연구 방법과 비평Research Method and Critique
Chapter Objectives
By the end of this chapter, you will be able to:
- Describe a research question, method, and finding in contemporary South Korean Standard Korean using accurate method-language vocabulary.
- Summarize prior research (a literature review) by attributing claims to specific studies or researchers rather than presenting them as your own.
- Formulate a critique that identifies a limitation, gap, or weakness in a study while remaining precise, measured, and evidence-based.
- Distinguish reporting another researcher's claim from asserting your own evaluative judgment about that claim.
- Synthesize two or more sources into a short paragraph that shows agreement, disagreement, or partial overlap between them.
- Read and interpret a short literature-review-style passage, correctly identifying which claims belong to which source.
This chapter introduces two major new productive systems: method/critique language and literature-review attribution and synthesis patterns. All research examples in this chapter are fictional and general-purpose; no real scholars, studies, journals, or institutions are named.
Opening Scenario
수아는 이제 정책 연구소를 떠나 대학원에서 진행 중인 도시 주거 정책 연구에 합류했다. 지도 교수가 말한다: "먼저 선행 연구를 정리해 봅시다. 기존 연구들이 이 문제를 어떻게 다뤘는지, 어떤 방법을 사용했는지, 그리고 그 연구들에 어떤 한계가 있는지 비평적으로 검토해야 해요. 단순히 요약만 하지 말고, 연구들 사이의 공통점과 차이점도 짚어 주세요." 수아는 이제 단순한 정보 전달이 아니라, 연구 방법을 설명하고, 선행 연구를 인용하며, 비평적 시각으로 여러 연구를 종합하는 학술적 글쓰기에 들어선다.
- You will learn vocabulary and structures for describing research questions, methods, and findings.
- You will learn to attribute claims to specific studies using literature-review language.
- You will learn to formulate a measured, evidence-based critique of a study's method or claim.
- You will read a short literature-review-style passage and identify source attribution.
- You will write a short literature review and critique synthesizing two or more fictional studies.
Unit III at a Glance: Research, Ideas, and Literary Language
This chapter opens Unit III. The table below previews how the unit will develop, so you can see where today's method and critique language leads.
| Chapter | Domain | Principal contribution |
|---|---|---|
| 11 | 연구 방법과 비평 | Method language, literature review attribution, critique, and synthesis — the foundation for the rest of the unit. |
| 12 | 사상적·문학적 산문 | Style, metaphor, intertextuality, and literary-adjacent analysis, building on the analytical stance developed here. |
| 13 | 역사·문화 텍스트 읽기 | Historical register and careful interpretation of culturally embedded texts. |
| 14 | 고급 학술 에세이 | Full source synthesis, argument, and citation language for an extended academic essay. |
| 15 | 종합 과제 3 | Unit III synthesis: an integrated analytical and interpretive project. |
Today's method, attribution, and critique language will be recycled and expanded throughout the unit, especially in Chapter 14's extended academic essay.
Core Vocabulary: Research Method and Critique
The following vocabulary supports describing research questions, methods, and findings, and forming a measured critique. Approximately 50 productive items are introduced across this chapter; the table below presents the core set.
| Korean | Meaning | Note |
|---|---|---|
| 연구 문제 | research question | noun; opens a study description |
| 연구 방법 | research method | noun; often paired with 을/를 조사하다, 분석하다 |
| 설문 조사 | survey | noun; a common method type |
| 사례 연구 | case study | noun; a common method type |
| 표본 | sample (of participants/data) | noun; 표본 크기 = sample size |
| 자료를 수집하다 | to collect data | action verb; dictionary form 수집하다 |
| 결과를 분석하다 | to analyze results | action verb; dictionary form 분석하다 |
| 가설 | hypothesis | noun; 가설을 세우다 = to form a hypothesis |
| 선행 연구 | prior research, previous studies | noun; central to literature review |
| 연구자 | researcher | noun; generic, non-named |
| ~에 따르면 | according to ~ | attribution frame; follows a source noun |
| ~라고 주장하다 | to claim/argue that ~ | reported-claim verb; follows a quoted clause |
| ~라고 지적하다 | to point out that ~ | reported-claim verb, often critical |
| 한계 | limitation | noun; central to critique |
| 공백, 미비점 | gap, insufficiency | noun; used in critique of coverage |
| 타당성 | validity | noun; used to evaluate method soundness |
| 신뢰성 | reliability | noun; used to evaluate method soundness |
| 뒷받침하다 | to support (a claim) | action verb; 자료가 주장을 뒷받침하다 |
| 반박하다 | to rebut, counter | action verb; critique of a claim |
| 종합하다 | to synthesize | action verb; already partially active from Ch. 10 |
| 공통점 | common point, similarity | noun; used in synthesis |
| 차이점 | difference, point of divergence | noun; used in synthesis |
Additional receptive and specialized items (e.g., 표집 방법, 통계적으로 유의미하다, 질적 연구, 양적 연구) may appear in the reading passage below, labeled and bounded; they are not required for independent production this chapter.
Grammar and Sentence Patterns: Attribution, Critique, and Synthesis
This chapter introduces two closely related productive systems: (1) literature-review attribution — reporting a claim to its correct source using ~에 따르면 and ~라고 주장하다/지적하다; and (2) measured critique — identifying a limitation or gap using 한계가 있다 and related evaluative frames, together with synthesis language for comparing sources.
1. Attribution: reporting what a source claims
A literature review must distinguish the source's claim from the writer's own voice. The attribution frame ~에 따르면 ("according to ~") opens the sentence; the source's claim follows, often closed with ~라고 주장하다 or ~라고 지적하다.
- 한 연구자에 따르면, 주거비 상승은 청년층의 이주 결정에 큰 영향을 미친다.According to one researcher, the rise in housing costs greatly affects young people's decisions to relocate.에 따르면 + reported claim, no closing verb needed
- 해당 연구는 주거 지원 정책이 청년층의 정착에 효과적이라고 주장한다.The study argues that housing support policy is effective for helping young people settle.quoted clause + 라고 주장하다
- 일부 연구자들은 기존 설문 조사의 표본이 지나치게 작다고 지적한다.Some researchers point out that the sample in existing surveys is excessively small.quoted clause + 라고 지적하다, critical framing
2. Critique: identifying a limitation with evidence, not opinion
A measured critique names a specific limitation and, where possible, explains why it matters, rather than offering a general negative judgment.
- 이 연구는 표본 크기가 작다는 한계가 있다.This study has the limitation that its sample size is small.노 clause + 는 한계가 있다
- 해당 설문 조사는 특정 지역에 한정되어 있어 결과의 타당성에 의문이 제기될 수 있다.Because that survey is limited to a specific region, questions can be raised about the validity of its results.reason clause + 타당성에 의문이 제기되다
- 이 연구의 결과는 다른 자료로 충분히 뒷받침되지 않는다.This study's results are not sufficiently supported by other data.뒷받침되다 in a critical evaluative frame
3. Synthesis: showing agreement and disagreement between sources
Synthesis language, building on the closing-paragraph patterns from Chapter 10, compares two or more sources explicitly rather than listing them one after another.
- 두 연구는 주거비 부담이 이주 결정에 영향을 미친다는 점에서 공통된 입장을 보인다.The two studies show a shared position in that housing cost burden affects relocation decisions.공통된 입장 + 는 점에서, comparative synthesis
- 그러나 두 연구는 그 영향의 크기에 대해서는 차이를 보인다.However, the two studies differ regarding the size of that effect.차이를 보이다, contrastive synthesis
Attribution (~에 따르면, ~라고 주장하다) reports what a source says. Critique (~는 한계가 있다, ~에 의문이 제기되다) evaluates that claim. Do not blend the two into a single unmarked sentence, or a reader cannot tell whether a limitation belongs to the source or to the writer's own judgment. Keep the source's claim and the writer's evaluation in separate, clearly marked clauses or sentences.
Error: 주거비 상승은 청년층의 이주를 가속화한다. (stated as plain fact, with no attribution, when this is actually one study's claim)
Correction: 한 연구에 따르면, 주거비 상승은 청년층의 이주를 가속화한다. Always attribute a specific claim to its source using ~에 따르면 or a reported-claim verb, unless the point is genuinely established and uncontested.
Model Exchange: Advisor and Graduate Student
지도 교수와 대학원생 수아의 연구 상담 (교육용 예시)
Reading: A Short Literature Review Excerpt
Read the following short literature-review-style passage, written for this course as general-purpose instructional material. No real researcher, study, or institution is named.
발췌 — 청년층 주거 이동에 관한 선행 연구 검토 (교육용 예시)
한 연구에 따르면, 주거비 상승은 청년층의 지역 이탈을 가속화하는 주요 요인으로 나타났다. 해당 연구는 설문 조사를 통해 세 개 도시의 청년층 표본으로부터 자료를 수집했다. 그러나 이 연구는 표본이 특정 지역에 한정되어 있다는 한계가 있어, 결과를 전국적으로 일반화하기는 어렵다는 지적이 있다. 한편 다른 연구자들은 사례 연구 방법을 사용하여 유사한 결론에 도달했다고 주장하지만, 표본 크기가 작아 통계적 타당성에 의문이 제기된다. 두 연구는 주거비 부담이 청년층의 이주 결정에 영향을 미친다는 점에서 공통된 입장을 보인다. 다만 첫 번째 연구는 경제적 요인을 강조하는 반면, 두 번째 연구는 사회적 관계망의 상실 또한 중요한 요인이라고 지적한다는 점에서 차이를 보인다.
분석 과제 — Analysis task:
- Identify the specific claim attributed to the first study, and the method it used.
- Identify the limitation named for the first study.
- Identify the method used by the second set of researchers, and the concern raised about it.
- Identify one point of agreement and one point of difference between the two studies.
- Write one original sentence using ~에 따르면 to attribute a fictional claim to a fictional study of your choosing.
Listening Practice: A Research Consultation
Ask your instructor, a language partner, or a text-to-speech tool to read the Model Exchange dialogue above aloud. Then answer the following questions.
| 질문 | 답 |
|---|---|
| What claim does 수아 attribute to the first study, and what attribution phrase does she use? | ______ |
| What limitation does 수아 identify in the first study's method? | ______ |
| According to 수아, what is the shared point between the two studies, and what is the point of difference? | ______ |
Speaking Practice
1단계 — 선행 연구 소개하기 — Introducing a study aloud
Choose a fictional research topic. Describe, in two to three sentences, the study's research question and method, using vocabulary from this chapter.
2단계 — 비평하기 — Critiquing a method aloud
With a partner, take turns describing a fictional study and identifying one specific limitation in its method, using ~는 한계가 있다 or a related frame. Your partner should ask one follow-up question about why that limitation matters.
혼자 하는 연습 — Solo alternative
Record yourself describing two fictional studies on the same topic, attributing a claim to each, identifying one limitation for each, and closing with one sentence of synthesis comparing them.
Writing Workshop: A Short Literature Review and Critique
Choose a fictional research topic, either the youth housing-mobility topic used in this chapter or a comparable fictional topic of your own choosing.
체크리스트 — Checklist:
- Both studies are introduced with a research question and method.
- Every claim is attributed to its specific fictional source, not stated as plain fact.
- Each critique names a specific limitation, not a vague negative judgment.
- The closing synthesis compares the two studies explicitly, naming both a similarity and a difference.
- No real researcher, study, journal, or institution is named.
- Hangeul, spacing, and particle use are accurate, with no romanization.
- No structure appears beyond what is active through Volume V, Chapter 10, plus this chapter's two new systems.
Culture and Communication
South Korean academic writing generally favors measured, evidence-based critique over sweeping or personal criticism of other researchers' work. A limitation is typically framed as a property of the study's method or scope — for example, a small sample or a narrow region — rather than as a judgment about the researcher's competence or intent.
Graduate research consultations, as modeled in this chapter's dialogue, commonly proceed through a cycle of question, attributed evidence, and critique, with the advisor prompting the student to identify limitations rather than simply accept a source's claim. Learners producing literature reviews should expect this same expectation of critical, not merely descriptive, engagement with prior research.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
Error: 이 연구는 좋지 않다. (a bare negative judgment with no specific limitation)
Correction: 이 연구는 표본 크기가 작다는 한계가 있다. Name a specific, verifiable limitation rather than offering an unsupported general judgment.
Error: Writing "Study A found X. Study B found Y." with no explicit statement of whether X and Y agree, disagree, or partially overlap.
Correction: Use explicit comparison language such as 공통된 입장을 보인다 or 차이를 보인다 to state the relationship between the sources directly.
Error: Using 라고 주장하다 for a well-established, uncontested finding, which can unintentionally suggest the claim is disputed.
Correction: Reserve 라고 주장하다 for claims the source is actively arguing for, and use a more neutral attribution such as 에 따르면 for straightforward reporting of findings.
Chapter Review
Section A — 어휘 (Vocabulary)
1. Using the Core Vocabulary table, write one original sentence describing a fictional study's research question and method.
Section B — 읽기 (Reading)
1. Complete the five analysis questions from the reading section above.
Section C — 듣기 (Listening)
1. Complete the listening task questions above.
Section D — 쓰기 (Writing)
1. Complete the five-step writing workshop and checklist.
Section E — 말하기 (Speaking)
1. Complete both speaking tiers, either with a partner or using the solo alternative.
누적 복습 — Cumulative review
This chapter recycles register discipline, section-opening framing, transition connectors, and synthesis language from Chapter 10, and introduces literature-review attribution and measured critique as the foundation for Unit III's academic and analytical work in Chapters 12 through 15.
Practical Performance Task
수행 과제 — Chapter 11 Performance Task
선행 연구 검토 작성 — Producing a Short Literature Review and Critique
Select a fictional research topic, either the youth housing-mobility topic used throughout this chapter or a comparable fictional topic of your own choosing. Produce a complete project with two parts.
- Written literature review (Korean): A short passage (approximately 120–180 words) introducing two fictional studies, attributing a specific claim to each, identifying a specific limitation for each, and closing with a synthesis sentence comparing the two studies.
- Oral summary: A 2–3 sentence spoken summary of your literature review, delivered aloud or recorded.
| Criterion | What is evaluated |
|---|---|
| Study description | Each fictional study includes a clear research question and method |
| Attribution accuracy | Every claim is attributed to its specific source using an attribution frame, not stated as plain fact |
| Critique specificity | Each critique names a concrete, verifiable limitation rather than a vague judgment |
| Synthesis quality | The closing sentence(s) explicitly compare the two studies' agreement and difference |
| Content appropriateness | No real researcher, study, journal, or institution is named or characterized |
| Hangeul and spacing accuracy | Accurate spelling and level-appropriate spacing throughout, no romanization |
Answer Key
Reading analysis
- Sample response: The first study claims that rising housing costs accelerate young people's departure from a region; it used a survey to collect data from a youth sample in three cities.
- Sample response: The first study's limitation is that its sample is confined to a specific region, making national generalization difficult.
- Sample response: The second set of researchers used a case-study method; the concern raised is that their small sample size calls statistical validity into question.
- Sample response: Both studies agree that housing cost burden affects relocation decisions; they differ in that the first emphasizes economic factors while the second also emphasizes the loss of social networks.
- Sample response: 한 연구에 따르면, 원격 근무의 확산은 청년층의 대도시 집중을 완화하는 데 기여했다.
Listening comprehension
- Sample response: 수아 attributes the claim that rising housing costs greatly affect young people's relocation decisions to "한 연구," using the phrase 에 따르면.
- Sample response: The limitation she identifies is that the survey's sample was limited to a specific region, raising questions about validity.
- Sample response: The shared point is that housing cost burden affects relocation in both studies; the difference is in the size of that effect.
Section D — Sample literature review (abridged)
한 연구에 따르면, 주거비 상승은 청년층의 지역 이탈을 가속화한다. 이 연구는 설문 조사를 통해 자료를 수집했으나, 표본이 특정 지역에 한정되어 있다는 한계가 있다. 다른 연구자들은 사례 연구 방법을 사용하여 유사한 결론에 도달했다고 주장하지만, 표본 크기가 작아 타당성에 의문이 제기된다. 두 연구는 주거비 부담이 이주에 영향을 미친다는 점에서 공통된 입장을 보이지만, 그 영향의 크기에 대해서는 차이를 보인다.
Section E — Sample discussion
Sample response: A well-constructed literature review attributes every claim to its specific fictional source, names a concrete limitation for each study rather than a vague judgment, and closes by explicitly comparing the studies' points of agreement and difference rather than simply listing their findings side by side.
Looking Ahead
지금 할 수 있는 것 — What you can do now
You can describe a research question and method, attribute a specific claim to its source, formulate a measured and evidence-based critique of a study's limitation, and synthesize two or more sources by naming their points of agreement and difference.