that this mixed approach requires us to develop,

1:07:17

which would be the sequence: the

1:07:20

design, the design and integration phase,

1:07:24

the mixed hypothesis that we are or

1:07:27

will design, the relationship between

1:07:30

samples, the data conversion, the

1:07:32

mixed data analysis, and our

1:07:35

mixed rigor. Let's say again, these would be

1:07:37

the steps that are... They're going to consider

1:07:40

a mixed approach, okay then.

1:07:44

You're going to tell me, "Well,

1:07:45

I can do that in a

1:07:47

Word document without any problem, right?

1:07:49

And I can develop each

1:07:53

of the stages with the support of the

1:07:55

printed material or the methodology ebook." Yes,

1:07:58

but here's where one

1:08:02

of the

1:08:03

benefits of working with the

1:08:05

IDE software comes in. So, having

1:08:08

two key input elements for

1:08:12

each of the stages is key. So, what's

1:08:14

going to change? Let's say we're

1:08:16

going to develop our

1:08:19

research objective. If we're going to

1:08:21

work on our

1:08:22

research objective or any other stage, we're

1:08:25

going to consider two

1:08:28

key tools. The first one is the

1:08:29

wizard. Yes, the wizard will always

1:08:32

tell us what characteristics we should

1:08:35

consider for the development of that

1:08:37

stage. In this case, it tells us that

1:08:40

the objectives aim to

1:08:42

indicate what the

1:08:45

research aspires to. They must be expressed

1:08:47

clearly, as they are study guides, and we have to

1:08:50

start with an

1:08:51

infinitive verb. Yes, that's what

1:08:54

the wizard tells us for the purpose of

1:08:56

writing our objective. So,

1:08:58

when we're writing it, if something...

1:09:00

Soon, it makes us wonder what it

1:09:03

meant, and we want to see

1:09:05

immediately that we have the assistant, another

1:09:07

tool that, well, is

1:09:09

extremely beneficial when working

1:09:11

with this software. Our

1:09:13

example is that in each of the stages we just

1:09:16

mentioned, you will have

1:09:19

this tool, which is the

1:09:21

example. So, here we are

1:09:26

exemplifying, based on a

1:09:28

project that was done, a

1:09:30

study where we wanted to know, not specifically,

1:09:32

what the ideal couple is.

1:09:35

So, for this, the first objective

1:09:37

was to identify the

1:09:39

factors or characteristics that describe

1:09:42

the relationship of young

1:09:45

university students from Celaya, and the second

1:09:48

was to determine if there are

1:09:50

differences in these factors or

1:09:52

characteristics between men and women.

1:09:55

Well, not only do we have the

1:09:57

characteristics, but we also have

1:10:00

the example, which, I

1:10:02

reiterate, will guide us in

1:10:05

each of the stages to exemplify, in

1:10:08

addition to all the material we already

1:10:10

have in the book, what we

1:10:13

should work on, what we

1:10:15

should design in that stage,

1:10:18

in that step we are working on. Now,

1:10:21

what other question should we...

1:10:24

Well, all these stages will be

1:10:26

developed in the

1:10:29

Word document. How would this

1:10:32

protocol that we worked on with the

1:10:34

software look in the end? We'll see an example in a second.

1:10:37

I'll stop sharing this and show you

1:10:41

what an example of

1:10:45

a protocol that was developed

1:10:47

with IDEA would look like.

1:10:50

So there we

1:10:53

see it.

1:10:56

Well, of course, these elements were

1:10:59

placed on our cover page. Then

1:11:02

we have the summary, the abstract, the

1:11:04

keywords that are still missing, and the table of

1:11:10

contents. Aha. And here it begins. Let's just say

1:11:13

that all of this was developed

1:11:15

with the IDEA software, considering the

1:11:18

wizard and also the

1:11:21

examples tool. And from there,

1:11:24

well, IDEA guided us,

1:11:26

structuring and

1:11:29

organizing the information with

1:11:31

general topics and subtopics, anticipating

1:11:34

all the universal elements

1:11:37

for the development of this type of

1:11:39

scientific document. So there we have

1:11:41

our first part. The second

1:11:43

part, which was the method, this

1:11:46

document was developed from a

1:11:48

quantitative perspective. That's why you

1:11:50

see these specific elements

1:11:53

aligned with that approach,

1:11:56

justifying each choice. And the

1:12:00

third part, which we already mentioned,

1:12:01

was the style section.

1:12:04

Timeline, general composition, tentative,

1:12:07

our profile, the references, the

1:12:10

appendix. Well, let's say that this entire

1:12:12

document was structured with the help of the

1:12:14

software. One of the

1:12:18

most frequent questions is whether it also

1:12:20

helps us in the preparation of

1:12:23

references. For that, we have to

1:12:25

look for another tool or

1:12:27

do it manually. So

1:12:30

that would be the result of working with this

1:12:33

idea. Now, we

1:12:37

say, in

1:12:42

particular, the users of the document,

1:12:44

we as authors, that the

1:12:47

key point of the idea is precisely to

1:12:51

facilitate, not to facilitate in a simple,

1:12:54

quick, and higher-quality way, this

1:12:58

standardized format of

1:13:00

research protocols, and that of course, well,

1:13:02

also as teachers, it helps us in

1:13:05

the work of reviewing

1:13:09

research projects. So, in

1:13:11

general, this was one of the

1:13:13

tools we wanted to present

1:13:16

during this

1:13:17

presentation. I thank you very much for

1:13:21

listening. And well, I'm going to

1:13:25

stop sharing that at the end we can

1:13:28

answer any questions you may

1:13:34

have. So, next, my

1:13:37

colleague Dr. Sergio Méndez is going to

1:13:41

share other

1:13:44

artificial intelligence tools in this

1:13:47

whole exercise to carry out

1:13:49

research projects. Thank you

1:13:56

very much. Thank you, Dr. Paulina.

1:13:59

Next, we'll discuss

1:14:00

Artificial Intelligence tools for

1:14:01

research, presented by Dr. Sergio Méndez

1:14:04

Valencia. He holds a degree in

1:14:06

International Business and a Master's in

1:14:07

Marketing Administration from the

1:14:09

University of Celaya, where he also earned his

1:14:11

doctorate in

1:14:13

Administration with a focus on

1:14:14

Finance. He completed a postdoctoral fellowship

1:14:17

at the National Technological Institute in

1:14:19

2005 and has taught at

1:14:30

both the undergraduate and graduate levels at various Mexican universities. He is the co-author of the books "Research Methodology for High School" and "Research Fundamentals," both

1:14:32

published by Magrao Gil,

1:14:34

among others, as well as numerous chapters

1:14:37

and scientific articles. He has participated

1:14:39

as a speaker and lecturer at

1:14:41

international congresses and events in

1:14:43

Europe and Latin America. Since 2015, he has been a

1:14:47

tenured professor at the University of

1:14:49

Guanajuato and currently holds

1:14:52

recognition as a National Researcher

1:14:55

from SNIT and CONIT, and as a Professor with a

1:14:59

Desirable Profile from

1:15:10

PRODE. Thank you all very much.

1:15:13

Thank you for this invitation;

1:15:16

we are very happy to be talking

1:15:18

with you today. We

1:15:21

also appreciate your patience because I

1:15:24

know this is a training session. It's

1:15:28

a little long, but I think that... well, it's about

1:15:31

sharing

1:15:34

tools that we've been

1:15:36

working with or

1:15:38

discovering, which is what I'm

1:15:41

going to talk to you about today. Look,

1:15:45

I know that for all of

1:15:47

you, this topic of Artificial Intelligence

1:15:51

still raises many questions. Some of you have already started

1:15:59

using them, others have

1:16:02

n't. There are doubts, and that's natural.

1:16:06

We'll talk a little more about that later,

1:16:08

but

1:16:12

before we begin this last

1:16:15

part, I

1:16:16

want to emphasize that what we're going to

1:16:19

share with you are

1:16:22

tools. Yes, tools. I want to

1:16:25

highlight this point: they're going to help

1:16:29

with research. But these are

1:16:32

tools; these

1:16:35

platforms don't do the research for

1:16:38

us. They are, again, tools,

1:16:41

ways that can facilitate

1:16:46

some processes, but it will depend on how we

1:16:49

use them. Whether they're

1:16:53

useful, whether they

1:16:56

work, etc. So, I

1:16:59

want to make this point very clear.

1:17:01

We're going to show some tools;

1:17:03

we'll talk a little more about them

1:17:07

later. Well, I

1:17:09

also want to

1:17:13

divide this talk into three parts. The first part

1:17:16

is about reflecting

1:17:20

on the use of these

1:17:21

Artificial Intelligence tools.

1:17:24

As you know, this topic is very

1:17:27

new. Basically, it was revealed last year,

1:17:31

and we began to see a

1:17:34

very important and rapid generation

1:17:38

of different platforms that

1:17:42

used Artificial Intelligence

1:17:44

and that could be used for

1:17:46

different

1:17:47

aspects, for different jobs.

1:17:51

One of these jobs is

1:17:56

research, but we'll see that its

1:18:00

incorporation into research

1:18:02

requires reflection. What you

1:18:05

see here is an editorial published by News

1:18:08

Education in

1:18:10

Practice, which is indexed in

1:18:14

SVIER. The

1:18:16

editorial, called CHPT,

1:18:25

reflects on the use of

1:18:29

CHPT in generating these

1:18:32

types of documents. They analyze two

1:18:36

concepts they call accountability and

1:18:40

contribution. Let's say the translation isn't

1:18:43

very simple, but accountability—

1:18:46

the concept of

1:18:48

accountability—has to do with

1:18:51

this. To take charge, let's say,

1:18:56

and contribute, well, with the contribution,

1:19:00

and this is what they are analyzing. Notice

1:19:04

that this editorial arises because in a

1:19:07

previous one it was signed as

1:19:09

oconor and chpt, so there comes this

1:19:14

question: was it

1:19:18

correct or incorrect? And the

1:19:21

ethics committee of this journal met

1:19:24

precisely to analyze this situation. Was it

1:19:28

correct that

1:19:31

chat gpt was considered a co-author? And

1:19:35

they begin to reflect, they meet, they

1:19:38

discuss, etc., and in short,

1:19:42

they come to the conclusion that chat gpt cannot be

1:19:45

considered a co-author,

1:19:49

given two issues. What

1:19:53

they reach is the first is

1:19:55

that chat gpt cannot take charge of what is

1:19:59

generated, no, no, no, he is not

1:20:02

responsible, let's say,

1:20:07

for the information that he offers, with which that

1:20:16

editorial, that

1:20:19

academic document, is enriched. And second, the

1:20:23

concept of

1:20:25

contribution is analyzed, obviously, from this

1:20:29

perspective of who is an author, who

1:20:32

contributes to a document, and in

1:20:36

short, what

1:20:39

the ethics committee reaches From this, from this, uh,

1:20:43

journal... Well, they say no,

1:20:45

ch gpt cannot be considered a

1:20:49

contributor. I don't know if that's the right word, it's

1:20:51

a literal translation of this, from this,

1:20:54

this document, insofar as it's not a

1:20:57

person. Is that correct? Isn't that correct? Well,

1:21:01

these are the conclusions

1:21:03

they reached, but this

1:21:06

leads to a first reflection: we

1:21:12

need

1:21:15

universities, editorial committees,

1:21:19

academic committees to meet to

1:21:22

deliberate, to

1:21:25

reflect, to define how we are going to

1:21:28

use these

1:21:31

tools in our institutions,

1:21:33

in our journals, in our

1:21:36

publications, in our

1:21:38

academic environment. So there's this

1:21:41

first

1:21:46

part, excuse me, of this discussion:

1:21:50

the need to reflect on

1:21:53

the use of artificial intelligence.

1:21:57

Artificial intelligence is already here, and

1:22:00

now what we have to do is define its

1:22:04

correct use.

1:22:06

Well, for that, we will have to

1:22:10

make use of ethics as a...

1:22:13

From the philosophy and its different

1:22:15

approaches, what we have been

1:22:19

reflecting on is from the perspective of

1:22:22

action and cognition. In this

1:22:25

sense, morality is similar to a

1:22:27

social paradigm that dictates or judges

1:22:30

people's behavior in a

1:22:33

specific period of history. Therefore, perhaps we are currently facing

1:22:39

a change in morality because of the

1:22:42

emergence of

1:22:44

artificial intelligence, and we must reflect

1:22:47

on its use in different

1:22:51

contexts,

1:22:52

specifically in

1:22:55

research. The values

1:22:57

demonstrated in ethics seem to have

1:22:59

an inherited origin and have

1:23:01

allowed for the survival of the species.

1:23:04

Therefore, it is inscribed in

1:23:07

consciousness and changes according to our

1:23:09

cognition and experience. This

1:23:11

back and forth between theory and action,

1:23:14

action and theory, these changes

1:23:18

originate from

1:23:22

extraordinary situations, not like those

1:23:24

presented here. The individual is responsible

1:23:27

for their own knowledge and

1:23:30

actions, as the motto tells us. Ethics, then,

1:23:34

will be the individual's capacity to

1:23:37

reflect on what is right or

1:23:39

wrong, good or bad. And

1:23:42

this will be reflected in

1:23:45

action. Why do we believe that

1:23:48

These aspects need to be reviewed because

1:23:51

ultimately, we will be facing

1:23:53

our students, and we need to

1:23:55

guide them. The students will be using

1:23:59

artificial intelligence for their

1:24:01

work; they are already using it.

1:24:04

We, as teachers, as educators,

1:24:06

as directors, need to

1:24:08

reflect on

1:24:12

this and establish the

1:24:15

correct use within our classrooms and

1:24:19

our context.

1:24:21

The use of

1:24:23

artificial intelligence technologies must

1:24:25

adhere to a socially

1:24:28

established moral framework. The most important thing is the

1:24:32

ethical reasoning behind its use by

1:24:35

the researcher, and, as I

1:24:38

mentioned, the teacher-researcher

1:24:41

must guide the

1:24:43

students so that they not only

1:24:45

use the tools but

1:24:47

also reflect on the

1:24:51

consequences of their actions and their

1:24:54

use. Well, I'll leave

1:24:58

this first part here, this need to

1:25:02

reflect on its use, to

1:25:05

establish norms and rules for how to

1:25:09

establish processes and procedures for

1:25:11

how these

1:25:14

artificial intelligence tools can be used

1:25:16

and how we can benefit in

1:25:20

research processes. So, that's the first

1:25:23

part. The second part is this:

1:25:26

perhaps some of you are

1:25:29

familiar with what you see on the

1:25:31

screen, which is a typical dish. From

1:25:33

Mexico, what is mole? You might

1:25:36

say, "This Sergio, he's crazy,

1:25:41

why is he using a picture of molle?"

1:25:44

Well, it's simply to provoke

1:25:47

reflection. But now it has to

1:25:50

do with processes. Dr.

1:25:53

Hernández

1:25:54

and Dr. Cristian Paulina Mendoza

1:25:57

Torres spoke to us this morning about

1:26:00

three research approaches, three

1:26:03

different processes for conducting

1:26:05

research. As they explained, they start from the problem

1:26:07

statement, from

1:26:10

precisely the

1:26:13

research problem that we define.

1:26:16

Under what process, under what approach, under

1:26:19

what method should

1:26:22

that research be carried out? And therein lies the

1:26:26

need to reflect, to teach

1:26:30

our students to think—these

1:26:33

skills that

1:26:35

Dr. Hernández Sanier also spoke to us about.

1:26:38

Research requires reflection.

1:26:41

Research is not a cooking recipe; that's why I'm

1:26:45

presenting this

1:26:47

dish. Research is indeed

1:26:50

a series of systematic,

1:26:53

empirical, and critical steps, but precisely that's what

1:26:56

requires reflection. It's not just

1:27:00

following the steps for the sake of following them; we

1:27:03

must always

1:27:05

think, reflect on

1:27:09

them: What are we doing?

1:27:13

Where are we headed? Okay, so what are we looking for? Well,

1:27:15

this is the second

1:27:18

point of my intervention:

1:27:22

the need to

1:27:24

always conduct research

1:27:28

thoughtfully, not just following steps,

1:27:32

but reflecting on each

1:27:36

stage and doing them

1:27:41

correctly. Okay, so there's my

1:27:44

second point. Now, the third point

1:27:48

is to look at tools—again,

1:27:51

artificial intelligence tools for

1:27:55

doing research. These tools are

1:27:58

n't ChatGPT, they aren't Gemini, they aren't

1:28:02

even U. They are tools that, as

1:28:05

you will see, are designed precisely

1:28:09

for researchers, for

1:28:11

academics. The first of them is

1:28:17

Consensus Vyan. You

1:28:19

can even explore them as we go along, so that we can get used to them, familiarize ourselves with them.

1:28:31

It's a search engine that

1:28:34

uses language models,

1:28:37

and what it does is highlight and

1:28:39

synthesize statements from

1:28:42

research articles. Here's the

1:28:45

difference, the difference that exists with

1:28:47

respect to ChatGPT, Gemini, or U.

1:28:51

Why? Because with these, we don't know where

1:28:54

the information comes from. In U, yes, but

1:28:58

the information that U uses isn't

1:29:00

academic. Yes,

1:29:04

because Consensus comes from

1:29:06

academic research articles and is

1:29:10

generated from a database

1:29:12

called Semantic Scholar. At the

1:29:16

time of my first review, it

1:29:18

had close to 200 million

1:29:21

scientific articles from different

1:29:24

domains: nutrition, administration,

1:29:28

medicine, history, etc. And this

1:29:33

Consensus will operate using

1:29:35

credits. Those already working with

1:29:38

artificial intelligence on different

1:29:41

platforms will probably be

1:29:43

familiar with these coins, these

1:29:46

credits, these little coins that are

1:29:48

spent each time we

1:29:50

use them. And if the use is very

1:29:54

intensive, then a

1:29:56

payment must be made. This platform has

1:29:59

three plans: one is free, Premium,

1:30:03

and Enterprise for institutions,

1:30:07

universities, and companies. The advantage is

1:30:10

also that it offers discounts to

1:30:12

students, which we know is not always the case with

1:30:15

analytics platforms or those

1:30:19

related to research.

1:30:23

This one

1:30:25

does have a student discount.

1:30:27

So that's another advantage I

1:30:30

see in Consensus, and I'm going to step out of

1:30:33

the presentation format to

1:30:37

switch between screens.

1:30:40

Please... Saying yes,

1:30:43

they can see it. Okay, then I'm going to do

1:30:46

a new

1:30:48

way of sharing and I'm going to go

1:30:52

directly to Consensus. Please, the

1:30:55

administrator, can you confirm that

1:30:58

the Consensus website is visible? It

1:31:04

seems so, right, Noelia? Yes,

1:31:08

thank you. I have it here. Thank you, Doctor. It's visible.

1:31:10

Perfect. So, this is the

1:31:13

Consensus website. Look, one way

1:31:15

we can engage

1:31:17

students with these

1:31:19

more specific tools for

1:31:21

academic work is by showing them that it's not

1:31:25

just for doing homework or

1:31:28

research projects; it's useful

1:31:30

for everyday life. I give

1:31:32

my students the following example, or in

1:31:35

these talks we give to

1:31:37

students: I say, "Look, here in the

1:31:40

audience I see people who are in shape,

1:31:43

guys and girls, who look like they're in

1:31:45

shape, who exercise. Many of

1:31:47

them have probably approached or

1:31:50

looked for information about

1:31:52

supplementation. Should I take protein?

1:31:56

Should I take creatine? Many times there are

1:31:59

different supplements, and we do

1:32:02

n't know which one to

1:32:05

prioritize." Well, Consensus

1:32:08

has an example of this. For

1:32:10

example, here, of course, we at Consensus

1:32:13

work with the typical...

1:32:16

Question space. It doesn't say "ask" here, or "

1:32:19

ask a question." Ask the research question,

1:32:22

but I normally work with this one

1:32:25

they use as an example, which is

1:32:28

creatine. Does it help build

1:32:30

muscle? This supplement has

1:32:34

become popular precisely in

1:32:38

the sports aspect of

1:32:41

sports supplementation. But I want to

1:32:43

know if there's really

1:32:45

scientific evidence that it works. Okay, so

1:32:49

I could ask this question: Does

1:32:51

creatine really help

1:32:54

build muscle? So I'm going to

1:32:57

click here just for the

1:32:59

example and see what

1:33:03

Consensus answers. What does Consensus offer? Well,

1:33:06

Consensus has many tools. Here,

1:33:08

quickly, because of time, I'll

1:33:10

show the most obvious ones. It

1:33:15

has a synthesizer, a copilot that

1:33:18

also helps us ask more

1:33:20

specific questions, this

1:33:25

summary answer, and another one, which is... I don't know

1:33:28

how you pronounce it, excuse me,

1:33:30

MET, something like that, like

1:33:33

consensus measurement. In general, what does it tell us?

1:33:36

Well, here it gives us a summary of 10

1:33:39

scientific articles analyzed first.

1:33:44

So here it tells us, "Look,

1:33:46

these studies suggest that

1:33:48

creatine supplementation promotes

1:33:52

muscle strength, increases

1:33:56

lean mass, and can improve..."

1:34:00

The growth of

1:34:02

muscle fibers during

1:34:05

resistance training, etc., that is, it already gives us a

1:34:07

first clue. Furthermore, it tells us,

1:34:11

look, of the 13 articles analyzed, which

1:34:14

are the ones it considers the main ones,

1:34:17

92% tell us that yes, it does help

1:34:20

muscle building, and 80%

1:34:24

tell us that it possibly does. So what I

1:34:27

tell my students here is,

1:34:29

what decision would you make? But now, it's

1:34:31

not what the coach tells you, it's not what

1:34:33

the nutritionist tells you, it's not what

1:34:36

the GPT chat tells you.

1:34:39

These answers are based on

1:34:44

scientific documents. Now, you, for example,

1:34:46

here Tito Morelia, might be thinking, "

1:34:50

Well, but that's still a

1:34:52

general answer." Well, but if you

1:34:55

go here to what the

1:34:59

key clues from the Consensus Copilot results give us,

1:35:02

Tito, you'll see that it gives you

1:35:06

these key ideas, but it tells you

1:35:10

which article

1:35:14

these key ideas come from. So here it tells you, "

1:35:17

Look, from the Journal of

1:35:19

Physiology, the Journal of Applied Physiology, the

1:35:25

European Journal of

1:35:29

Applied Physiology, etc." So if you

1:35:31

click there, it can take you to the

1:35:35

specific article here. Look, you click here and it

1:35:38

takes you to the article. But also, within

1:35:42

this answer, well, it gives you a

1:35:43

conclusion where it says that yes, it does

1:35:45

help or promote

1:35:48

muscle growth. Here are the

1:35:50

articles it

1:35:52

used to give that answer. So you

1:35:55

can go directly to those articles to

1:35:57

review them and say, "Agustina, no, I don't believe it.

1:36:00

I want to see the

1:36:03

information clearly." Well, of course, that's

1:36:06

the difference. So I

1:36:08

click here, which is the first article that

1:36:10

says yes, it does help

1:36:13

muscle growth. So I click and I go

1:36:17

to the complete abstract

1:36:21

to review what was done, if it was an

1:36:25

experiment, what the

1:36:27

main results were, etc. And I

1:36:31

could even go to the full text. Of course,

1:36:36

this will depend on the

1:36:38

databases where we are logged in at that

1:36:42

moment. For example, here now, since I

1:36:44

'm on the University of

1:36:47

Guanajuato network, my network allows me to

1:36:51

see this complete article, which is

1:36:54

free for me. So I can review

1:36:57

that article in detail. So there

1:37:00

we see

1:37:01

precisely the advantages of Consensus, which

1:37:05

is the first tool we're going to

1:37:07

look at today. Well, Obviously,

1:37:11

I have different tools prepared for you.

1:37:13

If

1:37:16

the administrator could help me again,

1:37:20

tell me how much time I have to

1:37:23

present so I can keep track of my

1:37:36

progress. I

1:37:39

have about 15 minutes.

1:37:43

So, I'll hurry. Look, don't

1:37:46

worry, I'll focus on the ones I

1:37:49

consider essential, from my point of

1:37:51

view, the ones that have worked for me.

1:37:54

In these 15 minutes, I just want to

1:37:59

tell you that they are very intuitive to use

1:38:02

because we've all been

1:38:05

working with one or another

1:38:07

artificial intelligence tool; it's more or less the

1:38:09

same process. So, I'm going

1:38:13

to show you the ones I have

1:38:15

prepared, and then you

1:38:18

can explore them. Does that sound good? This

1:38:20

way, we make the presentation more efficient. Okay,

1:38:27

the next tool is

1:38:30

Elicit. Elicit is similar to Consensus.

1:38:34

Here's the website so you can

1:38:36

write it down and

1:38:40

explore it later on. It

1:38:43

works very similarly to

1:38:46

Consensus and helps you do a

1:38:50

faster literature review. Or,

1:38:52

sometimes, let's say I think there

1:38:56

can be two scenarios with these

1:38:58

tools that I'm

1:39:00

showing you. One is that you want to

1:39:03

familiarize yourself with a topic as a

1:39:06

researcher or

1:39:08

academic, or the other is that you've already

1:39:12

done your literature review and

1:39:13

simply want to verify that you're not

1:39:16

missing anything. You

1:39:18

can also use it for that. So,

1:39:21

Elicit is a tool that helps,

1:39:24

as I said, to do a

1:39:26

literature review. It also automates

1:39:29

systematic reviews and even

1:39:31

meta-analyses, and it's an excellent option,

1:39:35

as I mentioned, for learning about a new

1:39:38

domain. It also works with the

1:39:41

Semantic Scholar database and

1:39:44

has different payment plans. It also

1:39:46

works with credits. So, let's

1:39:49

say that, again, due to

1:39:52

time constraints, I won't go into that one, but it

1:39:56

works very similarly to

1:40:00

Consensus. The other tool is

1:40:05

Site. What difference does Site have

1:40:09

compared to the previous ones? It does a bit of the

1:40:12

same thing, that is, it also helps you

1:40:15

search for articles on a

1:40:19

specific domain based on

1:40:21

questions. But it also helps you because it

1:40:25

has a concept they called

1:40:27

Smart Citations, which favors The

1:40:30

discovery and evaluation of

1:40:33

scientific articles—we're going to see how it works. It

1:40:35

also has an

1:40:37

assistant that helps you identify

1:40:40

relevant articles and answers the

1:40:43

questions the user generates, just like

1:40:44

Consensus and Elicit did, with

1:40:49

their different payment methods:

1:40:52

Individual, Enterprise. Okay, let's see

1:40:55

what Smart Citations refers to.

1:40:58

Smart Citations works like this: you have

1:41:01

an article—suppose you want to evaluate

1:41:04

an article that was published in 2010

1:41:08

because it appears as relevant in the

1:41:11

searches you've been doing,

1:41:14

but you want to see how

1:41:16

that article has been used. Well, that's what

1:41:18

Smart Citations does.

1:41:21

For example, you have an article from

1:41:23

2022, and Smart Citations helps you see

1:41:27

how the previous article was used.

1:41:32

Suppose Tito Morelia, from Morelia,

1:41:36

Mexico, published this article in 2010, and

1:41:40

Agustina is interested in how that

1:41:48

article by Tito Morelia from 2010 has been used. So,

1:41:50

the

1:41:53

site will give you these articles that have been

1:41:57

used. The one from Tito Morelia 2010, and they'll

1:42:00

tell you specifically how it's been

1:42:03

used. For example, here it says, "

1:42:07

Oh look, this

1:42:10

2022 article cites Tito Morelia in the

1:42:15

introduction, mentioning him.

1:42:18

This study is well-studied in the

1:42:22

literature, and it's supported by

1:42:25

Tito Morelia

1:42:27

2010. Then it uses it again in the

1:42:30

discussion,

1:42:37

citing it as consistent with

1:42:40

Tito Morelia 2010." So, that's how

1:42:44

we can also see... Well,

1:42:47

first we can evaluate an article, we can

1:42:50

review how it's been

1:42:53

used, we can even evaluate

1:42:57

our own work, maybe an

1:42:59

article we published a while ago,

1:43:01

how

1:43:03

other researchers have been using it. So

1:43:05

this is the advantage that

1:43:08

Smart Citations gives us, and as I

1:43:12

said, it does the same as the

1:43:15

previous two. Look, here it gives you a summary

1:43:18

and tells you where

1:43:21

those key ideas come from. Here we can

1:43:23

see it in a general way. Well, there's the

1:43:27

site. Another tool that I really like

1:43:29

is one called ResearchRabbit.

1:43:32

ResearchRabbit is a

1:43:35

tool that supports

1:43:37

literature review and allows you to locate

1:43:39

related articles. Starting with one that you

1:43:42

might be interested in, the advantage is

1:43:45

that it does it interactively

1:43:49

through images, and it also

1:43:53

allows you to collaborate with other

1:43:55

researchers. Another advantage is that it's

1:43:57

free, so that helps

1:44:01

us as professors, but especially

1:44:03

the students. I'm going

1:44:05

to stop here because I think it can

1:44:08

be very useful for you. Let me

1:44:10

change screens.

1:44:14

Let me move this little

1:44:17

bar and go to ResearchRabbit.

1:44:21

Well, I have a search that I

1:44:24

had already done. If I had had time, I

1:44:27

could have done it right now as an

1:44:29

exercise, but since we don't have much

1:44:32

time, I want to show you the one I've already done. I

1:44:34

started with this

1:44:37

document. Obviously, you ask it to

1:44:41

offer you documents

1:44:43

based on a topic, in this case,

1:44:46

organizational climate and culture, and it offered me,

1:44:49

among others, this one, and this is the one I want to

1:44:52

relate to others that have been

1:44:55

done previously or

1:44:59

subsequently. It offered me options

1:45:02

that I incorporated. Here, if you look, it

1:45:04

says "add papers." Of those options it

1:45:07

gave me, I'll show you... I kept

1:45:10

adding these, and I want to know if they're

1:45:13

related or not. So

1:45:17

the advantage here is that when you

1:45:19

click on "

1:45:21

connections," it tells you, "Oh, look, of those that

1:45:24

interested you, these are connected, and

1:45:27

these aren't." Okay, so now I have a

1:45:31

first idea of

1:45:34

where these are going. These suggest

1:45:36

one approach, and these others, let's say,

1:45:40

propose another approach. Okay,

1:45:43

those are the ones it offered me

1:45:45

immediately, directly from

1:45:47

the first search I did.

1:45:50

But I want it to offer

1:45:53

similar works. Okay, I'm going to click on it, and it will

1:45:58

offer me

1:46:00

similar works that I can click on and

1:46:03

go to. Obviously, some will be

1:46:05

open, others won't. But it also

1:46:09

shows them to me again visually.

1:46:12

See? So here I clearly see

1:46:15

the approaches. Another advantage is that

1:46:18

here I can quickly see authors. I mean,

1:46:21

in this search for "climate and

1:46:23

organizational culture," those who have

1:46:25

worked with these constructs

1:46:28

will realize that these are very

1:46:31

relevant authors for the topic. So here

1:46:33

we see that these are related. Here we see,

1:46:36

and these others aren't, but they're

1:46:39

also relevant authors, though perhaps they

1:46:40

establish other

1:46:43

positions. We see that it

1:46:46

offers us related previous works, for

1:46:50

example, here I can give you previous

1:46:55

or

1:47:00

subsequent ones. There it is, this

1:47:04

Research Rabbit tool, which I really

1:47:07

like. Well, again I'm going to

1:47:09

run a little fast because of time constraints,

1:47:12

but let's see which ones we

1:47:15

can cover. We also have

1:47:19

Hard Discovery, which works

1:47:22

very similarly to the first ones we saw,

1:47:25

Consensus, ELCIT, etc. So I won't dwell

1:47:29

on it, just make a note of it so

1:47:31

you can

1:47:34

explore it. Art Discovery, this one is

1:47:37

perhaps a little newer than the

1:47:39

previous ones. What's

1:47:43

relevant here is that it claims to exclude

1:47:46

predatory content, offers alerts for

1:47:49

new content, and allows you—

1:47:53

with a paid subscription—to listen to the content of

1:47:55

articles. That is, you can say, let's say,

1:47:59

Jelis is interested in an article, she

1:48:02

can download it to her phone and while she's on her

1:48:04

way home or from home to

1:48:07

work, she can listen to it to

1:48:11

see if it's really relevant to

1:48:14

the work she's doing,

1:48:15

etc. So, let's say it offers

1:48:18

this type of tool. It also

1:48:21

allows you to create and,

1:48:24

uh, it can be synchronized With

1:48:26

reference managers, not like the ones

1:48:29

you know. Well, there it is

1:48:32

for information retrieval.

1:48:35

The following tools, for

1:48:38

information analysis, we have this tool

1:48:40

called ChatPDF. What it does is

1:48:44

no longer answer questions

1:48:48

based on information from

1:48:50

scientific articles on the web,

1:48:53

but rather, you give it the

1:48:56

article you want to analyze.

1:48:59

Again, for this presentation, I have a

1:49:01

developed exercise. I'm not going to go anywhere; I'm going to

1:49:04

change pages again and

1:49:06

go to ChatPDF. In this case, I

1:49:10

'm already working. Look here, as it

1:49:12

says "Drop PDF here," and I take the

1:49:15

article I want to review, the one I already

1:49:17

identified with the

1:49:19

previous tools. I downloaded it, and I want to know

1:49:21

if it's useful for my work, so I

1:49:24

load it here, and I'm going to work from

1:49:28

it. It also works

1:49:32

through questions. For

1:49:33

example, I already have the article I want to

1:49:38

analyze, and I'm going to do it again with

1:49:42

questions. Here we have the

1:49:44

space to ask questions. Here, for

1:49:47

reasons of time, I'm going to use

1:49:49

example questions, for example, "What is the

1:49:51

difference between my

1:49:53

organizational culture?" but I want you to...

1:49:55

Answer from the article. Not from the

1:49:58

network. Here we are already working with

1:50:01

documents that we possibly found

1:50:04

with the previous tools. So, I want you to

1:50:07

tell me. I want to know if this

1:50:10

article can tell me what the

1:50:14

difference is between organizational climate and culture.

1:50:16

Well, and here it will generate the

1:50:20

answer. So it will tell me, look, the

1:50:23

difference between organizational climate and culture

1:50:25

is this: they are

1:50:29

related but

1:50:32

different concepts, and they are

1:50:37

included within

1:50:39

organizational behavior. And here it gives me what

1:50:42

climate and culture are,

1:50:48

specifically from this article. So I

1:50:50

can also say, "Well, but where does this

1:50:52

information come from?" Ah, well, here I click and it

1:50:55

will show me where the

1:50:59

information is from which it is

1:51:01

giving me this answer. Let's see here,

1:51:04

here it sends me to this other one. So

1:51:08

this is no longer so much for

1:51:10

searching for information, but rather

1:51:15

for analyzing the

1:51:19

documents that we found.

1:51:21

So there we have ChatPDF. Again,

1:51:24

I'm going to

1:51:25

change a tool similar to

1:51:28

ChatPDF: UMATA.

1:51:31

UMATA does the same thing as ChatPDF.

1:51:34

So you can explore it, you can

1:51:36

search for it exactly like that in the... A

1:51:39

search engine like Umata

1:51:41

Punai will do the same thing; it's a

1:51:45

chatbot that works with

1:51:47

artificial intelligence and operates based on the

1:51:49

documents the user provides. It

1:51:52

summarizes, answers questions, extracts data,

1:51:55

and writes based on it. There are various

1:51:57

versions, so here we have Umata.

1:52:02

Finally, to wrap things up,

1:52:05

artificial intelligence is already

1:52:08

appearing in software

1:52:12

geared towards the different stages

1:52:15

of the research process. For

1:52:17

example, these that I showed you

1:52:20

help with planning,

1:52:23

literature review, construction of the

1:52:24

theoretical framework, and even the method when

1:52:26

we are defining how we

1:52:29

could approach it, or

1:52:32

specifically, the

1:52:34

tools, approaches, etc.,

1:52:37

for analysis.

1:52:40

Artificial intelligence has also been incorporated

1:52:42

into these specific analysis software programs.

1:52:45

For example, here in the

1:52:46

presentation you can see

1:52:50

Atlas.net and Max, which are

1:52:55

software programs for qualitative analysis. And

1:53:01

recently,

1:53:06

artificial intelligence tools have been incorporated

1:53:09

for quantitative analysis. As far as I understand, it hasn't been

1:53:18

incorporated yet. That's it, but there's already a

1:53:22

GPT chat add-in for Excel, so it's

1:53:26

starting to be incorporated into

1:53:29

these analysis software programs.

1:53:31

Finally, there's

1:53:34

Quillbot, which also helps us. I

1:53:38

highly recommend it. It

1:53:40

will help us with the academic writing process. It

1:53:43

can help paraphrase,

1:53:45

offers synonyms, reviews grammar in

1:53:49

different languages, including

1:53:51

Spanish, helps with citations, checks for

1:53:54

plagiarism, and translates. Although some of these

1:53:57

tools require payment,

1:53:59

I use it a lot

1:54:01

for grammar checking, at least

1:54:04

sometimes when you have doubts about periods, commas,

1:54:07

etc., and Quillbot helps a lot. It

1:54:09

's very user-friendly, and that part is

1:54:13

free. And finally, there's Gam. Gam helps

1:54:19

to make presentations. In fact,

1:54:22

this presentation

1:54:24

you see, the graphic design of the

1:54:26

presentation, I made with Gam. In fact,

1:54:29

here it says "Made with Gamma," and you

1:54:32

can work from scratch, from

1:54:35

a template based on a

1:54:37

quick outline, from notes, or, as in my case,

1:54:40

by importing a file. I generated my

1:54:44

presentation, imported it into Gam, and Gam

1:54:47

made this presentation a bit more

1:54:49

eye-catching than you see. Pretty, huh? So,

1:54:52

well, I think I'll stop

1:54:55

there due to

1:54:57

time constraints. I'll just reiterate that what has been

1:55:00

presented are tools

1:55:02

that support research and

1:55:04

academic work, which do not replace

1:55:07

the experience and knowledge of a

1:55:10

researcher. We believe their use is

1:55:13

welcome as long as it is done with sound

1:55:15

judgment and ethics. Tools are not

1:55:19

good or bad; it depends on how

1:55:23

we use them. For example,

1:55:26

if I use a hammer to

1:55:29

drive a nail and then hang a

1:55:31

picture, then its use is good. But if I use

1:55:34

that same hammer to hit

1:55:36

someone, then the use is bad. It's not the

1:55:39

tool itself that is good or bad, but

1:55:42

the use we give it that

1:55:45

defines these aspects. Ultimately,

1:55:49

this moment makes us think about the

1:55:52

people who lived through the

1:55:54

Industrial Revolution. Artificial intelligence isn't going to take your job; what

1:56:00

will take it is surely someone

1:56:03

who knows more about artificial intelligence

1:56:05

than you. This was mentioned by Cristina

1:56:08

Villarroya, Director of

1:56:10

Digital Strategy and Media at

1:56:13

BBVA. What follows is the reflection, the discussion, the

1:56:18

necessary forums in our

1:56:20

institutions to continue defining the

1:56:23

guidelines in the Use of these tools.

1:56:27

Thank you very much. Sorry for rushing,

1:56:29

but time is always finite. Thank you

1:56:35

very much. Thank you very much to Dr.

1:56:38

Sergio. We are open to the

1:56:41

question round. Some

1:56:42

questions have been asked through the chat. We have one

1:56:45

for Dr. Sampieri who says that if

1:56:48

the objective were to demonstrate

1:56:50

the relationship between the organization

1:56:53

of school library spaces

1:56:54

and the services they provide,

1:56:57

what would be

1:57:13

quantitatively measurable? Sorry, I was

1:57:17

muted. Well, the

1:57:21

quantitative aspect would be to look at the

1:57:24

appropriate variables of use, perceptions

1:57:28

of

1:57:29

use, library usage behaviors,

1:57:33

etc.

1:57:36

And the qualitative aspect would be

1:57:39

service assessments.

1:57:43

And here, the most

1:57:47

appropriate approach would be a mixed-methods approach. I don't know if

1:57:49

I answered the question.

1:57:54

If you need to leave another question,

1:57:56

you can leave it in the chat so we

1:57:58

can review them. There were also

1:58:00

many questions about the software. Dr.

1:58:03

Paulina asked where we can register

1:58:05

to get more information about the

1:58:08

software. Well, Dr. Cristian,

1:58:11

Paulina had to leave us because she

1:58:14

had an important commitment, but

1:58:19

regarding the acquisition of the software, it

1:58:22

comes with any of our works. Our

1:58:28

research methodology includes mixed-methods approaches.

1:58:32

Research Fundamentals, an

1:58:34

introductory book on research and

1:58:36

research methodology for

1:58:39

high school students, comes free with the purchase

1:58:42

of any copy. Some people have

1:58:45

asked if they can't find it in their

1:58:48

country, so I don't know if the people at George

1:58:52

Hill, if Elid is around and could

1:58:57

give us the Macril website for

1:59:02

South America, or if we could write to him in the chat. For

1:59:06

those who have been answering comments in the chat, some people

1:59:11

also ask another question: Is it

1:59:14

acceptable in thesis presentations or

1:59:16

research documents to mention the

1:59:18

source of reference for these

1:59:20

artificial intelligences? Go

1:59:25

ahead, Dr.

1:59:30

MZ. Well, remember, what

1:59:35

this artificial intelligence or

1:59:38

these artificial intelligence tools do is

1:59:39

bring the

1:59:41

documents closer to you. What should be

1:59:44

referenced are the documents themselves, not so much

1:59:47

the tool. It's like

1:59:50

when we consult

1:59:53

databases; you don't reference the

1:59:55

database, but rather

1:59:58

the specific article you find in

2:00:01

a journal. And that journal is

2:00:03

indexed in these

2:00:07

databases, so yes, that's correct.

2:00:12

Thank you very much, Dr. Sergio. I'm

2:00:15

asking here; I'm interested in taking the

2:00:17

diploma course in

2:00:18

research methodology. Who do I contact, and is

2:00:20

there an online option?

2:00:33

Thank you. Oh, thank you

2:00:35

very much. Well, I'll give you my

2:00:39

email address. I'll write it in the chat for

2:00:42

any information. Right now, I'll put

2:00:45

my email address here, and you can

2:00:51

write to me.

2:00:53

Among other questions, they also

2:00:55

asked if the talk would be

2:00:57

recorded. It's available on our

2:00:59

library's YouTube channel. It will be

2:01:02

recorded

2:01:04

there. And for those who need a

2:01:07

certificate or would like to have a

2:01:09

certificate of attendance, I

2:01:11

'll also leave the library's email address

2:01:13

in the chat so they can

2:01:15

request it directly. They

2:01:17

must have been registered and,

2:01:20

obviously, participated in the chat.

2:01:32

Here we have more questions for

2:01:35

Dr. Sanier, and what influence does

2:01:39

the type of study, whether quantitative or

2:01:41

qualitative, have on the formulation of the hypothesis or

2:01:45

hypotheses, and what recommendation could you

2:01:49

give us for it?

2:01:52

Yes, well, what I want to point out is that

2:01:55

hypotheses only occur in the

2:01:59

quantitative approach. In the qualitative approach, there is

2:02:02

no hypothesis testing, logically,

2:02:06

because what is a hypothesis? It's a

2:02:09

statement about the possible relationship between

2:02:12

two or more variables. The variables are not

2:02:17

quantitative; they are measured, therefore they don't form

2:02:21

hypotheses. Qualitative because in

2:02:25

the qualitative world we don't work with

2:02:27

variables but with

2:02:29

constructs. So in

2:02:32

qualitative research, there is

2:02:35

no hypothesis testing. There can't be

2:02:38

hypotheses due to the very nature of the

2:02:41

research because there are no variables. In

2:02:43

mixed methods, there can be hypotheses for the

2:02:45

quantitative part, and from a

2:02:48

qualitative study, as a result of the study,

2:02:53

hypotheses can be proposed for

2:02:56

future quantitative studies.

2:03:01

Thank you very much.

2:03:03

Well, many thanks for the

2:03:06

chat. So, thank you all very much for

2:03:08

your messages. I don't know if you want to ask another

2:03:10

question. In any case, you can also

2:03:12

raise your hand and I'll activate your

2:03:16

audio for a second. That way we can have, I don't know, another

2:03:18

5 minutes of questions if you

2:03:20

want. Here's

2:03:22

Tito Morelia from Mexico. I'll

2:03:26

activate it for you. Thank you very much. Well, thank you.

2:03:30

First of all, to the Catholic University

2:03:31

of Argentina and the organizing team for

2:03:33

this interesting keynote address.

2:03:36

Also, to Dr. Sampieri's team

2:03:37

for this interesting presentation. I

2:03:41

greet you from Mexico. I am a professor of

2:03:43

research methodology. I just

2:03:46

acquired your book, latest edition, Doctor.

2:03:48

Very interesting. It's just that the

2:03:50

IDEA code hasn't wanted to work.

2:03:53

But well, I'll see if I can contact

2:03:56

a technician or someone who can help me. Thank you,

2:03:59

an interesting presentation.

2:04:02

I think it has been very beneficial for

2:04:04

everyone. Very kind. Thank you very much, Tito.

2:04:09

Now, María Sánchez, I'm activating you,

2:04:13

María. Thank you very much. Well, from

2:04:16

Peru, I send you all my heart. I am very

2:04:18

excited to have heard the

2:04:21

participation of excellent

2:04:23

professionals in the field, and

2:04:25

especially thank you very much, Dr.

2:04:27

Roberto Hernández. I follow his book. I teach

2:04:30

methodology, I write

2:04:34

theses, and all this topic as well, and I am

2:04:37

always following his book. And

2:04:39

something curious happened to me. So, when

2:04:41

one wants to buy a book, one always wants the

2:04:43

latest edition, right? Well, I

2:04:46

saw that it was in the second edition, and I

2:04:48

thought, "That's strange." So I looked it up, and it

2:04:50

came up that it was in the sixth

2:04:52

edition. So,

2:04:54

Dr. Hernández, I just wanted to ask if you could

2:04:57

clarify for me. And excuse my ignorance, perhaps it's

2:05:00

still in the second

2:05:01

edition or already in the sixth? That's why I could

2:05:04

n't find it here, and that

2:05:07

was the problem. Yes, yes,

2:05:10

thank you very much. It's that in

2:05:13

Research Methodology, it had a first stage with

2:05:15

some co-authors,

2:05:17

and it was, for seven editions,

2:05:23

that book that was called

2:05:28

Research Methodology. In

2:05:30

2014, we published a book, the

2:05:34

Research Methodology book, with the

2:05:37

subtitle "Quantitative,

2:05:39

Qualitative, and Mixed Methods," and a change in

2:05:42

co-authors. Dr.

2:05:45

Cristian Paulina Mendoza Torres was added. So,

2:05:49

when they say "second edition," it's the

2:05:52

second edition from last year,

2:05:55

and it has a cover.

2:06:01

I'll quickly

2:06:03

share

2:06:06

the

2:06:10

book cover, which is this cover with some

2:06:14

arrows. This is the latest edition,

2:06:17

from August/September of last year. It's the

2:06:21

second edition with

2:06:25

Dr. Cristian Paulina as co-author, and it's the

2:06:27

last edition. The next one will

2:06:30

also include Dr. Sergio Méndez,

2:06:33

and it will be the third edition, or perhaps

2:06:36

a first edition, depending on the

2:06:41

situation. So, this is it. And I also

2:06:44

want to briefly mention

2:06:48

that the book, the

2:06:52

Methodology book, has an online resource center. The

2:06:55

address is there; I'll

2:06:59

paste it in the chat. There, you can

2:07:01

get additional chapters of the book and manuals, such as

2:07:05

manuals for

2:07:11

research in epidemiology or

2:07:13

public health, and other manuals. These are

2:07:16

library resources,

2:07:20

free resources for

2:07:23

users of the works.

2:07:26

So, this is the cover.

2:07:31

I insist, the which has three blue and

2:07:36

yellow arrows. This is the

2:07:39

last one, I don't know if it

2:07:44

responds. Thank you very much, Doctor.

2:07:47

I'll leave this in the chat for

2:07:50

any questions. Elida also

2:07:52

left it in the chat so you

2:07:56

can contact the

2:07:58

publisher directly. I don't know, Elida, if you want to add

2:08:01

anything

2:08:04

else. Good afternoon to everyone present.

2:08:08

Thank you very much, Doctor Roberto, and also

2:08:11

to Doctor Paulina, who had to

2:08:13

leave, and Doctor Sergio. Um, for Peru, they

2:08:17

were

2:08:19

asking. We have Manuel

2:08:22

Reyes as the distributor. I've passed along his contact information; his

2:08:25

email is Manuel.reyes@gmail.com,

2:08:32

where you can find the latest edition

2:08:35

of the work. For

2:08:37

Argentina, we have distributors like

2:08:41

SBS Corpus. In some cases,

2:08:46

the new edition is in transit, so

2:08:49

if it hasn't arrived yet, it

2:08:51

will be arriving soon. You

2:08:54

also have our

2:08:57

website, which is

2:08:59

mill.com.co for Colombia, which is for

2:09:01

South America, or .mx for Mexico. You

2:09:05

can also purchase from that

2:09:09

page. Thank you very much, Elida.

2:09:12

Um, Doctor, we have one more question, and if

2:09:15

you want, we can close

2:09:17

for today. Um, a

2:09:20

question for Doctor Sampieri: what

2:09:22

recommendations do you have for students and

2:09:24

researchers who face

2:09:26

difficulties? Formulating the

2:09:31

research problem: Well, that's the most

2:09:34

important challenge. The software helps, but

2:09:40

the question

2:09:41

and the

2:09:43

research itself are crucial.

2:09:48

Read the recommendations for the idea you

2:09:51

have to move on to formulating

2:09:53

the problem. Read about the topic and

2:09:57

clarify it many times. We

2:10:00

suggest in our works representing it

2:10:03

graphically. What are your variables?

2:10:06

How do you want to link them? We

2:10:09

suggest this in our works to

2:10:11

formulate the research problem

2:10:13

graphically. If it's

2:10:15

qualitative, also graphically. And

2:10:20

realize that

2:10:22

research is for everyone. It's not just

2:10:25

for privileged minds; anyone

2:10:28

can do research. Have the

2:10:31

enthusiasm, the proactive attitude, and you'll see that

2:10:36

you yourself will develop it. What

2:10:40

recommendation? Put in a lot of effort, a lot of enthusiasm.

2:10:42

Research is very

2:10:44

beautiful and will give you a lot of satisfaction.

2:10:48

And Dr. Sergio Méndez wanted to add:

2:10:54

Thank you very much.

2:10:56

Look, for example, what we

2:11:00

are proposing now in these

2:11:02

new works is that

2:11:06

Artificial Intelligence can help us

2:11:08

in these situations. Of course,

2:11:11

again, the use. What use are we going to give to

2:11:15

this Artificial Intelligence? Or

2:11:18

how are we going to take advantage of their use?

2:11:27

Look, for example, if I have an

2:11:31

introductory course—it often happens in many degree programs—

2:11:34

I have an

2:11:37

introductory research course.

2:11:39

Normally, that course is given in the

2:11:41

first semesters. I think that's more or

2:11:44

less the case in different

2:11:46

universities. But we, as

2:11:48

teachers, ask the students to

2:11:50

generate a research question

2:11:54

related to their field of study. But if the

2:11:57

students are only in their first, second, or even

2:12:00

third semester, they haven't seen

2:12:02

much about their field. Well, they

2:12:06

can use

2:12:08

artificial intelligence tools, even the

2:12:10

GPT chat. How can they do it? Well, they can,

2:12:13

for example,

2:12:17

ask the student to write a first

2:12:19

draft of their idea. What is it they would

2:12:21

like to know? Well, they'll

2:12:23

tell you in their

2:12:25

own words: "I want to know

2:12:28

how the colors of a

2:12:30

commercial establishment influence the

2:12:34

customer's purchase motivation." So you

2:12:38

can put it, for example,

2:12:41

in the GPT chat and say, "This helps

2:12:45

generate research ideas

2:12:47

related to it." And you go on discussing

2:12:49

this. This helps to re-engage

2:12:54

students. Why?

2:12:58

Because you're already

2:13:00

helping them generate concrete ideas for their

2:13:04

project. Some will say no, but

2:13:06

how is this? Where is their reflection?

2:13:09

Where is it? Well, in this case,

2:13:12

when it comes to introductory courses,

2:13:15

these first courses you're going to

2:13:16

give them so they know where to search, how to

2:13:19

search, how to make a proposal,

2:13:21

etc. Sometimes the most important thing is to

2:13:25

engage, familiarize, and inspire the

2:13:28

student with research, and have them go

2:13:32

through the process little by

2:13:34

little, etc. In other words, the process

2:13:37

is what's interesting, the search. And if you

2:13:41

engage them with topics that are of

2:13:44

interest to them, then you've already

2:13:48

achieved, I think, part of the objective of

2:13:50

this course. Why? Because you're going to be

2:13:53

teaching them about their interests,

2:13:57

about, for example, sports and the

2:14:00

relationship between sports and

2:14:02

marketing, the relationship between

2:14:04

soccer and sports teams and

2:14:07

marketing, to give you an example.

2:14:10

So, in that way, you

2:14:13

awaken the students' interest, and then

2:14:15

encourage them to

2:14:18

practice.

2:14:22

The important thing is that we lose our

2:14:24

fear. The important thing is that we give ourselves the

2:14:27

opportunity. The important thing is that we

2:14:29

practice ourselves, and that in

2:14:32

this way we can hook and

2:14:35

inspire students with this

2:14:40

beautiful thing called

2:14:42

research, because it allows us, or

2:14:45

allows them, to learn for

2:14:50

themselves. Thank you very much to Dr.

2:14:52

Sergio, and well, we've left the

2:14:55

emails here. The library's email is the

2:14:57

same one where you received the invitation. So, I'll be happy to

2:15:01

answer your questions there.

2:15:03

We are truly delighted with the

2:15:05

participation of these excellent

2:15:07

speakers today, and we

2:15:09

thank everyone for their participation and

2:15:11

their time. Thank you very much, and until the

2:15:15

next

2:15:16

event. Goodbye. Thank you

2:15:19

all.

2:15:23

[Music] Let's see

2:15:26

if the doctor

2:15:30

wanted to.

2:15:32

Thank you, Dr. Soledad Lago Jos, to everyone,

2:15:36

thank you Elida Ramírez, and to the

2:15:39

editorial staff, Maila Martín Chue, the

2:15:42

vice president who is from

2:15:45

Argentina, Latin America, and thank you very much,

2:15:51

Paulina. God bless you.

2:15:54

Goodbye to you and your families until

2:15:56

next time. Thank you very much, goodbye. Thank you, goodbye.

More transcripts

Explore other videos transcribed with YouTLDR.

Get the TLDR of any YouTube video

Transcribe, summarize, and repurpose videos in 125+ languages — free, no signup required.

Try YouTLDR Free