where to find the methodology in research paper

• Interlibrary Loan and Scan & Deliver
• Course Reserves
• Purchase Request
• Collection Development & Maintenance
• Current Negotiations
• Ask a Librarian
• Instructor Support
• Library How-To
• Research Guides
• Research Support
• Study Rooms
• Research Rooms
• Partner Spaces
• Loanable Equipment
• Print, Scan, Copy
• 3D Printers
• Poster Printing
• OSULP Leadership
• Strategic Plan

Scholarly Articles: How can I tell?

• Journal Information
• Literature Review
• Author and affiliation
• Introduction
• Specialized Vocabulary

Methodology

• Research sponsors
• Peer-review

The methodology section or methods section tells you how the author(s) went about doing their research. It should let you know a) what method they used to gather data (survey, interviews, experiments, etc.), why they chose this method, and what the limitations are to this method.

The methodology section should be detailed enough that another researcher could replicate the study described. When you read the methodology or methods section:

• What kind of research method did the authors use? Is it an appropriate method for the type of study they are conducting?
• How did the authors get their tests subjects? What criteria did they use?
• What are the contexts of the study that may have affected the results (e.g. environmental conditions, lab conditions, timing questions, etc.)
• Is the sample size representative of the larger population (i.e., was it big enough?)
• Are the data collection instruments and procedures likely to have measured all the important characteristics with reasonable accuracy?
• Does the data analysis appear to have been done with care, and were appropriate analytical techniques used? 

A good researcher will always let you know about the limitations of his or her research.

• << Previous: Specialized Vocabulary
• Next: Results >>
• Last Updated: Apr 15, 2024 3:26 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.oregonstate.edu/ScholarlyArticle

Contact Info

121 The Valley Library Corvallis OR 97331–4501

Phone: 541-737-3331

Services for Persons with Disabilities

In the Valley Library

• Oregon State University Press
• Special Collections and Archives Research Center
• Undergrad Research & Writing Studio
• Graduate Student Commons
• Tutoring Services
• Northwest Art Collection

Digital Projects

• Oregon Explorer
• Oregon Digital
• ScholarsArchive@OSU
• Digital Publishing Initiatives
• Atlas of the Pacific Northwest
• Marilyn Potts Guin Library  
• Cascades Campus Library
• McDowell Library of Vet Medicine

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Methodology – Types, Examples and writing Guide

Research Methodology – Types, Examples and writing Guide

Table of Contents

Research Methodology

Definition:

Research Methodology refers to the systematic and scientific approach used to conduct research, investigate problems, and gather data and information for a specific purpose. It involves the techniques and procedures used to identify, collect , analyze , and interpret data to answer research questions or solve research problems . Moreover, They are philosophical and theoretical frameworks that guide the research process.

Structure of Research Methodology

Research methodology formats can vary depending on the specific requirements of the research project, but the following is a basic example of a structure for a research methodology section:

I. Introduction

• Provide an overview of the research problem and the need for a research methodology section
• Outline the main research questions and objectives

II. Research Design

• Explain the research design chosen and why it is appropriate for the research question(s) and objectives
• Discuss any alternative research designs considered and why they were not chosen
• Describe the research setting and participants (if applicable)

III. Data Collection Methods

• Describe the methods used to collect data (e.g., surveys, interviews, observations)
• Explain how the data collection methods were chosen and why they are appropriate for the research question(s) and objectives
• Detail any procedures or instruments used for data collection

IV. Data Analysis Methods

• Describe the methods used to analyze the data (e.g., statistical analysis, content analysis )
• Explain how the data analysis methods were chosen and why they are appropriate for the research question(s) and objectives
• Detail any procedures or software used for data analysis

V. Ethical Considerations

• Discuss any ethical issues that may arise from the research and how they were addressed
• Explain how informed consent was obtained (if applicable)
• Detail any measures taken to ensure confidentiality and anonymity

VI. Limitations

• Identify any potential limitations of the research methodology and how they may impact the results and conclusions

VII. Conclusion

• Summarize the key aspects of the research methodology section
• Explain how the research methodology addresses the research question(s) and objectives

Research Methodology Types

Types of Research Methodology are as follows:

Quantitative Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the collection and analysis of numerical data using statistical methods. This type of research is often used to study cause-and-effect relationships and to make predictions.

Qualitative Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the collection and analysis of non-numerical data such as words, images, and observations. This type of research is often used to explore complex phenomena, to gain an in-depth understanding of a particular topic, and to generate hypotheses.

Mixed-Methods Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that combines elements of both quantitative and qualitative research. This approach can be particularly useful for studies that aim to explore complex phenomena and to provide a more comprehensive understanding of a particular topic.

Case Study Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves in-depth examination of a single case or a small number of cases. Case studies are often used in psychology, sociology, and anthropology to gain a detailed understanding of a particular individual or group.

Action Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves a collaborative process between researchers and practitioners to identify and solve real-world problems. Action research is often used in education, healthcare, and social work.

Experimental Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the manipulation of one or more independent variables to observe their effects on a dependent variable. Experimental research is often used to study cause-and-effect relationships and to make predictions.

Survey Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the collection of data from a sample of individuals using questionnaires or interviews. Survey research is often used to study attitudes, opinions, and behaviors.

Grounded Theory Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the development of theories based on the data collected during the research process. Grounded theory is often used in sociology and anthropology to generate theories about social phenomena.

Research Methodology Example

An Example of Research Methodology could be the following:

Research Methodology for Investigating the Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in Reducing Symptoms of Depression in Adults

Introduction:

The aim of this research is to investigate the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) in reducing symptoms of depression in adults. To achieve this objective, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted using a mixed-methods approach.

Research Design:

The study will follow a pre-test and post-test design with two groups: an experimental group receiving CBT and a control group receiving no intervention. The study will also include a qualitative component, in which semi-structured interviews will be conducted with a subset of participants to explore their experiences of receiving CBT.

Participants:

Participants will be recruited from community mental health clinics in the local area. The sample will consist of 100 adults aged 18-65 years old who meet the diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder. Participants will be randomly assigned to either the experimental group or the control group.

Intervention :

The experimental group will receive 12 weekly sessions of CBT, each lasting 60 minutes. The intervention will be delivered by licensed mental health professionals who have been trained in CBT. The control group will receive no intervention during the study period.

Data Collection:

Quantitative data will be collected through the use of standardized measures such as the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7). Data will be collected at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and at a 3-month follow-up. Qualitative data will be collected through semi-structured interviews with a subset of participants from the experimental group. The interviews will be conducted at the end of the intervention period, and will explore participants’ experiences of receiving CBT.

Data Analysis:

Quantitative data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics, t-tests, and mixed-model analyses of variance (ANOVA) to assess the effectiveness of the intervention. Qualitative data will be analyzed using thematic analysis to identify common themes and patterns in participants’ experiences of receiving CBT.

Ethical Considerations:

This study will comply with ethical guidelines for research involving human subjects. Participants will provide informed consent before participating in the study, and their privacy and confidentiality will be protected throughout the study. Any adverse events or reactions will be reported and managed appropriately.

Data Management:

All data collected will be kept confidential and stored securely using password-protected databases. Identifying information will be removed from qualitative data transcripts to ensure participants’ anonymity.

Limitations:

One potential limitation of this study is that it only focuses on one type of psychotherapy, CBT, and may not generalize to other types of therapy or interventions. Another limitation is that the study will only include participants from community mental health clinics, which may not be representative of the general population.

Conclusion:

This research aims to investigate the effectiveness of CBT in reducing symptoms of depression in adults. By using a randomized controlled trial and a mixed-methods approach, the study will provide valuable insights into the mechanisms underlying the relationship between CBT and depression. The results of this study will have important implications for the development of effective treatments for depression in clinical settings.

How to Write Research Methodology

Writing a research methodology involves explaining the methods and techniques you used to conduct research, collect data, and analyze results. It’s an essential section of any research paper or thesis, as it helps readers understand the validity and reliability of your findings. Here are the steps to write a research methodology:

• Start by explaining your research question: Begin the methodology section by restating your research question and explaining why it’s important. This helps readers understand the purpose of your research and the rationale behind your methods.
• Describe your research design: Explain the overall approach you used to conduct research. This could be a qualitative or quantitative research design, experimental or non-experimental, case study or survey, etc. Discuss the advantages and limitations of the chosen design.
• Discuss your sample: Describe the participants or subjects you included in your study. Include details such as their demographics, sampling method, sample size, and any exclusion criteria used.
• Describe your data collection methods : Explain how you collected data from your participants. This could include surveys, interviews, observations, questionnaires, or experiments. Include details on how you obtained informed consent, how you administered the tools, and how you minimized the risk of bias.
• Explain your data analysis techniques: Describe the methods you used to analyze the data you collected. This could include statistical analysis, content analysis, thematic analysis, or discourse analysis. Explain how you dealt with missing data, outliers, and any other issues that arose during the analysis.
• Discuss the validity and reliability of your research : Explain how you ensured the validity and reliability of your study. This could include measures such as triangulation, member checking, peer review, or inter-coder reliability.
• Acknowledge any limitations of your research: Discuss any limitations of your study, including any potential threats to validity or generalizability. This helps readers understand the scope of your findings and how they might apply to other contexts.
• Provide a summary: End the methodology section by summarizing the methods and techniques you used to conduct your research. This provides a clear overview of your research methodology and helps readers understand the process you followed to arrive at your findings.

When to Write Research Methodology

Research methodology is typically written after the research proposal has been approved and before the actual research is conducted. It should be written prior to data collection and analysis, as it provides a clear roadmap for the research project.

The research methodology is an important section of any research paper or thesis, as it describes the methods and procedures that will be used to conduct the research. It should include details about the research design, data collection methods, data analysis techniques, and any ethical considerations.

The methodology should be written in a clear and concise manner, and it should be based on established research practices and standards. It is important to provide enough detail so that the reader can understand how the research was conducted and evaluate the validity of the results.

Applications of Research Methodology

Here are some of the applications of research methodology:

• To identify the research problem: Research methodology is used to identify the research problem, which is the first step in conducting any research.
• To design the research: Research methodology helps in designing the research by selecting the appropriate research method, research design, and sampling technique.
• To collect data: Research methodology provides a systematic approach to collect data from primary and secondary sources.
• To analyze data: Research methodology helps in analyzing the collected data using various statistical and non-statistical techniques.
• To test hypotheses: Research methodology provides a framework for testing hypotheses and drawing conclusions based on the analysis of data.
• To generalize findings: Research methodology helps in generalizing the findings of the research to the target population.
• To develop theories : Research methodology is used to develop new theories and modify existing theories based on the findings of the research.
• To evaluate programs and policies : Research methodology is used to evaluate the effectiveness of programs and policies by collecting data and analyzing it.
• To improve decision-making: Research methodology helps in making informed decisions by providing reliable and valid data.

Purpose of Research Methodology

Research methodology serves several important purposes, including:

• To guide the research process: Research methodology provides a systematic framework for conducting research. It helps researchers to plan their research, define their research questions, and select appropriate methods and techniques for collecting and analyzing data.
• To ensure research quality: Research methodology helps researchers to ensure that their research is rigorous, reliable, and valid. It provides guidelines for minimizing bias and error in data collection and analysis, and for ensuring that research findings are accurate and trustworthy.
• To replicate research: Research methodology provides a clear and detailed account of the research process, making it possible for other researchers to replicate the study and verify its findings.
• To advance knowledge: Research methodology enables researchers to generate new knowledge and to contribute to the body of knowledge in their field. It provides a means for testing hypotheses, exploring new ideas, and discovering new insights.
• To inform decision-making: Research methodology provides evidence-based information that can inform policy and decision-making in a variety of fields, including medicine, public health, education, and business.

Advantages of Research Methodology

Research methodology has several advantages that make it a valuable tool for conducting research in various fields. Here are some of the key advantages of research methodology:

• Systematic and structured approach : Research methodology provides a systematic and structured approach to conducting research, which ensures that the research is conducted in a rigorous and comprehensive manner.
• Objectivity : Research methodology aims to ensure objectivity in the research process, which means that the research findings are based on evidence and not influenced by personal bias or subjective opinions.
• Replicability : Research methodology ensures that research can be replicated by other researchers, which is essential for validating research findings and ensuring their accuracy.
• Reliability : Research methodology aims to ensure that the research findings are reliable, which means that they are consistent and can be depended upon.
• Validity : Research methodology ensures that the research findings are valid, which means that they accurately reflect the research question or hypothesis being tested.
• Efficiency : Research methodology provides a structured and efficient way of conducting research, which helps to save time and resources.
• Flexibility : Research methodology allows researchers to choose the most appropriate research methods and techniques based on the research question, data availability, and other relevant factors.
• Scope for innovation: Research methodology provides scope for innovation and creativity in designing research studies and developing new research techniques.

Research Methodology Vs Research Methods

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

APA Table of Contents – Format and Example

Literature Review – Types Writing Guide and...

Assignment – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Dissertation Methodology – Structure, Example...

How to Cite Research Paper – All Formats and...

Informed Consent in Research – Types, Templates...

• How it works

Published by Nicolas at March 21st, 2024 , Revised On March 12, 2024

The Ultimate Guide To Research Methodology

Research methodology is a crucial aspect of any investigative process, serving as the blueprint for the entire research journey. If you are stuck in the methodology section of your research paper , then this blog will guide you on what is a research methodology, its types and how to successfully conduct one. 

Table of Contents

What Is Research Methodology?

Research methodology can be defined as the systematic framework that guides researchers in designing, conducting, and analyzing their investigations. It encompasses a structured set of processes, techniques, and tools employed to gather and interpret data, ensuring the reliability and validity of the research findings. 

Research methodology is not confined to a singular approach; rather, it encapsulates a diverse range of methods tailored to the specific requirements of the research objectives.

Here is why Research methodology is important in academic and professional settings.

Facilitating Rigorous Inquiry

Research methodology forms the backbone of rigorous inquiry. It provides a structured approach that aids researchers in formulating precise thesis statements , selecting appropriate methodologies, and executing systematic investigations. This, in turn, enhances the quality and credibility of the research outcomes.

Ensuring Reproducibility And Reliability

In both academic and professional contexts, the ability to reproduce research outcomes is paramount. A well-defined research methodology establishes clear procedures, making it possible for others to replicate the study. This not only validates the findings but also contributes to the cumulative nature of knowledge.

Guiding Decision-Making Processes

In professional settings, decisions often hinge on reliable data and insights. Research methodology equips professionals with the tools to gather pertinent information, analyze it rigorously, and derive meaningful conclusions.

This informed decision-making is instrumental in achieving organizational goals and staying ahead in competitive environments.

Contributing To Academic Excellence

For academic researchers, adherence to robust research methodology is a hallmark of excellence. Institutions value research that adheres to high standards of methodology, fostering a culture of academic rigour and intellectual integrity. Furthermore, it prepares students with critical skills applicable beyond academia.

Enhancing Problem-Solving Abilities

Research methodology instills a problem-solving mindset by encouraging researchers to approach challenges systematically. It equips individuals with the skills to dissect complex issues, formulate hypotheses , and devise effective strategies for investigation.

Understanding Research Methodology

In the pursuit of knowledge and discovery, understanding the fundamentals of research methodology is paramount. 

Basics Of Research

Research, in its essence, is a systematic and organized process of inquiry aimed at expanding our understanding of a particular subject or phenomenon. It involves the exploration of existing knowledge, the formulation of hypotheses, and the collection and analysis of data to draw meaningful conclusions. 

Research is a dynamic and iterative process that contributes to the continuous evolution of knowledge in various disciplines.

Types of Research

Research takes on various forms, each tailored to the nature of the inquiry. Broadly classified, research can be categorized into two main types:

• Quantitative Research: This type involves the collection and analysis of numerical data to identify patterns, relationships, and statistical significance. It is particularly useful for testing hypotheses and making predictions.
• Qualitative Research: Qualitative research focuses on understanding the depth and details of a phenomenon through non-numerical data. It often involves methods such as interviews, focus groups, and content analysis, providing rich insights into complex issues.

Components Of Research Methodology

To conduct effective research, one must go through the different components of research methodology. These components form the scaffolding that supports the entire research process, ensuring its coherence and validity.

Research Design

Research design serves as the blueprint for the entire research project. It outlines the overall structure and strategy for conducting the study. The three primary types of research design are:

• Exploratory Research: Aimed at gaining insights and familiarity with the topic, often used in the early stages of research.
• Descriptive Research: Involves portraying an accurate profile of a situation or phenomenon, answering the ‘what,’ ‘who,’ ‘where,’ and ‘when’ questions.
• Explanatory Research: Seeks to identify the causes and effects of a phenomenon, explaining the ‘why’ and ‘how.’

Data Collection Methods

Choosing the right data collection methods is crucial for obtaining reliable and relevant information. Common methods include:

• Surveys and Questionnaires: Employed to gather information from a large number of respondents through standardized questions.
• Interviews: In-depth conversations with participants, offering qualitative insights.
• Observation: Systematic watching and recording of behaviour, events, or processes in their natural setting.

Data Analysis Techniques

Once data is collected, analysis becomes imperative to derive meaningful conclusions. Different methodologies exist for quantitative and qualitative data:

• Quantitative Data Analysis: Involves statistical techniques such as descriptive statistics, inferential statistics, and regression analysis to interpret numerical data.
• Qualitative Data Analysis: Methods like content analysis, thematic analysis, and grounded theory are employed to extract patterns, themes, and meanings from non-numerical data.

The research paper we write have:

• Precision and Clarity
• Zero Plagiarism
• High-level Encryption
• Authentic Sources

Choosing a Research Method

Selecting an appropriate research method is a critical decision in the research process. It determines the approach, tools, and techniques that will be used to answer the research questions. 

Quantitative Research Methods

Quantitative research involves the collection and analysis of numerical data, providing a structured and objective approach to understanding and explaining phenomena.

Experimental Research

Experimental research involves manipulating variables to observe the effect on another variable under controlled conditions. It aims to establish cause-and-effect relationships.

Key Characteristics:

• Controlled Environment: Experiments are conducted in a controlled setting to minimize external influences.
• Random Assignment: Participants are randomly assigned to different experimental conditions.
• Quantitative Data: Data collected is numerical, allowing for statistical analysis.

Applications: Commonly used in scientific studies and psychology to test hypotheses and identify causal relationships.

Survey Research

Survey research gathers information from a sample of individuals through standardized questionnaires or interviews. It aims to collect data on opinions, attitudes, and behaviours.

• Structured Instruments: Surveys use structured instruments, such as questionnaires, to collect data.
• Large Sample Size: Surveys often target a large and diverse group of participants.
• Quantitative Data Analysis: Responses are quantified for statistical analysis.

Applications: Widely employed in social sciences, marketing, and public opinion research to understand trends and preferences.

Descriptive Research

Descriptive research seeks to portray an accurate profile of a situation or phenomenon. It focuses on answering the ‘what,’ ‘who,’ ‘where,’ and ‘when’ questions.

• Observation and Data Collection: This involves observing and documenting without manipulating variables.
• Objective Description: Aim to provide an unbiased and factual account of the subject.
• Quantitative or Qualitative Data: T his can include both types of data, depending on the research focus.

Applications: Useful in situations where researchers want to understand and describe a phenomenon without altering it, common in social sciences and education.

Qualitative Research Methods

Qualitative research emphasizes exploring and understanding the depth and complexity of phenomena through non-numerical data.

A case study is an in-depth exploration of a particular person, group, event, or situation. It involves detailed, context-rich analysis.

• Rich Data Collection: Uses various data sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents.
• Contextual Understanding: Aims to understand the context and unique characteristics of the case.
• Holistic Approach: Examines the case in its entirety.

Applications: Common in social sciences, psychology, and business to investigate complex and specific instances.

Ethnography

Ethnography involves immersing the researcher in the culture or community being studied to gain a deep understanding of their behaviours, beliefs, and practices.

• Participant Observation: Researchers actively participate in the community or setting.
• Holistic Perspective: Focuses on the interconnectedness of cultural elements.
• Qualitative Data: In-depth narratives and descriptions are central to ethnographic studies.

Applications: Widely used in anthropology, sociology, and cultural studies to explore and document cultural practices.

Grounded Theory

Grounded theory aims to develop theories grounded in the data itself. It involves systematic data collection and analysis to construct theories from the ground up.

• Constant Comparison: Data is continually compared and analyzed during the research process.
• Inductive Reasoning: Theories emerge from the data rather than being imposed on it.
• Iterative Process: The research design evolves as the study progresses.

Applications: Commonly applied in sociology, nursing, and management studies to generate theories from empirical data.

Research design is the structural framework that outlines the systematic process and plan for conducting a study. It serves as the blueprint, guiding researchers on how to collect, analyze, and interpret data.

Exploratory, Descriptive, And Explanatory Designs

Exploratory design.

Exploratory research design is employed when a researcher aims to explore a relatively unknown subject or gain insights into a complex phenomenon.

• Flexibility: Allows for flexibility in data collection and analysis.
• Open-Ended Questions: Uses open-ended questions to gather a broad range of information.
• Preliminary Nature: Often used in the initial stages of research to formulate hypotheses.

Applications: Valuable in the early stages of investigation, especially when the researcher seeks a deeper understanding of a subject before formalizing research questions.

Descriptive Design

Descriptive research design focuses on portraying an accurate profile of a situation, group, or phenomenon.

• Structured Data Collection: Involves systematic and structured data collection methods.
• Objective Presentation: Aims to provide an unbiased and factual account of the subject.
• Quantitative or Qualitative Data: Can incorporate both types of data, depending on the research objectives.

Applications: Widely used in social sciences, marketing, and educational research to provide detailed and objective descriptions.

Explanatory Design

Explanatory research design aims to identify the causes and effects of a phenomenon, explaining the ‘why’ and ‘how’ behind observed relationships.

• Causal Relationships: Seeks to establish causal relationships between variables.
• Controlled Variables : Often involves controlling certain variables to isolate causal factors.
• Quantitative Analysis: Primarily relies on quantitative data analysis techniques.

Applications: Commonly employed in scientific studies and social sciences to delve into the underlying reasons behind observed patterns.

Cross-Sectional Vs. Longitudinal Designs

Cross-sectional design.

Cross-sectional designs collect data from participants at a single point in time.

• Snapshot View: Provides a snapshot of a population at a specific moment.
• Efficiency: More efficient in terms of time and resources.
• Limited Temporal Insights: Offers limited insights into changes over time.

Applications: Suitable for studying characteristics or behaviours that are stable or not expected to change rapidly.

Longitudinal Design

Longitudinal designs involve the collection of data from the same participants over an extended period.

• Temporal Sequence: Allows for the examination of changes over time.
• Causality Assessment: Facilitates the assessment of cause-and-effect relationships.
• Resource-Intensive: Requires more time and resources compared to cross-sectional designs.

Applications: Ideal for studying developmental processes, trends, or the impact of interventions over time.

Experimental Vs Non-experimental Designs

Experimental design.

Experimental designs involve manipulating variables under controlled conditions to observe the effect on another variable.

• Causality Inference: Enables the inference of cause-and-effect relationships.
• Quantitative Data: Primarily involves the collection and analysis of numerical data.

Applications: Commonly used in scientific studies, psychology, and medical research to establish causal relationships.

Non-Experimental Design

Non-experimental designs observe and describe phenomena without manipulating variables.

• Natural Settings: Data is often collected in natural settings without intervention.
• Descriptive or Correlational: Focuses on describing relationships or correlations between variables.
• Quantitative or Qualitative Data: This can involve either type of data, depending on the research approach.

Applications: Suitable for studying complex phenomena in real-world settings where manipulation may not be ethical or feasible.

Effective data collection is fundamental to the success of any research endeavour. 

Designing Effective Surveys

Objective Design:

• Clearly define the research objectives to guide the survey design.
• Craft questions that align with the study’s goals and avoid ambiguity.

Structured Format:

• Use a structured format with standardized questions for consistency.
• Include a mix of closed-ended and open-ended questions for detailed insights.

Pilot Testing:

• Conduct pilot tests to identify and rectify potential issues with survey design.
• Ensure clarity, relevance, and appropriateness of questions.

Sampling Strategy:

• Develop a robust sampling strategy to ensure a representative participant group.
• Consider random sampling or stratified sampling based on the research goals.

Conducting Interviews

Establishing Rapport:

• Build rapport with participants to create a comfortable and open environment.
• Clearly communicate the purpose of the interview and the value of participants’ input.

Open-Ended Questions:

• Frame open-ended questions to encourage detailed responses.
• Allow participants to express their thoughts and perspectives freely.

Active Listening:

• Practice active listening to understand areas and gather rich data.
• Avoid interrupting and maintain a non-judgmental stance during the interview.

Ethical Considerations:

• Obtain informed consent and assure participants of confidentiality.
• Be transparent about the study’s purpose and potential implications.

Observation

1. participant observation.

Immersive Participation:

• Actively immerse yourself in the setting or group being observed.
• Develop a deep understanding of behaviours, interactions, and context.

Field Notes:

• Maintain detailed and reflective field notes during observations.
• Document observed patterns, unexpected events, and participant reactions.

Ethical Awareness:

• Be conscious of ethical considerations, ensuring respect for participants.
• Balance the role of observer and participant to minimize bias.

2. Non-participant Observation

Objective Observation:

• Maintain a more detached and objective stance during non-participant observation.
• Focus on recording behaviours, events, and patterns without direct involvement.

Data Reliability:

• Enhance the reliability of data by reducing observer bias.
• Develop clear observation protocols and guidelines.

Contextual Understanding:

• Strive for a thorough understanding of the observed context.
• Consider combining non-participant observation with other methods for triangulation.

Archival Research

1. using existing data.

Identifying Relevant Archives:

• Locate and access archives relevant to the research topic.
• Collaborate with institutions or repositories holding valuable data.

Data Verification:

• Verify the accuracy and reliability of archived data.
• Cross-reference with other sources to ensure data integrity.

Ethical Use:

• Adhere to ethical guidelines when using existing data.
• Respect copyright and intellectual property rights.

2. Challenges and Considerations

Incomplete or Inaccurate Archives:

• Address the possibility of incomplete or inaccurate archival records.
• Acknowledge limitations and uncertainties in the data.

Temporal Bias:

• Recognize potential temporal biases in archived data.
• Consider the historical context and changes that may impact interpretation.

Access Limitations:

• Address potential limitations in accessing certain archives.
• Seek alternative sources or collaborate with institutions to overcome barriers.

Common Challenges in Research Methodology

Conducting research is a complex and dynamic process, often accompanied by a myriad of challenges. Addressing these challenges is crucial to ensure the reliability and validity of research findings.

Sampling Issues

Sampling bias:.

• The presence of sampling bias can lead to an unrepresentative sample, affecting the generalizability of findings.
• Employ random sampling methods and ensure the inclusion of diverse participants to reduce bias.

Sample Size Determination:

• Determining an appropriate sample size is a delicate balance. Too small a sample may lack statistical power, while an excessively large sample may strain resources.
• Conduct a power analysis to determine the optimal sample size based on the research objectives and expected effect size.

Data Quality And Validity

Measurement error:.

• Inaccuracies in measurement tools or data collection methods can introduce measurement errors, impacting the validity of results.
• Pilot test instruments, calibrate equipment, and use standardized measures to enhance the reliability of data.

Construct Validity:

• Ensuring that the chosen measures accurately capture the intended constructs is a persistent challenge.
• Use established measurement instruments and employ multiple measures to assess the same construct for triangulation.

Time And Resource Constraints

Timeline pressures:.

• Limited timeframes can compromise the depth and thoroughness of the research process.
• Develop a realistic timeline, prioritize tasks, and communicate expectations with stakeholders to manage time constraints effectively.

Resource Availability:

• Inadequate resources, whether financial or human, can impede the execution of research activities.
• Seek external funding, collaborate with other researchers, and explore alternative methods that require fewer resources.

Managing Bias in Research

Selection bias:.

• Selecting participants in a way that systematically skews the sample can introduce selection bias.
• Employ randomization techniques, use stratified sampling, and transparently report participant recruitment methods.

Confirmation Bias:

• Researchers may unintentionally favour information that confirms their preconceived beliefs or hypotheses.
• Adopt a systematic and open-minded approach, use blinded study designs, and engage in peer review to mitigate confirmation bias.

Tips On How To Write A Research Methodology

Conducting successful research relies not only on the application of sound methodologies but also on strategic planning and effective collaboration. Here are some tips to enhance the success of your research methodology:

Tip 1. Clear Research Objectives

Well-defined research objectives guide the entire research process. Clearly articulate the purpose of your study, outlining specific research questions or hypotheses.

Tip 2. Comprehensive Literature Review

A thorough literature review provides a foundation for understanding existing knowledge and identifying gaps. Invest time in reviewing relevant literature to inform your research design and methodology.

Tip 3. Detailed Research Plan

A detailed plan serves as a roadmap, ensuring all aspects of the research are systematically addressed. Develop a detailed research plan outlining timelines, milestones, and tasks.

Tip 4. Ethical Considerations

Ethical practices are fundamental to maintaining the integrity of research. Address ethical considerations early, obtain necessary approvals, and ensure participant rights are safeguarded.

Tip 5. Stay Updated On Methodologies

Research methodologies evolve, and staying updated is essential for employing the most effective techniques. Engage in continuous learning by attending workshops, conferences, and reading recent publications.

Tip 6. Adaptability In Methods

Unforeseen challenges may arise during research, necessitating adaptability in methods. Be flexible and willing to modify your approach when needed, ensuring the integrity of the study.

Tip 7. Iterative Approach

Research is often an iterative process, and refining methods based on ongoing findings enhance the study’s robustness. Regularly review and refine your research design and methods as the study progresses.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the research methodology.

Research methodology is the systematic process of planning, executing, and evaluating scientific investigation. It encompasses the techniques, tools, and procedures used to collect, analyze, and interpret data, ensuring the reliability and validity of research findings.

What are the methodologies in research?

Research methodologies include qualitative and quantitative approaches. Qualitative methods involve in-depth exploration of non-numerical data, while quantitative methods use statistical analysis to examine numerical data. Mixed methods combine both approaches for a comprehensive understanding of research questions.

How to write research methodology?

To write a research methodology, clearly outline the study’s design, data collection, and analysis procedures. Specify research tools, participants, and sampling methods. Justify choices and discuss limitations. Ensure clarity, coherence, and alignment with research objectives for a robust methodology section.

How to write the methodology section of a research paper?

In the methodology section of a research paper, describe the study’s design, data collection, and analysis methods. Detail procedures, tools, participants, and sampling. Justify choices, address ethical considerations, and explain how the methodology aligns with research objectives, ensuring clarity and rigour.

What is mixed research methodology?

Mixed research methodology combines both qualitative and quantitative research approaches within a single study. This approach aims to enhance the details and depth of research findings by providing a more comprehensive understanding of the research problem or question.

You May Also Like

Craft a compelling scholarship motivation letter by showcasing your passion, achievements, and future goals concisely and impactfully.

Are you in need of captivating and achievable research topics within the field of biology? Your quest for the best […]

Explore the essential elements in choosing effective control variables for robust and valid research outcomes.

Ready to place an order?

USEFUL LINKS

Learning resources, company details.

• How It Works

Automated page speed optimizations for fast site performance

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• 6. The Methodology
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Applying Critical Thinking
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

The methods section describes actions taken to investigate a research problem and the rationale for the application of specific procedures or techniques used to identify, select, process, and analyze information applied to understanding the problem, thereby, allowing the reader to critically evaluate a study’s overall validity and reliability. The methodology section of a research paper answers two main questions: How was the data collected or generated? And, how was it analyzed? The writing should be direct and precise and always written in the past tense.

Kallet, Richard H. "How to Write the Methods Section of a Research Paper." Respiratory Care 49 (October 2004): 1229-1232.

Importance of a Good Methodology Section

You must explain how you obtained and analyzed your results for the following reasons:

• Readers need to know how the data was obtained because the method you chose affects the results and, by extension, how you interpreted their significance in the discussion section of your paper.
• Methodology is crucial for any branch of scholarship because an unreliable method produces unreliable results and, as a consequence, undermines the value of your analysis of the findings.
• In most cases, there are a variety of different methods you can choose to investigate a research problem. The methodology section of your paper should clearly articulate the reasons why you have chosen a particular procedure or technique.
• The reader wants to know that the data was collected or generated in a way that is consistent with accepted practice in the field of study. For example, if you are using a multiple choice questionnaire, readers need to know that it offered your respondents a reasonable range of answers to choose from.
• The method must be appropriate to fulfilling the overall aims of the study. For example, you need to ensure that you have a large enough sample size to be able to generalize and make recommendations based upon the findings.
• The methodology should discuss the problems that were anticipated and the steps you took to prevent them from occurring. For any problems that do arise, you must describe the ways in which they were minimized or why these problems do not impact in any meaningful way your interpretation of the findings.
• In the social and behavioral sciences, it is important to always provide sufficient information to allow other researchers to adopt or replicate your methodology. This information is particularly important when a new method has been developed or an innovative use of an existing method is utilized.

Bem, Daryl J. Writing the Empirical Journal Article. Psychology Writing Center. University of Washington; Denscombe, Martyn. The Good Research Guide: For Small-Scale Social Research Projects . 5th edition. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press, 2014; Lunenburg, Frederick C. Writing a Successful Thesis or Dissertation: Tips and Strategies for Students in the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2008.

Structure and Writing Style

I.  Groups of Research Methods

There are two main groups of research methods in the social sciences:

• The e mpirical-analytical group approaches the study of social sciences in a similar manner that researchers study the natural sciences . This type of research focuses on objective knowledge, research questions that can be answered yes or no, and operational definitions of variables to be measured. The empirical-analytical group employs deductive reasoning that uses existing theory as a foundation for formulating hypotheses that need to be tested. This approach is focused on explanation.
• The i nterpretative group of methods is focused on understanding phenomenon in a comprehensive, holistic way . Interpretive methods focus on analytically disclosing the meaning-making practices of human subjects [the why, how, or by what means people do what they do], while showing how those practices arrange so that it can be used to generate observable outcomes. Interpretive methods allow you to recognize your connection to the phenomena under investigation. However, the interpretative group requires careful examination of variables because it focuses more on subjective knowledge.

II.  Content

The introduction to your methodology section should begin by restating the research problem and underlying assumptions underpinning your study. This is followed by situating the methods you used to gather, analyze, and process information within the overall “tradition” of your field of study and within the particular research design you have chosen to study the problem. If the method you choose lies outside of the tradition of your field [i.e., your review of the literature demonstrates that the method is not commonly used], provide a justification for how your choice of methods specifically addresses the research problem in ways that have not been utilized in prior studies.

The remainder of your methodology section should describe the following:

• Decisions made in selecting the data you have analyzed or, in the case of qualitative research, the subjects and research setting you have examined,
• Tools and methods used to identify and collect information, and how you identified relevant variables,
• The ways in which you processed the data and the procedures you used to analyze that data, and
• The specific research tools or strategies that you utilized to study the underlying hypothesis and research questions.

In addition, an effectively written methodology section should:

• Introduce the overall methodological approach for investigating your research problem . Is your study qualitative or quantitative or a combination of both (mixed method)? Are you going to take a special approach, such as action research, or a more neutral stance?
• Indicate how the approach fits the overall research design . Your methods for gathering data should have a clear connection to your research problem. In other words, make sure that your methods will actually address the problem. One of the most common deficiencies found in research papers is that the proposed methodology is not suitable to achieving the stated objective of your paper.
• Describe the specific methods of data collection you are going to use , such as, surveys, interviews, questionnaires, observation, archival research. If you are analyzing existing data, such as a data set or archival documents, describe how it was originally created or gathered and by whom. Also be sure to explain how older data is still relevant to investigating the current research problem.
• Explain how you intend to analyze your results . Will you use statistical analysis? Will you use specific theoretical perspectives to help you analyze a text or explain observed behaviors? Describe how you plan to obtain an accurate assessment of relationships, patterns, trends, distributions, and possible contradictions found in the data.
• Provide background and a rationale for methodologies that are unfamiliar for your readers . Very often in the social sciences, research problems and the methods for investigating them require more explanation/rationale than widely accepted rules governing the natural and physical sciences. Be clear and concise in your explanation.
• Provide a justification for subject selection and sampling procedure . For instance, if you propose to conduct interviews, how do you intend to select the sample population? If you are analyzing texts, which texts have you chosen, and why? If you are using statistics, why is this set of data being used? If other data sources exist, explain why the data you chose is most appropriate to addressing the research problem.
• Provide a justification for case study selection . A common method of analyzing research problems in the social sciences is to analyze specific cases. These can be a person, place, event, phenomenon, or other type of subject of analysis that are either examined as a singular topic of in-depth investigation or multiple topics of investigation studied for the purpose of comparing or contrasting findings. In either method, you should explain why a case or cases were chosen and how they specifically relate to the research problem.
• Describe potential limitations . Are there any practical limitations that could affect your data collection? How will you attempt to control for potential confounding variables and errors? If your methodology may lead to problems you can anticipate, state this openly and show why pursuing this methodology outweighs the risk of these problems cropping up.

NOTE:   Once you have written all of the elements of the methods section, subsequent revisions should focus on how to present those elements as clearly and as logically as possibly. The description of how you prepared to study the research problem, how you gathered the data, and the protocol for analyzing the data should be organized chronologically. For clarity, when a large amount of detail must be presented, information should be presented in sub-sections according to topic. If necessary, consider using appendices for raw data.

ANOTHER NOTE: If you are conducting a qualitative analysis of a research problem , the methodology section generally requires a more elaborate description of the methods used as well as an explanation of the processes applied to gathering and analyzing of data than is generally required for studies using quantitative methods. Because you are the primary instrument for generating the data [e.g., through interviews or observations], the process for collecting that data has a significantly greater impact on producing the findings. Therefore, qualitative research requires a more detailed description of the methods used.

YET ANOTHER NOTE:   If your study involves interviews, observations, or other qualitative techniques involving human subjects , you may be required to obtain approval from the university's Office for the Protection of Research Subjects before beginning your research. This is not a common procedure for most undergraduate level student research assignments. However, i f your professor states you need approval, you must include a statement in your methods section that you received official endorsement and adequate informed consent from the office and that there was a clear assessment and minimization of risks to participants and to the university. This statement informs the reader that your study was conducted in an ethical and responsible manner. In some cases, the approval notice is included as an appendix to your paper.

III.  Problems to Avoid

Irrelevant Detail The methodology section of your paper should be thorough but concise. Do not provide any background information that does not directly help the reader understand why a particular method was chosen, how the data was gathered or obtained, and how the data was analyzed in relation to the research problem [note: analyzed, not interpreted! Save how you interpreted the findings for the discussion section]. With this in mind, the page length of your methods section will generally be less than any other section of your paper except the conclusion.

Unnecessary Explanation of Basic Procedures Remember that you are not writing a how-to guide about a particular method. You should make the assumption that readers possess a basic understanding of how to investigate the research problem on their own and, therefore, you do not have to go into great detail about specific methodological procedures. The focus should be on how you applied a method , not on the mechanics of doing a method. An exception to this rule is if you select an unconventional methodological approach; if this is the case, be sure to explain why this approach was chosen and how it enhances the overall process of discovery.

Problem Blindness It is almost a given that you will encounter problems when collecting or generating your data, or, gaps will exist in existing data or archival materials. Do not ignore these problems or pretend they did not occur. Often, documenting how you overcame obstacles can form an interesting part of the methodology. It demonstrates to the reader that you can provide a cogent rationale for the decisions you made to minimize the impact of any problems that arose.

Literature Review Just as the literature review section of your paper provides an overview of sources you have examined while researching a particular topic, the methodology section should cite any sources that informed your choice and application of a particular method [i.e., the choice of a survey should include any citations to the works you used to help construct the survey].

It’s More than Sources of Information! A description of a research study's method should not be confused with a description of the sources of information. Such a list of sources is useful in and of itself, especially if it is accompanied by an explanation about the selection and use of the sources. The description of the project's methodology complements a list of sources in that it sets forth the organization and interpretation of information emanating from those sources.

Azevedo, L.F. et al. "How to Write a Scientific Paper: Writing the Methods Section." Revista Portuguesa de Pneumologia 17 (2011): 232-238; Blair Lorrie. “Choosing a Methodology.” In Writing a Graduate Thesis or Dissertation , Teaching Writing Series. (Rotterdam: Sense Publishers 2016), pp. 49-72; Butin, Dan W. The Education Dissertation A Guide for Practitioner Scholars . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin, 2010; Carter, Susan. Structuring Your Research Thesis . New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012; Kallet, Richard H. “How to Write the Methods Section of a Research Paper.” Respiratory Care 49 (October 2004):1229-1232; Lunenburg, Frederick C. Writing a Successful Thesis or Dissertation: Tips and Strategies for Students in the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2008. Methods Section. The Writer’s Handbook. Writing Center. University of Wisconsin, Madison; Rudestam, Kjell Erik and Rae R. Newton. “The Method Chapter: Describing Your Research Plan.” In Surviving Your Dissertation: A Comprehensive Guide to Content and Process . (Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications, 2015), pp. 87-115; What is Interpretive Research. Institute of Public and International Affairs, University of Utah; Writing the Experimental Report: Methods, Results, and Discussion. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Methods and Materials. The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper. Department of Biology. Bates College.

Writing Tip

Statistical Designs and Tests? Do Not Fear Them!

Don't avoid using a quantitative approach to analyzing your research problem just because you fear the idea of applying statistical designs and tests. A qualitative approach, such as conducting interviews or content analysis of archival texts, can yield exciting new insights about a research problem, but it should not be undertaken simply because you have a disdain for running a simple regression. A well designed quantitative research study can often be accomplished in very clear and direct ways, whereas, a similar study of a qualitative nature usually requires considerable time to analyze large volumes of data and a tremendous burden to create new paths for analysis where previously no path associated with your research problem had existed.

To locate data and statistics, GO HERE .

Another Writing Tip

Knowing the Relationship Between Theories and Methods

There can be multiple meaning associated with the term "theories" and the term "methods" in social sciences research. A helpful way to delineate between them is to understand "theories" as representing different ways of characterizing the social world when you research it and "methods" as representing different ways of generating and analyzing data about that social world. Framed in this way, all empirical social sciences research involves theories and methods, whether they are stated explicitly or not. However, while theories and methods are often related, it is important that, as a researcher, you deliberately separate them in order to avoid your theories playing a disproportionate role in shaping what outcomes your chosen methods produce.

Introspectively engage in an ongoing dialectic between the application of theories and methods to help enable you to use the outcomes from your methods to interrogate and develop new theories, or ways of framing conceptually the research problem. This is how scholarship grows and branches out into new intellectual territory.

Reynolds, R. Larry. Ways of Knowing. Alternative Microeconomics . Part 1, Chapter 3. Boise State University; The Theory-Method Relationship. S-Cool Revision. United Kingdom.

Yet Another Writing Tip

Methods and the Methodology

Do not confuse the terms "methods" and "methodology." As Schneider notes, a method refers to the technical steps taken to do research . Descriptions of methods usually include defining and stating why you have chosen specific techniques to investigate a research problem, followed by an outline of the procedures you used to systematically select, gather, and process the data [remember to always save the interpretation of data for the discussion section of your paper].

The methodology refers to a discussion of the underlying reasoning why particular methods were used . This discussion includes describing the theoretical concepts that inform the choice of methods to be applied, placing the choice of methods within the more general nature of academic work, and reviewing its relevance to examining the research problem. The methodology section also includes a thorough review of the methods other scholars have used to study the topic.

Bryman, Alan. "Of Methods and Methodology." Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal 3 (2008): 159-168; Schneider, Florian. “What's in a Methodology: The Difference between Method, Methodology, and Theory…and How to Get the Balance Right?” PoliticsEastAsia.com. Chinese Department, University of Leiden, Netherlands.

• << Previous: Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Next: Qualitative Methods >>
• Last Updated: Jun 18, 2024 10:45 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

How to Write the Methods Section of a Research Paper

Writing a research paper is both an art and a skill, and knowing how to write the methods section of a research paper is the first crucial step in mastering scientific writing. If, like the majority of early career researchers, you believe that the methods section is the simplest to write and needs little in the way of careful consideration or thought, this article will help you understand it is not 1 .

We have all probably asked our supervisors, coworkers, or search engines “ how to write a methods section of a research paper ” at some point in our scientific careers, so you are not alone if that’s how you ended up here.  Even for seasoned researchers, selecting what to include in the methods section from a wealth of experimental information can occasionally be a source of distress and perplexity.   

Additionally, journal specifications, in some cases, may make it more of a requirement rather than a choice to provide a selective yet descriptive account of the experimental procedure. Hence, knowing these nuances of how to write the methods section of a research paper is critical to its success. The methods section of the research paper is not supposed to be a detailed heavy, dull section that some researchers tend to write; rather, it should be the central component of the study that justifies the validity and reliability of the research.

Are you still unsure of how the methods section of a research paper forms the basis of every investigation? Consider the last article you read but ignore the methods section and concentrate on the other parts of the paper . Now think whether you could repeat the study and be sure of the credibility of the findings despite knowing the literature review and even having the data in front of you. You have the answer!   

Having established the importance of the methods section , the next question is how to write the methods section of a research paper that unifies the overall study. The purpose of the methods section , which was earlier called as Materials and Methods , is to describe how the authors went about answering the “research question” at hand. Here, the objective is to tell a coherent story that gives a detailed account of how the study was conducted, the rationale behind specific experimental procedures, the experimental setup, objects (variables) involved, the research protocol employed, tools utilized to measure, calculations and measurements, and the analysis of the collected data 2 .

In this article, we will take a deep dive into this topic and provide a detailed overview of how to write the methods section of a research paper . For the sake of clarity, we have separated the subject into various sections with corresponding subheadings.  

Table of Contents

What is the methods section of a research paper ?  

The methods section is a fundamental section of any paper since it typically discusses the ‘ what ’, ‘ how ’, ‘ which ’, and ‘ why ’ of the study, which is necessary to arrive at the final conclusions. In a research article, the introduction, which serves to set the foundation for comprehending the background and results is usually followed by the methods section, which precedes the result and discussion sections. The methods section must explicitly state what was done, how it was done, which equipment, tools and techniques were utilized, how were the measurements/calculations taken, and why specific research protocols, software, and analytical methods were employed.  

Why is the methods section important?  

The primary goal of the methods section is to provide pertinent details about the experimental approach so that the reader may put the results in perspective and, if necessary, replicate the findings 3 .  This section offers readers the chance to evaluate the reliability and validity of any study. In short, it also serves as the study’s blueprint, assisting researchers who might be unsure about any other portion in establishing the study’s context and validity. The methods plays a rather crucial role in determining the fate of the article; an incomplete and unreliable methods section can frequently result in early rejections and may lead to numerous rounds of modifications during the publication process. This means that the reviewers also often use methods section to assess the reliability and validity of the research protocol and the data analysis employed to address the research topic. In other words, the purpose of the methods section is to demonstrate the research acumen and subject-matter expertise of the author(s) in their field.  

Structure of methods section of a research paper  

Similar to the research paper, the methods section also follows a defined structure; this may be dictated by the guidelines of a specific journal or can be presented in a chronological or thematic manner based on the study type. When writing the methods section , authors should keep in mind that they are telling a story about how the research was conducted. They should only report relevant information to avoid confusing the reader and include details that would aid in connecting various aspects of the entire research activity together. It is generally advisable to present experiments in the order in which they were conducted. This facilitates the logical flow of the research and allows readers to follow the progression of the study design.   

It is also essential to clearly state the rationale behind each experiment and how the findings of earlier experiments informed the design or interpretation of later experiments. This allows the readers to understand the overall purpose of the study design and the significance of each experiment within that context. However, depending on the particular research question and method, it may make sense to present information in a different order; therefore, authors must select the best structure and strategy for their individual studies.   

In cases where there is a lot of information, divide the sections into subheadings to cover the pertinent details. If the journal guidelines pose restrictions on the word limit , additional important information can be supplied in the supplementary files. A simple rule of thumb for sectioning the method section is to begin by explaining the methodological approach ( what was done ), describing the data collection methods ( how it was done ), providing the analysis method ( how the data was analyzed ), and explaining the rationale for choosing the methodological strategy. This is described in detail in the upcoming sections.    

How to write the methods section of a research paper  

Contrary to widespread assumption, the methods section of a research paper should be prepared once the study is complete to prevent missing any key parameter. Hence, please make sure that all relevant experiments are done before you start writing a methods section . The next step for authors is to look up any applicable academic style manuals or journal-specific standards to ensure that the methods section is formatted correctly. The methods section of a research paper typically constitutes materials and methods; while writing this section, authors usually arrange the information under each category.

The materials category describes the samples, materials, treatments, and instruments, while experimental design, sample preparation, data collection, and data analysis are a part of the method category. According to the nature of the study, authors should include additional subsections within the methods section, such as ethical considerations like the declaration of Helsinki (for studies involving human subjects), demographic information of the participants, and any other crucial information that can affect the output of the study. Simply put, the methods section has two major components: content and format. Here is an easy checklist for you to consider if you are struggling with how to write the methods section of a research paper .   

• Explain the research design, subjects, and sample details  
• Include information on inclusion and exclusion criteria  
• Mention ethical or any other permission required for the study  
• Include information about materials, experimental setup, tools, and software  
• Add details of data collection and analysis methods  
• Incorporate how research biases were avoided or confounding variables were controlled  
• Evaluate and justify the experimental procedure selected to address the research question  
• Provide precise and clear details of each experiment  
• Flowcharts, infographics, or tables can be used to present complex information     
• Use past tense to show that the experiments have been done   
• Follow academic style guides (such as APA or MLA ) to structure the content  
• Citations should be included as per standard protocols in the field  

Now that you know how to write the methods section of a research paper , let’s address another challenge researchers face while writing the methods section —what to include in the methods section .  How much information is too much is not always obvious when it comes to trying to include data in the methods section of a paper. In the next section, we examine this issue and explore potential solutions.   

What to include in the methods section of a research paper  

The technical nature of the methods section occasionally makes it harder to present the information clearly and concisely while staying within the study context. Many young researchers tend to veer off subject significantly, and they frequently commit the sin of becoming bogged down in itty bitty details, making the text harder to read and impairing its overall flow. However, the best way to write the methods section is to start with crucial components of the experiments. If you have trouble deciding which elements are essential, think about leaving out those that would make it more challenging to comprehend the context or replicate the results. The top-down approach helps to ensure all relevant information is incorporated and vital information is not lost in technicalities. Next, remember to add details that are significant to assess the validity and reliability of the study. Here is a simple checklist for you to follow ( bonus tip: you can also make a checklist for your own study to avoid missing any critical information while writing the methods section ).  

• Structuring the methods section : Authors should diligently follow journal guidelines and adhere to the specific author instructions provided when writing the methods section . Journals typically have specific guidelines for formatting the methods section ; for example, Frontiers in Plant Sciences advises arranging the materials and methods section by subheading and citing relevant literature. There are several standardized checklists available for different study types in the biomedical field, including CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) for randomized clinical trials, PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis) for systematic reviews and meta-analysis, and STROBE (STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology) for cohort, case-control, cross-sectional studies. Before starting the methods section , check the checklist available in your field that can function as a guide.     
• Organizing different sections to tell a story : Once you are sure of the format required for structuring the methods section , the next is to present the sections in a logical manner; as mentioned earlier, the sections can be organized according to the chronology or themes. In the chronological arrangement, you should discuss the methods in accordance with how the experiments were carried out. An example of the method section of a research paper of an animal study should first ideally include information about the species, weight, sex, strain, and age. Next, the number of animals, their initial conditions, and their living and housing conditions should also be mentioned. Second, how the groups are assigned and the intervention (drug treatment, stress, or other) given to each group, and finally, the details of tools and techniques used to measure, collect, and analyze the data. Experiments involving animal or human subjects should additionally state an ethics approval statement. It is best to arrange the section using the thematic approach when discussing distinct experiments not following a sequential order.  
• Define and explain the objects and procedure: Experimental procedure should clearly be stated in the methods section . Samples, necessary preparations (samples, treatment, and drug), and methods for manipulation need to be included. All variables (control, dependent, independent, and confounding) must be clearly defined, particularly if the confounding variables can affect the outcome of the study.  
• Match the order of the methods section with the order of results: Though not mandatory, organizing the manuscript in a logical and coherent manner can improve the readability and clarity of the paper. This can be done by following a consistent structure throughout the manuscript; readers can easily navigate through the different sections and understand the methods and results in relation to each other. Using experiment names as headings for both the methods and results sections can also make it simpler for readers to locate specific information and corroborate it if needed.   
• Relevant information must always be included: The methods section should have information on all experiments conducted and their details clearly mentioned. Ask the journal whether there is a way to offer more information in the supplemental files or external repositories if your target journal has strict word limitations. For example, Nature communications encourages authors to deposit their step-by-step protocols in an open-resource depository, Protocol Exchange which allows the protocols to be linked with the manuscript upon publication. Providing access to detailed protocols also helps to increase the transparency and reproducibility of the research.  
• It’s all in the details: The methods section should meticulously list all the materials, tools, instruments, and software used for different experiments. Specify the testing equipment on which data was obtained, together with its manufacturer’s information, location, city, and state or any other stimuli used to manipulate the variables. Provide specifics on the research process you employed; if it was a standard protocol, cite previous studies that also used the protocol.  Include any protocol modifications that were made, as well as any other factors that were taken into account when planning the study or gathering data. Any new or modified techniques should be explained by the authors. Typically, readers evaluate the reliability and validity of the procedures using the cited literature, and a widely accepted checklist helps to support the credibility of the methodology. Note: Authors should include a statement on sample size estimation (if applicable), which is often missed. It enables the reader to determine how many subjects will be required to detect the expected change in the outcome variables within a given confidence interval.  
• Write for the audience: While explaining the details in the methods section , authors should be mindful of their target audience, as some of the rationale or assumptions on which specific procedures are based might not always be obvious to the audience, particularly for a general audience. Therefore, when in doubt, the objective of a procedure should be specified either in relation to the research question or to the entire protocol.  
• Data interpretation and analysis : Information on data processing, statistical testing, levels of significance, and analysis tools and software should be added. Mention if the recommendations and expertise of an experienced statistician were followed. Also, evaluate and justify the preferred statistical method used in the study and its significance.  

What NOT to include in the methods section of a research paper  

To address “ how to write the methods section of a research paper ”, authors should not only pay careful attention to what to include but also what not to include in the methods section of a research paper . Here is a list of do not’s when writing the methods section :  

• Do not elaborate on specifics of standard methods/procedures: You should refrain from adding unnecessary details of experiments and practices that are well established and cited previously.  Instead, simply cite relevant literature or mention if the manufacturer’s protocol was followed.  
• Do not add unnecessary details : Do not include minute details of the experimental procedure and materials/instruments used that are not significant for the outcome of the experiment. For example, there is no need to mention the brand name of the water bath used for incubation.    
• Do not discuss the results: The methods section is not to discuss the results or refer to the tables and figures; save it for the results and discussion section. Also, focus on the methods selected to conduct the study and avoid diverting to other methods or commenting on their pros or cons.  
• Do not make the section bulky : For extensive methods and protocols, provide the essential details and share the rest of the information in the supplemental files. The writing should be clear yet concise to maintain the flow of the section.  

We hope that by this point, you understand how crucial it is to write a thoughtful and precise methods section and the ins and outs of how to write the methods section of a research paper . To restate, the entire purpose of the methods section is to enable others to reproduce the results or verify the research. We sincerely hope that this post has cleared up any confusion and given you a fresh perspective on the methods section .

As a parting gift, we’re leaving you with a handy checklist that will help you understand how to write the methods section of a research paper . Feel free to download this checklist and use or share this with those who you think may benefit from it.  

References  

• Bhattacharya, D. How to write the Methods section of a research paper. Editage Insights, 2018. https://www.editage.com/insights/how-to-write-the-methods-section-of-a-research-paper (2018).
• Kallet, R. H. How to Write the Methods Section of a Research Paper. Respiratory Care 49, 1229–1232 (2004). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15447808/
• Grindstaff, T. L. & Saliba, S. A. AVOIDING MANUSCRIPT MISTAKES. Int J Sports Phys Ther 7, 518–524 (2012). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3474299/

Researcher.Life is a subscription-based platform that unifies the best AI tools and services designed to speed up, simplify, and streamline every step of a researcher’s journey. The Researcher.Life All Access Pack is a one-of-a-kind subscription that unlocks full access to an AI writing assistant, literature recommender, journal finder, scientific illustration tool, and exclusive discounts on professional publication services from Editage.  

Based on 21+ years of experience in academia, Researcher.Life All Access empowers researchers to put their best research forward and move closer to success. Explore our top AI Tools pack, AI Tools + Publication Services pack, or Build Your Own Plan. Find everything a researcher needs to succeed, all in one place –  Get All Access now starting at just $17 a month !    

Related Posts

What is a Case Study in Research? Definition, Methods, and Examples

Take Top AI Tools for Researchers for a Spin with the Editage All Access 7-Day Pass!

• Resources Home 🏠
• Try SciSpace Copilot
• Search research papers
• Add Copilot Extension
• Try AI Detector
• Try Paraphraser
• Try Citation Generator
• April Papers
• June Papers
• July Papers

Here's What You Need to Understand About Research Methodology

Table of Contents

Research methodology involves a systematic and well-structured approach to conducting scholarly or scientific inquiries. Knowing the significance of research methodology and its different components is crucial as it serves as the basis for any study.

Typically, your research topic will start as a broad idea you want to investigate more thoroughly. Once you’ve identified a research problem and created research questions , you must choose the appropriate methodology and frameworks to address those questions effectively.

What is the definition of a research methodology?

Research methodology is the process or the way you intend to execute your study. The methodology section of a research paper outlines how you plan to conduct your study. It covers various steps such as collecting data, statistical analysis, observing participants, and other procedures involved in the research process

The methods section should give a description of the process that will convert your idea into a study. Additionally, the outcomes of your process must provide valid and reliable results resonant with the aims and objectives of your research. This thumb rule holds complete validity, no matter whether your paper has inclinations for qualitative or quantitative usage.

Studying research methods used in related studies can provide helpful insights and direction for your own research. Now easily discover papers related to your topic on SciSpace and utilize our AI research assistant, Copilot , to quickly review the methodologies applied in different papers.

The need for a good research methodology

While deciding on your approach towards your research, the reason or factors you weighed in choosing a particular problem and formulating a research topic need to be validated and explained. A research methodology helps you do exactly that. Moreover, a good research methodology lets you build your argument to validate your research work performed through various data collection methods, analytical methods, and other essential points.

Just imagine it as a strategy documented to provide an overview of what you intend to do.

While undertaking any research writing or performing the research itself, you may get drifted in not something of much importance. In such a case, a research methodology helps you to get back to your outlined work methodology.

A research methodology helps in keeping you accountable for your work. Additionally, it can help you evaluate whether your work is in sync with your original aims and objectives or not. Besides, a good research methodology enables you to navigate your research process smoothly and swiftly while providing effective planning to achieve your desired results.

What is the basic structure of a research methodology?

Usually, you must ensure to include the following stated aspects while deciding over the basic structure of your research methodology:

1. Your research procedure

Explain what research methods you’re going to use. Whether you intend to proceed with quantitative or qualitative, or a composite of both approaches, you need to state that explicitly. The option among the three depends on your research’s aim, objectives, and scope.

2. Provide the rationality behind your chosen approach

Based on logic and reason, let your readers know why you have chosen said research methodologies. Additionally, you have to build strong arguments supporting why your chosen research method is the best way to achieve the desired outcome.

3. Explain your mechanism

The mechanism encompasses the research methods or instruments you will use to develop your research methodology. It usually refers to your data collection methods. You can use interviews, surveys, physical questionnaires, etc., of the many available mechanisms as research methodology instruments. The data collection method is determined by the type of research and whether the data is quantitative data(includes numerical data) or qualitative data (perception, morale, etc.) Moreover, you need to put logical reasoning behind choosing a particular instrument.

4. Significance of outcomes

The results will be available once you have finished experimenting. However, you should also explain how you plan to use the data to interpret the findings. This section also aids in understanding the problem from within, breaking it down into pieces, and viewing the research problem from various perspectives.

5. Reader’s advice

Anything that you feel must be explained to spread more awareness among readers and focus groups must be included and described in detail. You should not just specify your research methodology on the assumption that a reader is aware of the topic.  

All the relevant information that explains and simplifies your research paper must be included in the methodology section. If you are conducting your research in a non-traditional manner, give a logical justification and list its benefits.

6. Explain your sample space

Include information about the sample and sample space in the methodology section. The term "sample" refers to a smaller set of data that a researcher selects or chooses from a larger group of people or focus groups using a predetermined selection method. Let your readers know how you are going to distinguish between relevant and non-relevant samples. How you figured out those exact numbers to back your research methodology, i.e. the sample spacing of instruments, must be discussed thoroughly.

For example, if you are going to conduct a survey or interview, then by what procedure will you select the interviewees (or sample size in case of surveys), and how exactly will the interview or survey be conducted.

7. Challenges and limitations

This part, which is frequently assumed to be unnecessary, is actually very important. The challenges and limitations that your chosen strategy inherently possesses must be specified while you are conducting different types of research.

The importance of a good research methodology

You must have observed that all research papers, dissertations, or theses carry a chapter entirely dedicated to research methodology. This section helps maintain your credibility as a better interpreter of results rather than a manipulator.

A good research methodology always explains the procedure, data collection methods and techniques, aim, and scope of the research. In a research study, it leads to a well-organized, rationality-based approach, while the paper lacking it is often observed as messy or disorganized.

You should pay special attention to validating your chosen way towards the research methodology. This becomes extremely important in case you select an unconventional or a distinct method of execution.

Curating and developing a strong, effective research methodology can assist you in addressing a variety of situations, such as:

• When someone tries to duplicate or expand upon your research after few years.
• If a contradiction or conflict of facts occurs at a later time. This gives you the security you need to deal with these contradictions while still being able to defend your approach.
• Gaining a tactical approach in getting your research completed in time. Just ensure you are using the right approach while drafting your research methodology, and it can help you achieve your desired outcomes. Additionally, it provides a better explanation and understanding of the research question itself.
• Documenting the results so that the final outcome of the research stays as you intended it to be while starting.

Instruments you could use while writing a good research methodology

As a researcher, you must choose which tools or data collection methods that fit best in terms of the relevance of your research. This decision has to be wise.

There exists many research equipments or tools that you can use to carry out your research process. These are classified as:

a. Interviews (One-on-One or a Group)

An interview aimed to get your desired research outcomes can be undertaken in many different ways. For example, you can design your interview as structured, semi-structured, or unstructured. What sets them apart is the degree of formality in the questions. On the other hand, in a group interview, your aim should be to collect more opinions and group perceptions from the focus groups on a certain topic rather than looking out for some formal answers.

In surveys, you are in better control if you specifically draft the questions you seek the response for. For example, you may choose to include free-style questions that can be answered descriptively, or you may provide a multiple-choice type response for questions. Besides, you can also opt to choose both ways, deciding what suits your research process and purpose better.

c. Sample Groups

Similar to the group interviews, here, you can select a group of individuals and assign them a topic to discuss or freely express their opinions over that. You can simultaneously note down the answers and later draft them appropriately, deciding on the relevance of every response.

d. Observations

If your research domain is humanities or sociology, observations are the best-proven method to draw your research methodology. Of course, you can always include studying the spontaneous response of the participants towards a situation or conducting the same but in a more structured manner. A structured observation means putting the participants in a situation at a previously decided time and then studying their responses.

Of all the tools described above, it is you who should wisely choose the instruments and decide what’s the best fit for your research. You must not restrict yourself from multiple methods or a combination of a few instruments if appropriate in drafting a good research methodology.

Types of research methodology

A research methodology exists in various forms. Depending upon their approach, whether centered around words, numbers, or both, methodologies are distinguished as qualitative, quantitative, or an amalgamation of both.

1. Qualitative research methodology

When a research methodology primarily focuses on words and textual data, then it is generally referred to as qualitative research methodology. This type is usually preferred among researchers when the aim and scope of the research are mainly theoretical and explanatory.

The instruments used are observations, interviews, and sample groups. You can use this methodology if you are trying to study human behavior or response in some situations. Generally, qualitative research methodology is widely used in sociology, psychology, and other related domains.

2. Quantitative research methodology

If your research is majorly centered on data, figures, and stats, then analyzing these numerical data is often referred to as quantitative research methodology. You can use quantitative research methodology if your research requires you to validate or justify the obtained results.

In quantitative methods, surveys, tests, experiments, and evaluations of current databases can be advantageously used as instruments If your research involves testing some hypothesis, then use this methodology.

3. Amalgam methodology

As the name suggests, the amalgam methodology uses both quantitative and qualitative approaches. This methodology is used when a part of the research requires you to verify the facts and figures, whereas the other part demands you to discover the theoretical and explanatory nature of the research question.

The instruments for the amalgam methodology require you to conduct interviews and surveys, including tests and experiments. The outcome of this methodology can be insightful and valuable as it provides precise test results in line with theoretical explanations and reasoning.

The amalgam method, makes your work both factual and rational at the same time.

Final words: How to decide which is the best research methodology?

If you have kept your sincerity and awareness intact with the aims and scope of research well enough, you must have got an idea of which research methodology suits your work best.

Before deciding which research methodology answers your research question, you must invest significant time in reading and doing your homework for that. Taking references that yield relevant results should be your first approach to establishing a research methodology.

Moreover, you should never refrain from exploring other options. Before setting your work in stone, you must try all the available options as it explains why the choice of research methodology that you finally make is more appropriate than the other available options.

You should always go for a quantitative research methodology if your research requires gathering large amounts of data, figures, and statistics. This research methodology will provide you with results if your research paper involves the validation of some hypothesis.

Whereas, if  you are looking for more explanations, reasons, opinions, and public perceptions around a theory, you must use qualitative research methodology.The choice of an appropriate research methodology ultimately depends on what you want to achieve through your research.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Research Methodology

1. how to write a research methodology.

You can always provide a separate section for research methodology where you should specify details about the methods and instruments used during the research, discussions on result analysis, including insights into the background information, and conveying the research limitations.

2. What are the types of research methodology?

There generally exists four types of research methodology i.e.

• Observation
• Experimental
• Derivational

3. What is the true meaning of research methodology?

The set of techniques or procedures followed to discover and analyze the information gathered to validate or justify a research outcome is generally called Research Methodology.

4. Where lies the importance of research methodology?

Your research methodology directly reflects the validity of your research outcomes and how well-informed your research work is. Moreover, it can help future researchers cite or refer to your research if they plan to use a similar research methodology.

You might also like

Consensus GPT vs. SciSpace GPT: Choose the Best GPT for Research

Literature Review and Theoretical Framework: Understanding the Differences

Using AI for research: A beginner’s guide

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• BMC Med Res Methodol

A tutorial on methodological studies: the what, when, how and why

Lawrence mbuagbaw.

1 Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON Canada

2 Biostatistics Unit/FSORC, 50 Charlton Avenue East, St Joseph’s Healthcare—Hamilton, 3rd Floor Martha Wing, Room H321, Hamilton, Ontario L8N 4A6 Canada

3 Centre for the Development of Best Practices in Health, Yaoundé, Cameroon

Daeria O. Lawson

Livia puljak.

4 Center for Evidence-Based Medicine and Health Care, Catholic University of Croatia, Ilica 242, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia

David B. Allison

5 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health – Bloomington, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405 USA

Lehana Thabane

6 Departments of Paediatrics and Anaesthesia, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON Canada

7 Centre for Evaluation of Medicine, St. Joseph’s Healthcare-Hamilton, Hamilton, ON Canada

8 Population Health Research Institute, Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON Canada

Associated Data

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.

Methodological studies – studies that evaluate the design, analysis or reporting of other research-related reports – play an important role in health research. They help to highlight issues in the conduct of research with the aim of improving health research methodology, and ultimately reducing research waste.

We provide an overview of some of the key aspects of methodological studies such as what they are, and when, how and why they are done. We adopt a “frequently asked questions” format to facilitate reading this paper and provide multiple examples to help guide researchers interested in conducting methodological studies. Some of the topics addressed include: is it necessary to publish a study protocol? How to select relevant research reports and databases for a methodological study? What approaches to data extraction and statistical analysis should be considered when conducting a methodological study? What are potential threats to validity and is there a way to appraise the quality of methodological studies?

Appropriate reflection and application of basic principles of epidemiology and biostatistics are required in the design and analysis of methodological studies. This paper provides an introduction for further discussion about the conduct of methodological studies.

The field of meta-research (or research-on-research) has proliferated in recent years in response to issues with research quality and conduct [ 1 – 3 ]. As the name suggests, this field targets issues with research design, conduct, analysis and reporting. Various types of research reports are often examined as the unit of analysis in these studies (e.g. abstracts, full manuscripts, trial registry entries). Like many other novel fields of research, meta-research has seen a proliferation of use before the development of reporting guidance. For example, this was the case with randomized trials for which risk of bias tools and reporting guidelines were only developed much later – after many trials had been published and noted to have limitations [ 4 , 5 ]; and for systematic reviews as well [ 6 – 8 ]. However, in the absence of formal guidance, studies that report on research differ substantially in how they are named, conducted and reported [ 9 , 10 ]. This creates challenges in identifying, summarizing and comparing them. In this tutorial paper, we will use the term methodological study to refer to any study that reports on the design, conduct, analysis or reporting of primary or secondary research-related reports (such as trial registry entries and conference abstracts).

In the past 10 years, there has been an increase in the use of terms related to methodological studies (based on records retrieved with a keyword search [in the title and abstract] for “methodological review” and “meta-epidemiological study” in PubMed up to December 2019), suggesting that these studies may be appearing more frequently in the literature. See Fig.  1 .

Trends in the number studies that mention “methodological review” or “meta-

epidemiological study” in PubMed.

The methods used in many methodological studies have been borrowed from systematic and scoping reviews. This practice has influenced the direction of the field, with many methodological studies including searches of electronic databases, screening of records, duplicate data extraction and assessments of risk of bias in the included studies. However, the research questions posed in methodological studies do not always require the approaches listed above, and guidance is needed on when and how to apply these methods to a methodological study. Even though methodological studies can be conducted on qualitative or mixed methods research, this paper focuses on and draws examples exclusively from quantitative research.

The objectives of this paper are to provide some insights on how to conduct methodological studies so that there is greater consistency between the research questions posed, and the design, analysis and reporting of findings. We provide multiple examples to illustrate concepts and a proposed framework for categorizing methodological studies in quantitative research.

What is a methodological study?

Any study that describes or analyzes methods (design, conduct, analysis or reporting) in published (or unpublished) literature is a methodological study. Consequently, the scope of methodological studies is quite extensive and includes, but is not limited to, topics as diverse as: research question formulation [ 11 ]; adherence to reporting guidelines [ 12 – 14 ] and consistency in reporting [ 15 ]; approaches to study analysis [ 16 ]; investigating the credibility of analyses [ 17 ]; and studies that synthesize these methodological studies [ 18 ]. While the nomenclature of methodological studies is not uniform, the intents and purposes of these studies remain fairly consistent – to describe or analyze methods in primary or secondary studies. As such, methodological studies may also be classified as a subtype of observational studies.

Parallel to this are experimental studies that compare different methods. Even though they play an important role in informing optimal research methods, experimental methodological studies are beyond the scope of this paper. Examples of such studies include the randomized trials by Buscemi et al., comparing single data extraction to double data extraction [ 19 ], and Carrasco-Labra et al., comparing approaches to presenting findings in Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) summary of findings tables [ 20 ]. In these studies, the unit of analysis is the person or groups of individuals applying the methods. We also direct readers to the Studies Within a Trial (SWAT) and Studies Within a Review (SWAR) programme operated through the Hub for Trials Methodology Research, for further reading as a potential useful resource for these types of experimental studies [ 21 ]. Lastly, this paper is not meant to inform the conduct of research using computational simulation and mathematical modeling for which some guidance already exists [ 22 ], or studies on the development of methods using consensus-based approaches.

When should we conduct a methodological study?

Methodological studies occupy a unique niche in health research that allows them to inform methodological advances. Methodological studies should also be conducted as pre-cursors to reporting guideline development, as they provide an opportunity to understand current practices, and help to identify the need for guidance and gaps in methodological or reporting quality. For example, the development of the popular Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were preceded by methodological studies identifying poor reporting practices [ 23 , 24 ]. In these instances, after the reporting guidelines are published, methodological studies can also be used to monitor uptake of the guidelines.

These studies can also be conducted to inform the state of the art for design, analysis and reporting practices across different types of health research fields, with the aim of improving research practices, and preventing or reducing research waste. For example, Samaan et al. conducted a scoping review of adherence to different reporting guidelines in health care literature [ 18 ]. Methodological studies can also be used to determine the factors associated with reporting practices. For example, Abbade et al. investigated journal characteristics associated with the use of the Participants, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Timeframe (PICOT) format in framing research questions in trials of venous ulcer disease [ 11 ].

How often are methodological studies conducted?

There is no clear answer to this question. Based on a search of PubMed, the use of related terms (“methodological review” and “meta-epidemiological study”) – and therefore, the number of methodological studies – is on the rise. However, many other terms are used to describe methodological studies. There are also many studies that explore design, conduct, analysis or reporting of research reports, but that do not use any specific terms to describe or label their study design in terms of “methodology”. This diversity in nomenclature makes a census of methodological studies elusive. Appropriate terminology and key words for methodological studies are needed to facilitate improved accessibility for end-users.

Why do we conduct methodological studies?

Methodological studies provide information on the design, conduct, analysis or reporting of primary and secondary research and can be used to appraise quality, quantity, completeness, accuracy and consistency of health research. These issues can be explored in specific fields, journals, databases, geographical regions and time periods. For example, Areia et al. explored the quality of reporting of endoscopic diagnostic studies in gastroenterology [ 25 ]; Knol et al. investigated the reporting of p -values in baseline tables in randomized trial published in high impact journals [ 26 ]; Chen et al. describe adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement in Chinese Journals [ 27 ]; and Hopewell et al. describe the effect of editors’ implementation of CONSORT guidelines on reporting of abstracts over time [ 28 ]. Methodological studies provide useful information to researchers, clinicians, editors, publishers and users of health literature. As a result, these studies have been at the cornerstone of important methodological developments in the past two decades and have informed the development of many health research guidelines including the highly cited CONSORT statement [ 5 ].

Where can we find methodological studies?

Methodological studies can be found in most common biomedical bibliographic databases (e.g. Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science). However, the biggest caveat is that methodological studies are hard to identify in the literature due to the wide variety of names used and the lack of comprehensive databases dedicated to them. A handful can be found in the Cochrane Library as “Cochrane Methodology Reviews”, but these studies only cover methodological issues related to systematic reviews. Previous attempts to catalogue all empirical studies of methods used in reviews were abandoned 10 years ago [ 29 ]. In other databases, a variety of search terms may be applied with different levels of sensitivity and specificity.

Some frequently asked questions about methodological studies

In this section, we have outlined responses to questions that might help inform the conduct of methodological studies.

Q: How should I select research reports for my methodological study?

A: Selection of research reports for a methodological study depends on the research question and eligibility criteria. Once a clear research question is set and the nature of literature one desires to review is known, one can then begin the selection process. Selection may begin with a broad search, especially if the eligibility criteria are not apparent. For example, a methodological study of Cochrane Reviews of HIV would not require a complex search as all eligible studies can easily be retrieved from the Cochrane Library after checking a few boxes [ 30 ]. On the other hand, a methodological study of subgroup analyses in trials of gastrointestinal oncology would require a search to find such trials, and further screening to identify trials that conducted a subgroup analysis [ 31 ].

The strategies used for identifying participants in observational studies can apply here. One may use a systematic search to identify all eligible studies. If the number of eligible studies is unmanageable, a random sample of articles can be expected to provide comparable results if it is sufficiently large [ 32 ]. For example, Wilson et al. used a random sample of trials from the Cochrane Stroke Group’s Trial Register to investigate completeness of reporting [ 33 ]. It is possible that a simple random sample would lead to underrepresentation of units (i.e. research reports) that are smaller in number. This is relevant if the investigators wish to compare multiple groups but have too few units in one group. In this case a stratified sample would help to create equal groups. For example, in a methodological study comparing Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews, Kahale et al. drew random samples from both groups [ 34 ]. Alternatively, systematic or purposeful sampling strategies can be used and we encourage researchers to justify their selected approaches based on the study objective.

Q: How many databases should I search?

A: The number of databases one should search would depend on the approach to sampling, which can include targeting the entire “population” of interest or a sample of that population. If you are interested in including the entire target population for your research question, or drawing a random or systematic sample from it, then a comprehensive and exhaustive search for relevant articles is required. In this case, we recommend using systematic approaches for searching electronic databases (i.e. at least 2 databases with a replicable and time stamped search strategy). The results of your search will constitute a sampling frame from which eligible studies can be drawn.

Alternatively, if your approach to sampling is purposeful, then we recommend targeting the database(s) or data sources (e.g. journals, registries) that include the information you need. For example, if you are conducting a methodological study of high impact journals in plastic surgery and they are all indexed in PubMed, you likely do not need to search any other databases. You may also have a comprehensive list of all journals of interest and can approach your search using the journal names in your database search (or by accessing the journal archives directly from the journal’s website). Even though one could also search journals’ web pages directly, using a database such as PubMed has multiple advantages, such as the use of filters, so the search can be narrowed down to a certain period, or study types of interest. Furthermore, individual journals’ web sites may have different search functionalities, which do not necessarily yield a consistent output.

Q: Should I publish a protocol for my methodological study?

A: A protocol is a description of intended research methods. Currently, only protocols for clinical trials require registration [ 35 ]. Protocols for systematic reviews are encouraged but no formal recommendation exists. The scientific community welcomes the publication of protocols because they help protect against selective outcome reporting, the use of post hoc methodologies to embellish results, and to help avoid duplication of efforts [ 36 ]. While the latter two risks exist in methodological research, the negative consequences may be substantially less than for clinical outcomes. In a sample of 31 methodological studies, 7 (22.6%) referenced a published protocol [ 9 ]. In the Cochrane Library, there are 15 protocols for methodological reviews (21 July 2020). This suggests that publishing protocols for methodological studies is not uncommon.

Authors can consider publishing their study protocol in a scholarly journal as a manuscript. Advantages of such publication include obtaining peer-review feedback about the planned study, and easy retrieval by searching databases such as PubMed. The disadvantages in trying to publish protocols includes delays associated with manuscript handling and peer review, as well as costs, as few journals publish study protocols, and those journals mostly charge article-processing fees [ 37 ]. Authors who would like to make their protocol publicly available without publishing it in scholarly journals, could deposit their study protocols in publicly available repositories, such as the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/ ).

Q: How to appraise the quality of a methodological study?

A: To date, there is no published tool for appraising the risk of bias in a methodological study, but in principle, a methodological study could be considered as a type of observational study. Therefore, during conduct or appraisal, care should be taken to avoid the biases common in observational studies [ 38 ]. These biases include selection bias, comparability of groups, and ascertainment of exposure or outcome. In other words, to generate a representative sample, a comprehensive reproducible search may be necessary to build a sampling frame. Additionally, random sampling may be necessary to ensure that all the included research reports have the same probability of being selected, and the screening and selection processes should be transparent and reproducible. To ensure that the groups compared are similar in all characteristics, matching, random sampling or stratified sampling can be used. Statistical adjustments for between-group differences can also be applied at the analysis stage. Finally, duplicate data extraction can reduce errors in assessment of exposures or outcomes.

Q: Should I justify a sample size?

A: In all instances where one is not using the target population (i.e. the group to which inferences from the research report are directed) [ 39 ], a sample size justification is good practice. The sample size justification may take the form of a description of what is expected to be achieved with the number of articles selected, or a formal sample size estimation that outlines the number of articles required to answer the research question with a certain precision and power. Sample size justifications in methodological studies are reasonable in the following instances:

• Comparing two groups
• Determining a proportion, mean or another quantifier
• Determining factors associated with an outcome using regression-based analyses

For example, El Dib et al. computed a sample size requirement for a methodological study of diagnostic strategies in randomized trials, based on a confidence interval approach [ 40 ].

Q: What should I call my study?

A: Other terms which have been used to describe/label methodological studies include “ methodological review ”, “methodological survey” , “meta-epidemiological study” , “systematic review” , “systematic survey”, “meta-research”, “research-on-research” and many others. We recommend that the study nomenclature be clear, unambiguous, informative and allow for appropriate indexing. Methodological study nomenclature that should be avoided includes “ systematic review” – as this will likely be confused with a systematic review of a clinical question. “ Systematic survey” may also lead to confusion about whether the survey was systematic (i.e. using a preplanned methodology) or a survey using “ systematic” sampling (i.e. a sampling approach using specific intervals to determine who is selected) [ 32 ]. Any of the above meanings of the words “ systematic” may be true for methodological studies and could be potentially misleading. “ Meta-epidemiological study” is ideal for indexing, but not very informative as it describes an entire field. The term “ review ” may point towards an appraisal or “review” of the design, conduct, analysis or reporting (or methodological components) of the targeted research reports, yet it has also been used to describe narrative reviews [ 41 , 42 ]. The term “ survey ” is also in line with the approaches used in many methodological studies [ 9 ], and would be indicative of the sampling procedures of this study design. However, in the absence of guidelines on nomenclature, the term “ methodological study ” is broad enough to capture most of the scenarios of such studies.

Q: Should I account for clustering in my methodological study?

A: Data from methodological studies are often clustered. For example, articles coming from a specific source may have different reporting standards (e.g. the Cochrane Library). Articles within the same journal may be similar due to editorial practices and policies, reporting requirements and endorsement of guidelines. There is emerging evidence that these are real concerns that should be accounted for in analyses [ 43 ]. Some cluster variables are described in the section: “ What variables are relevant to methodological studies?”

A variety of modelling approaches can be used to account for correlated data, including the use of marginal, fixed or mixed effects regression models with appropriate computation of standard errors [ 44 ]. For example, Kosa et al. used generalized estimation equations to account for correlation of articles within journals [ 15 ]. Not accounting for clustering could lead to incorrect p -values, unduly narrow confidence intervals, and biased estimates [ 45 ].

Q: Should I extract data in duplicate?

A: Yes. Duplicate data extraction takes more time but results in less errors [ 19 ]. Data extraction errors in turn affect the effect estimate [ 46 ], and therefore should be mitigated. Duplicate data extraction should be considered in the absence of other approaches to minimize extraction errors. However, much like systematic reviews, this area will likely see rapid new advances with machine learning and natural language processing technologies to support researchers with screening and data extraction [ 47 , 48 ]. However, experience plays an important role in the quality of extracted data and inexperienced extractors should be paired with experienced extractors [ 46 , 49 ].

Q: Should I assess the risk of bias of research reports included in my methodological study?

A : Risk of bias is most useful in determining the certainty that can be placed in the effect measure from a study. In methodological studies, risk of bias may not serve the purpose of determining the trustworthiness of results, as effect measures are often not the primary goal of methodological studies. Determining risk of bias in methodological studies is likely a practice borrowed from systematic review methodology, but whose intrinsic value is not obvious in methodological studies. When it is part of the research question, investigators often focus on one aspect of risk of bias. For example, Speich investigated how blinding was reported in surgical trials [ 50 ], and Abraha et al., investigated the application of intention-to-treat analyses in systematic reviews and trials [ 51 ].

Q: What variables are relevant to methodological studies?

A: There is empirical evidence that certain variables may inform the findings in a methodological study. We outline some of these and provide a brief overview below:

• Country: Countries and regions differ in their research cultures, and the resources available to conduct research. Therefore, it is reasonable to believe that there may be differences in methodological features across countries. Methodological studies have reported loco-regional differences in reporting quality [ 52 , 53 ]. This may also be related to challenges non-English speakers face in publishing papers in English.
• Authors’ expertise: The inclusion of authors with expertise in research methodology, biostatistics, and scientific writing is likely to influence the end-product. Oltean et al. found that among randomized trials in orthopaedic surgery, the use of analyses that accounted for clustering was more likely when specialists (e.g. statistician, epidemiologist or clinical trials methodologist) were included on the study team [ 54 ]. Fleming et al. found that including methodologists in the review team was associated with appropriate use of reporting guidelines [ 55 ].
• Source of funding and conflicts of interest: Some studies have found that funded studies report better [ 56 , 57 ], while others do not [ 53 , 58 ]. The presence of funding would indicate the availability of resources deployed to ensure optimal design, conduct, analysis and reporting. However, the source of funding may introduce conflicts of interest and warrant assessment. For example, Kaiser et al. investigated the effect of industry funding on obesity or nutrition randomized trials and found that reporting quality was similar [ 59 ]. Thomas et al. looked at reporting quality of long-term weight loss trials and found that industry funded studies were better [ 60 ]. Kan et al. examined the association between industry funding and “positive trials” (trials reporting a significant intervention effect) and found that industry funding was highly predictive of a positive trial [ 61 ]. This finding is similar to that of a recent Cochrane Methodology Review by Hansen et al. [ 62 ]
• Journal characteristics: Certain journals’ characteristics may influence the study design, analysis or reporting. Characteristics such as journal endorsement of guidelines [ 63 , 64 ], and Journal Impact Factor (JIF) have been shown to be associated with reporting [ 63 , 65 – 67 ].
• Study size (sample size/number of sites): Some studies have shown that reporting is better in larger studies [ 53 , 56 , 58 ].
• Year of publication: It is reasonable to assume that design, conduct, analysis and reporting of research will change over time. Many studies have demonstrated improvements in reporting over time or after the publication of reporting guidelines [ 68 , 69 ].
• Type of intervention: In a methodological study of reporting quality of weight loss intervention studies, Thabane et al. found that trials of pharmacologic interventions were reported better than trials of non-pharmacologic interventions [ 70 ].
• Interactions between variables: Complex interactions between the previously listed variables are possible. High income countries with more resources may be more likely to conduct larger studies and incorporate a variety of experts. Authors in certain countries may prefer certain journals, and journal endorsement of guidelines and editorial policies may change over time.

Q: Should I focus only on high impact journals?

A: Investigators may choose to investigate only high impact journals because they are more likely to influence practice and policy, or because they assume that methodological standards would be higher. However, the JIF may severely limit the scope of articles included and may skew the sample towards articles with positive findings. The generalizability and applicability of findings from a handful of journals must be examined carefully, especially since the JIF varies over time. Even among journals that are all “high impact”, variations exist in methodological standards.

Q: Can I conduct a methodological study of qualitative research?

A: Yes. Even though a lot of methodological research has been conducted in the quantitative research field, methodological studies of qualitative studies are feasible. Certain databases that catalogue qualitative research including the Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) have defined subject headings that are specific to methodological research (e.g. “research methodology”). Alternatively, one could also conduct a qualitative methodological review; that is, use qualitative approaches to synthesize methodological issues in qualitative studies.

Q: What reporting guidelines should I use for my methodological study?

A: There is no guideline that covers the entire scope of methodological studies. One adaptation of the PRISMA guidelines has been published, which works well for studies that aim to use the entire target population of research reports [ 71 ]. However, it is not widely used (40 citations in 2 years as of 09 December 2019), and methodological studies that are designed as cross-sectional or before-after studies require a more fit-for purpose guideline. A more encompassing reporting guideline for a broad range of methodological studies is currently under development [ 72 ]. However, in the absence of formal guidance, the requirements for scientific reporting should be respected, and authors of methodological studies should focus on transparency and reproducibility.

Q: What are the potential threats to validity and how can I avoid them?

A: Methodological studies may be compromised by a lack of internal or external validity. The main threats to internal validity in methodological studies are selection and confounding bias. Investigators must ensure that the methods used to select articles does not make them differ systematically from the set of articles to which they would like to make inferences. For example, attempting to make extrapolations to all journals after analyzing high-impact journals would be misleading.

Many factors (confounders) may distort the association between the exposure and outcome if the included research reports differ with respect to these factors [ 73 ]. For example, when examining the association between source of funding and completeness of reporting, it may be necessary to account for journals that endorse the guidelines. Confounding bias can be addressed by restriction, matching and statistical adjustment [ 73 ]. Restriction appears to be the method of choice for many investigators who choose to include only high impact journals or articles in a specific field. For example, Knol et al. examined the reporting of p -values in baseline tables of high impact journals [ 26 ]. Matching is also sometimes used. In the methodological study of non-randomized interventional studies of elective ventral hernia repair, Parker et al. matched prospective studies with retrospective studies and compared reporting standards [ 74 ]. Some other methodological studies use statistical adjustments. For example, Zhang et al. used regression techniques to determine the factors associated with missing participant data in trials [ 16 ].

With regard to external validity, researchers interested in conducting methodological studies must consider how generalizable or applicable their findings are. This should tie in closely with the research question and should be explicit. For example. Findings from methodological studies on trials published in high impact cardiology journals cannot be assumed to be applicable to trials in other fields. However, investigators must ensure that their sample truly represents the target sample either by a) conducting a comprehensive and exhaustive search, or b) using an appropriate and justified, randomly selected sample of research reports.

Even applicability to high impact journals may vary based on the investigators’ definition, and over time. For example, for high impact journals in the field of general medicine, Bouwmeester et al. included the Annals of Internal Medicine (AIM), BMJ, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Lancet, the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), and PLoS Medicine ( n  = 6) [ 75 ]. In contrast, the high impact journals selected in the methodological study by Schiller et al. were BMJ, JAMA, Lancet, and NEJM ( n  = 4) [ 76 ]. Another methodological study by Kosa et al. included AIM, BMJ, JAMA, Lancet and NEJM ( n  = 5). In the methodological study by Thabut et al., journals with a JIF greater than 5 were considered to be high impact. Riado Minguez et al. used first quartile journals in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) for a specific year to determine “high impact” [ 77 ]. Ultimately, the definition of high impact will be based on the number of journals the investigators are willing to include, the year of impact and the JIF cut-off [ 78 ]. We acknowledge that the term “generalizability” may apply differently for methodological studies, especially when in many instances it is possible to include the entire target population in the sample studied.

Finally, methodological studies are not exempt from information bias which may stem from discrepancies in the included research reports [ 79 ], errors in data extraction, or inappropriate interpretation of the information extracted. Likewise, publication bias may also be a concern in methodological studies, but such concepts have not yet been explored.

A proposed framework

In order to inform discussions about methodological studies, the development of guidance for what should be reported, we have outlined some key features of methodological studies that can be used to classify them. For each of the categories outlined below, we provide an example. In our experience, the choice of approach to completing a methodological study can be informed by asking the following four questions:

• What is the aim?

A methodological study may be focused on exploring sources of bias in primary or secondary studies (meta-bias), or how bias is analyzed. We have taken care to distinguish bias (i.e. systematic deviations from the truth irrespective of the source) from reporting quality or completeness (i.e. not adhering to a specific reporting guideline or norm). An example of where this distinction would be important is in the case of a randomized trial with no blinding. This study (depending on the nature of the intervention) would be at risk of performance bias. However, if the authors report that their study was not blinded, they would have reported adequately. In fact, some methodological studies attempt to capture both “quality of conduct” and “quality of reporting”, such as Richie et al., who reported on the risk of bias in randomized trials of pharmacy practice interventions [ 80 ]. Babic et al. investigated how risk of bias was used to inform sensitivity analyses in Cochrane reviews [ 81 ]. Further, biases related to choice of outcomes can also be explored. For example, Tan et al investigated differences in treatment effect size based on the outcome reported [ 82 ].

Methodological studies may report quality of reporting against a reporting checklist (i.e. adherence to guidelines) or against expected norms. For example, Croituro et al. report on the quality of reporting in systematic reviews published in dermatology journals based on their adherence to the PRISMA statement [ 83 ], and Khan et al. described the quality of reporting of harms in randomized controlled trials published in high impact cardiovascular journals based on the CONSORT extension for harms [ 84 ]. Other methodological studies investigate reporting of certain features of interest that may not be part of formally published checklists or guidelines. For example, Mbuagbaw et al. described how often the implications for research are elaborated using the Evidence, Participants, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Timeframe (EPICOT) format [ 30 ].

Sometimes investigators may be interested in how consistent reports of the same research are, as it is expected that there should be consistency between: conference abstracts and published manuscripts; manuscript abstracts and manuscript main text; and trial registration and published manuscript. For example, Rosmarakis et al. investigated consistency between conference abstracts and full text manuscripts [ 85 ].

In addition to identifying issues with reporting in primary and secondary studies, authors of methodological studies may be interested in determining the factors that are associated with certain reporting practices. Many methodological studies incorporate this, albeit as a secondary outcome. For example, Farrokhyar et al. investigated the factors associated with reporting quality in randomized trials of coronary artery bypass grafting surgery [ 53 ].

Methodological studies may also be used to describe methods or compare methods, and the factors associated with methods. Muller et al. described the methods used for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies [ 86 ].

Some methodological studies synthesize results from other methodological studies. For example, Li et al. conducted a scoping review of methodological reviews that investigated consistency between full text and abstracts in primary biomedical research [ 87 ].

Some methodological studies may investigate the use of names and terms in health research. For example, Martinic et al. investigated the definitions of systematic reviews used in overviews of systematic reviews (OSRs), meta-epidemiological studies and epidemiology textbooks [ 88 ].

In addition to the previously mentioned experimental methodological studies, there may exist other types of methodological studies not captured here.

• 2. What is the design?

Most methodological studies are purely descriptive and report their findings as counts (percent) and means (standard deviation) or medians (interquartile range). For example, Mbuagbaw et al. described the reporting of research recommendations in Cochrane HIV systematic reviews [ 30 ]. Gohari et al. described the quality of reporting of randomized trials in diabetes in Iran [ 12 ].

Some methodological studies are analytical wherein “analytical studies identify and quantify associations, test hypotheses, identify causes and determine whether an association exists between variables, such as between an exposure and a disease.” [ 89 ] In the case of methodological studies all these investigations are possible. For example, Kosa et al. investigated the association between agreement in primary outcome from trial registry to published manuscript and study covariates. They found that larger and more recent studies were more likely to have agreement [ 15 ]. Tricco et al. compared the conclusion statements from Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews with a meta-analysis of the primary outcome and found that non-Cochrane reviews were more likely to report positive findings. These results are a test of the null hypothesis that the proportions of Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews that report positive results are equal [ 90 ].

• 3. What is the sampling strategy?

Methodological reviews with narrow research questions may be able to include the entire target population. For example, in the methodological study of Cochrane HIV systematic reviews, Mbuagbaw et al. included all of the available studies ( n  = 103) [ 30 ].

Many methodological studies use random samples of the target population [ 33 , 91 , 92 ]. Alternatively, purposeful sampling may be used, limiting the sample to a subset of research-related reports published within a certain time period, or in journals with a certain ranking or on a topic. Systematic sampling can also be used when random sampling may be challenging to implement.

• 4. What is the unit of analysis?

Many methodological studies use a research report (e.g. full manuscript of study, abstract portion of the study) as the unit of analysis, and inferences can be made at the study-level. However, both published and unpublished research-related reports can be studied. These may include articles, conference abstracts, registry entries etc.

Some methodological studies report on items which may occur more than once per article. For example, Paquette et al. report on subgroup analyses in Cochrane reviews of atrial fibrillation in which 17 systematic reviews planned 56 subgroup analyses [ 93 ].

This framework is outlined in Fig.  2 .

A proposed framework for methodological studies

Conclusions

Methodological studies have examined different aspects of reporting such as quality, completeness, consistency and adherence to reporting guidelines. As such, many of the methodological study examples cited in this tutorial are related to reporting. However, as an evolving field, the scope of research questions that can be addressed by methodological studies is expected to increase.

In this paper we have outlined the scope and purpose of methodological studies, along with examples of instances in which various approaches have been used. In the absence of formal guidance on the design, conduct, analysis and reporting of methodological studies, we have provided some advice to help make methodological studies consistent. This advice is grounded in good contemporary scientific practice. Generally, the research question should tie in with the sampling approach and planned analysis. We have also highlighted the variables that may inform findings from methodological studies. Lastly, we have provided suggestions for ways in which authors can categorize their methodological studies to inform their design and analysis.

Acknowledgements

Abbreviations.

Authors’ contributions

LM conceived the idea and drafted the outline and paper. DOL and LT commented on the idea and draft outline. LM, LP and DOL performed literature searches and data extraction. All authors (LM, DOL, LT, LP, DBA) reviewed several draft versions of the manuscript and approved the final manuscript.

This work did not receive any dedicated funding.

Availability of data and materials

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

DOL, DBA, LM, LP and LT are involved in the development of a reporting guideline for methodological studies.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Reference management. Clean and simple.

What is research methodology?

The basics of research methodology

Why do you need a research methodology, what needs to be included, why do you need to document your research method, what are the different types of research instruments, qualitative / quantitative / mixed research methodologies, how do you choose the best research methodology for you, frequently asked questions about research methodology, related articles.

When you’re working on your first piece of academic research, there are many different things to focus on, and it can be overwhelming to stay on top of everything. This is especially true of budding or inexperienced researchers.

If you’ve never put together a research proposal before or find yourself in a position where you need to explain your research methodology decisions, there are a few things you need to be aware of.

Once you understand the ins and outs, handling academic research in the future will be less intimidating. We break down the basics below:

A research methodology encompasses the way in which you intend to carry out your research. This includes how you plan to tackle things like collection methods, statistical analysis, participant observations, and more.

You can think of your research methodology as being a formula. One part will be how you plan on putting your research into practice, and another will be why you feel this is the best way to approach it. Your research methodology is ultimately a methodological and systematic plan to resolve your research problem.

In short, you are explaining how you will take your idea and turn it into a study, which in turn will produce valid and reliable results that are in accordance with the aims and objectives of your research. This is true whether your paper plans to make use of qualitative methods or quantitative methods.

The purpose of a research methodology is to explain the reasoning behind your approach to your research - you'll need to support your collection methods, methods of analysis, and other key points of your work.

Think of it like writing a plan or an outline for you what you intend to do.

When carrying out research, it can be easy to go off-track or depart from your standard methodology.

Tip: Having a methodology keeps you accountable and on track with your original aims and objectives, and gives you a suitable and sound plan to keep your project manageable, smooth, and effective.

With all that said, how do you write out your standard approach to a research methodology?

As a general plan, your methodology should include the following information:

• Your research method.  You need to state whether you plan to use quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis, or mixed-method research methods. This will often be determined by what you hope to achieve with your research.
• Explain your reasoning. Why are you taking this methodological approach? Why is this particular methodology the best way to answer your research problem and achieve your objectives?
• Explain your instruments.  This will mainly be about your collection methods. There are varying instruments to use such as interviews, physical surveys, questionnaires, for example. Your methodology will need to detail your reasoning in choosing a particular instrument for your research.
• What will you do with your results?  How are you going to analyze the data once you have gathered it?
• Advise your reader.  If there is anything in your research methodology that your reader might be unfamiliar with, you should explain it in more detail. For example, you should give any background information to your methods that might be relevant or provide your reasoning if you are conducting your research in a non-standard way.
• How will your sampling process go?  What will your sampling procedure be and why? For example, if you will collect data by carrying out semi-structured or unstructured interviews, how will you choose your interviewees and how will you conduct the interviews themselves?
• Any practical limitations?  You should discuss any limitations you foresee being an issue when you’re carrying out your research.

In any dissertation, thesis, or academic journal, you will always find a chapter dedicated to explaining the research methodology of the person who carried out the study, also referred to as the methodology section of the work.

A good research methodology will explain what you are going to do and why, while a poor methodology will lead to a messy or disorganized approach.

You should also be able to justify in this section your reasoning for why you intend to carry out your research in a particular way, especially if it might be a particularly unique method.

Having a sound methodology in place can also help you with the following:

• When another researcher at a later date wishes to try and replicate your research, they will need your explanations and guidelines.
• In the event that you receive any criticism or questioning on the research you carried out at a later point, you will be able to refer back to it and succinctly explain the how and why of your approach.
• It provides you with a plan to follow throughout your research. When you are drafting your methodology approach, you need to be sure that the method you are using is the right one for your goal. This will help you with both explaining and understanding your method.
• It affords you the opportunity to document from the outset what you intend to achieve with your research, from start to finish.

A research instrument is a tool you will use to help you collect, measure and analyze the data you use as part of your research.

The choice of research instrument will usually be yours to make as the researcher and will be whichever best suits your methodology.

There are many different research instruments you can use in collecting data for your research.

Generally, they can be grouped as follows:

• Interviews (either as a group or one-on-one). You can carry out interviews in many different ways. For example, your interview can be structured, semi-structured, or unstructured. The difference between them is how formal the set of questions is that is asked of the interviewee. In a group interview, you may choose to ask the interviewees to give you their opinions or perceptions on certain topics.
• Surveys (online or in-person). In survey research, you are posing questions in which you ask for a response from the person taking the survey. You may wish to have either free-answer questions such as essay-style questions, or you may wish to use closed questions such as multiple choice. You may even wish to make the survey a mixture of both.
• Focus Groups.  Similar to the group interview above, you may wish to ask a focus group to discuss a particular topic or opinion while you make a note of the answers given.
• Observations.  This is a good research instrument to use if you are looking into human behaviors. Different ways of researching this include studying the spontaneous behavior of participants in their everyday life, or something more structured. A structured observation is research conducted at a set time and place where researchers observe behavior as planned and agreed upon with participants.

These are the most common ways of carrying out research, but it is really dependent on your needs as a researcher and what approach you think is best to take.

It is also possible to combine a number of research instruments if this is necessary and appropriate in answering your research problem.

There are three different types of methodologies, and they are distinguished by whether they focus on words, numbers, or both.

➡️ Want to learn more about the differences between qualitative and quantitative research, and how to use both methods? Check out our guide for that!

If you've done your due diligence, you'll have an idea of which methodology approach is best suited to your research.

It’s likely that you will have carried out considerable reading and homework before you reach this point and you may have taken inspiration from other similar studies that have yielded good results.

Still, it is important to consider different options before setting your research in stone. Exploring different options available will help you to explain why the choice you ultimately make is preferable to other methods.

If proving your research problem requires you to gather large volumes of numerical data to test hypotheses, a quantitative research method is likely to provide you with the most usable results.

If instead you’re looking to try and learn more about people, and their perception of events, your methodology is more exploratory in nature and would therefore probably be better served using a qualitative research methodology.

It helps to always bring things back to the question: what do I want to achieve with my research?

Once you have conducted your research, you need to analyze it. Here are some helpful guides for qualitative data analysis:

➡️  How to do a content analysis

➡️  How to do a thematic analysis

➡️  How to do a rhetorical analysis

Research methodology refers to the techniques used to find and analyze information for a study, ensuring that the results are valid, reliable and that they address the research objective.

Data can typically be organized into four different categories or methods: observational, experimental, simulation, and derived.

Writing a methodology section is a process of introducing your methods and instruments, discussing your analysis, providing more background information, addressing your research limitations, and more.

Your research methodology section will need a clear research question and proposed research approach. You'll need to add a background, introduce your research question, write your methodology and add the works you cited during your data collecting phase.

The research methodology section of your study will indicate how valid your findings are and how well-informed your paper is. It also assists future researchers planning to use the same methodology, who want to cite your study or replicate it.

• Research Process
• Manuscript Preparation
• Manuscript Review
• Publication Process
• Publication Recognition
• Language Editing Services
• Translation Services

Choosing the Right Research Methodology: A Guide for Researchers

• 3 minute read
• 43.2K views

Table of Contents

Choosing an optimal research methodology is crucial for the success of any research project. The methodology you select will determine the type of data you collect, how you collect it, and how you analyse it. Understanding the different types of research methods available along with their strengths and weaknesses, is thus imperative to make an informed decision.

Understanding different research methods:

There are several research methods available depending on the type of study you are conducting, i.e., whether it is laboratory-based, clinical, epidemiological, or survey based . Some common methodologies include qualitative research, quantitative research, experimental research, survey-based research, and action research. Each method can be opted for and modified, depending on the type of research hypotheses and objectives.

Qualitative vs quantitative research:

When deciding on a research methodology, one of the key factors to consider is whether your research will be qualitative or quantitative. Qualitative research is used to understand people’s experiences, concepts, thoughts, or behaviours . Quantitative research, on the contrary, deals with numbers, graphs, and charts, and is used to test or confirm hypotheses, assumptions, and theories. 

Qualitative research methodology:

Qualitative research is often used to examine issues that are not well understood, and to gather additional insights on these topics. Qualitative research methods include open-ended survey questions, observations of behaviours described through words, and reviews of literature that has explored similar theories and ideas. These methods are used to understand how language is used in real-world situations, identify common themes or overarching ideas, and describe and interpret various texts. Data analysis for qualitative research typically includes discourse analysis, thematic analysis, and textual analysis. 

Quantitative research methodology:

The goal of quantitative research is to test hypotheses, confirm assumptions and theories, and determine cause-and-effect relationships. Quantitative research methods include experiments, close-ended survey questions, and countable and numbered observations. Data analysis for quantitative research relies heavily on statistical methods.

Analysing qualitative vs quantitative data:

The methods used for data analysis also differ for qualitative and quantitative research. As mentioned earlier, quantitative data is generally analysed using statistical methods and does not leave much room for speculation. It is more structured and follows a predetermined plan. In quantitative research, the researcher starts with a hypothesis and uses statistical methods to test it. Contrarily, methods used for qualitative data analysis can identify patterns and themes within the data, rather than provide statistical measures of the data. It is an iterative process, where the researcher goes back and forth trying to gauge the larger implications of the data through different perspectives and revising the analysis if required.

When to use qualitative vs quantitative research:

The choice between qualitative and quantitative research will depend on the gap that the research project aims to address, and specific objectives of the study. If the goal is to establish facts about a subject or topic, quantitative research is an appropriate choice. However, if the goal is to understand people’s experiences or perspectives, qualitative research may be more suitable. 

Conclusion:

In conclusion, an understanding of the different research methods available, their applicability, advantages, and disadvantages is essential for making an informed decision on the best methodology for your project. If you need any additional guidance on which research methodology to opt for, you can head over to Elsevier Author Services (EAS). EAS experts will guide you throughout the process and help you choose the perfect methodology for your research goals.

Why is data validation important in research?

When Data Speak, Listen: Importance of Data Collection and Analysis Methods

You may also like.

Descriptive Research Design and Its Myriad Uses

Five Common Mistakes to Avoid When Writing a Biomedical Research Paper

Making Technical Writing in Environmental Engineering Accessible

To Err is Not Human: The Dangers of AI-assisted Academic Writing

Writing a good review article

Scholarly Sources: What are They and Where can You Find Them?

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• This Or That Game
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• College University and Postgraduate
• Academic Writing

How to Write Research Methodology

Last Updated: May 27, 2024 Approved

This article was co-authored by Alexander Ruiz, M.Ed. and by wikiHow staff writer, Jennifer Mueller, JD . Alexander Ruiz is an Educational Consultant and the Educational Director of Link Educational Institute, a tutoring business based in Claremont, California that provides customizable educational plans, subject and test prep tutoring, and college application consulting. With over a decade and a half of experience in the education industry, Alexander coaches students to increase their self-awareness and emotional intelligence while achieving skills and the goal of achieving skills and higher education. He holds a BA in Psychology from Florida International University and an MA in Education from Georgia Southern University. wikiHow marks an article as reader-approved once it receives enough positive feedback. In this case, several readers have written to tell us that this article was helpful to them, earning it our reader-approved status. This article has been viewed 525,031 times.

The research methodology section of any academic research paper gives you the opportunity to convince your readers that your research is useful and will contribute to your field of study. An effective research methodology is grounded in your overall approach – whether qualitative or quantitative – and adequately describes the methods you used. Justify why you chose those methods over others, then explain how those methods will provide answers to your research questions. [1] X Research source

Describing Your Methods

• In your restatement, include any underlying assumptions that you're making or conditions that you're taking for granted. These assumptions will also inform the research methods you've chosen.
• Generally, state the variables you'll test and the other conditions you're controlling or assuming are equal.

• If you want to research and document measurable social trends, or evaluate the impact of a particular policy on various variables, use a quantitative approach focused on data collection and statistical analysis.
• If you want to evaluate people's views or understanding of a particular issue, choose a more qualitative approach.
• You can also combine the two. For example, you might look primarily at a measurable social trend, but also interview people and get their opinions on how that trend is affecting their lives.

• For example, if you conducted a survey, you would describe the questions included in the survey, where and how the survey was conducted (such as in person, online, over the phone), how many surveys were distributed, and how long your respondents had to complete the survey.
• Include enough detail that your study can be replicated by others in your field, even if they may not get the same results you did. [4] X Research source

• Qualitative research methods typically require more detailed explanation than quantitative methods.
• Basic investigative procedures don't need to be explained in detail. Generally, you can assume that your readers have a general understanding of common research methods that social scientists use, such as surveys or focus groups.

• For example, suppose you conducted a survey and used a couple of other research papers to help construct the questions on your survey. You would mention those as contributing sources.

Justifying Your Choice of Methods

• Describe study participants specifically, and list any inclusion or exclusion criteria you used when forming your group of participants.
• Justify the size of your sample, if applicable, and describe how this affects whether your study can be generalized to larger populations. For example, if you conducted a survey of 30 percent of the student population of a university, you could potentially apply those results to the student body as a whole, but maybe not to students at other universities.

• Reading other research papers is a good way to identify potential problems that commonly arise with various methods. State whether you actually encountered any of these common problems during your research.

• If you encountered any problems as you collected data, explain clearly the steps you took to minimize the effect that problem would have on your results.

• In some cases, this may be as simple as stating that while there were numerous studies using one method, there weren't any using your method, which caused a gap in understanding of the issue.
• For example, there may be multiple papers providing quantitative analysis of a particular social trend. However, none of these papers looked closely at how this trend was affecting the lives of people.

Connecting Your Methods to Your Research Goals

• Depending on your research questions, you may be mixing quantitative and qualitative analysis – just as you could potentially use both approaches. For example, you might do a statistical analysis, and then interpret those statistics through a particular theoretical lens.

• For example, suppose you're researching the effect of college education on family farms in rural America. While you could do interviews of college-educated people who grew up on a family farm, that would not give you a picture of the overall effect. A quantitative approach and statistical analysis would give you a bigger picture.

• If in answering your research questions, your findings have raised other questions that may require further research, state these briefly.
• You can also include here any limitations to your methods, or questions that weren't answered through your research.

• Generalization is more typically used in quantitative research. If you have a well-designed sample, you can statistically apply your results to the larger population your sample belongs to.

Template to Write Research Methodology

Community Q&A

• Organize your methodology section chronologically, starting with how you prepared to conduct your research methods, how you gathered data, and how you analyzed that data. [13] X Research source Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0
• Write your research methodology section in past tense, unless you're submitting the methodology section before the research described has been carried out. [14] X Research source Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0
• Discuss your plans in detail with your advisor or supervisor before committing to a particular methodology. They can help identify possible flaws in your study. [15] X Research source Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0

You Might Also Like

• ↑ http://expertjournals.com/how-to-write-a-research-methodology-for-your-academic-article/
• ↑ http://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/methodology
• ↑ https://www.skillsyouneed.com/learn/dissertation-methodology.html
• ↑ https://uir.unisa.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10500/4245/05Chap%204_Research%20methodology%20and%20design.pdf
• ↑ https://elc.polyu.edu.hk/FYP/html/method.htm

About This Article

To write a research methodology, start with a section that outlines the problems or questions you'll be studying, including your hypotheses or whatever it is you're setting out to prove. Then, briefly explain why you chose to use either a qualitative or quantitative approach for your study. Next, go over when and where you conducted your research and what parameters you used to ensure you were objective. Finally, cite any sources you used to decide on the methodology for your research. To learn how to justify your choice of methods in your research methodology, scroll down! Did this summary help you? Yes No

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Prof. Dr. Ahmed Askar

Apr 18, 2020

Did this article help you?

M. Mahmood Shah Khan

Mar 17, 2020

Shimola Makondo

Jul 20, 2019

Zain Sharif Mohammed Alnadhery

Jan 7, 2019

Lundi Dukashe

Feb 17, 2020

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

Get all the best how-tos!

Sign up for wikiHow's weekly email newsletter

Organizing Academic Research Papers: 6. The Methodology

• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Executive Summary
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tertiary Sources
• What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Annotated Bibliography
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• How to Manage Group Projects
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Essays
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Acknowledgements

The methods section of a research paper provides the information by which a study’s validity is judged. The method section answers two main questions: 1) How was the data collected or generated? 2) How was it analyzed? The writing should be direct and precise and written in the past tense.

Importance of a Good Methodology Section

You must explain how you obtained and analyzed your results for the following reasons:

• Readers need to know how the data was obtained because the method you choose affects the results and, by extension, how you likely interpreted those results.
• Methodology is crucial for any branch of scholarship because an unreliable method produces unreliable results and it misappropriates interpretations of findings .
• In most cases, there are a variety of different methods you can choose to investigate a research problem. Your methodology section of your paper should make clear the reasons why you chose a particular method or procedure .
• The reader wants to know that the data was collected or generated in a way that is consistent with accepted practice in the field of study. For example, if you are using a questionnaire, readers need to know that it offered your respondents a reasonable range of answers to choose from.
• The research method must be appropriate to the objectives of the study . For example, be sure you have a large enough sample size to be able to generalize and make recommendations based upon the findings.
• The methodology should discuss the problems that were anticipated and the steps you took to prevent them from occurring . For any problems that did arise, you must describe the ways in which their impact was minimized or why these problems do not affect the findings in any way that impacts your interpretation of the data.
• Often in social science research, it is useful for other researchers to adapt or replicate your methodology. Therefore, it is important to always provide sufficient information to allow others to use or replicate the study . This information is particularly important when a new method had been developed or an innovative use of an existing method has been utilized.

Bem, Daryl J. Writing the Empirical Journal Article . Psychology Writing Center. University of Washington; Lunenburg, Frederick C. Writing a Successful Thesis or Dissertation: Tips and Strategies for Students in the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2008.

Structure and Writing Style

I. Groups of Research Methods

There are two main groups of research methods in the social sciences:

• The empirical-analytical group approaches the study of social sciences in a similar manner that researchers study the natural sciences. This type of research focuses on objective knowledge, research questions that can be answered yes or no, and operational definitions of variables to be measured. The empirical-analytical group employs deductive reasoning that uses existing theory as a foundation for hypotheses that need to be tested. This approach is focused on explanation .
• The interpretative group is focused on understanding phenomenon in a comprehensive, holistic way . This research method allows you to recognize your connection to the subject under study. Because the interpretative group focuses more on subjective knowledge, it requires careful interpretation of variables.

II. Content

An effectively written methodology section should:

• Introduce the overall methodological approach for investigating your research problem . Is your study qualitative or quantitative or a combination of both (mixed method)? Are you going to take a special approach, such as action research, or a more neutral stance?
• Indicate how the approach fits the overall research design . Your methods should have a clear connection with your research problem. In other words, make sure that your methods will actually address the problem. One of the most common deficiencies found in research papers is that the proposed methodology is unsuited to achieving the stated objective of your paper.
• Describe the specific methods of data collection you are going to use , such as, surveys, interviews, questionnaires, observation, archival research. If you are analyzing existing data, such as a data set or archival documents, describe how it was originally created or gathered and by whom.
• Explain how you intend to analyze your results . Will you use statistical analysis? Will you use specific theoretical perspectives to help you analyze a text or explain observed behaviors?
• Provide background and rationale for methodologies that are unfamiliar for your readers . Very often in the social sciences, research problems and the methods for investigating them require more explanation/rationale than widely accepted rules governing the natural and physical sciences. Be clear and concise in your explanation.
• Provide a rationale for subject selection and sampling procedure . For instance, if you propose to conduct interviews, how do you intend to select the sample population? If you are analyzing texts, which texts have you chosen, and why? If you are using statistics, why is this set of statisics being used? If other data sources exist, explain why the data you chose is most appropriate.
• Address potential limitations . Are there any practical limitations that could affect your data collection? How will you attempt to control for potential confounding variables and errors? If your methodology may lead to problems you can anticipate, state this openly and show why pursuing this methodology outweighs the risk of these problems cropping up.

NOTE :  Once you have written all of the elements of the methods section, subsequent revisions should focus on how to present those elements as clearly and as logically as possibly. The description of how you prepared to study the research problem, how you gathered the data, and the protocol for analyzing the data should be organized chronologically. For clarity, when a large amount of detail must be presented, information should be presented in sub-sections according to topic.

III.  Problems to Avoid

Irrelevant Detail The methodology section of your paper should be thorough but to the point. Don’t provide any background information that doesn’t directly help the reader to understand why a particular method was chosen, how the data was gathered or obtained, and how it was analyzed. Unnecessary Explanation of Basic Procedures Remember that you are not writing a how-to guide about a particular method. You should make the assumption that readers possess a basic understanding of how to investigate the research problem on their own and, therefore, you do not have to go into great detail about specific methodological procedures. The focus should be on how you applied a method , not on the mechanics of doing a method. NOTE: An exception to this rule is if you select an unconventional approach to doing the method; if this is the case, be sure to explain why this approach was chosen and how it enhances the overall research process. Problem Blindness It is almost a given that you will encounter problems when collecting or generating your data. Do not ignore these problems or pretend they did not occur. Often, documenting how you overcame obstacles can form an interesting part of the methodology. It demonstrates to the reader that you can provide a cogent rationale for the decisions you made to minimize the impact of any problems that arose. Literature Review Just as the literature review section of your paper provides an overview of sources you have examined while researching a particular topic, the methodology section should cite any sources that informed your choice and application of a particular method [i.e., the choice of a survey should include any citations to the works you used to help construct the survey].

It’s More than Sources of Information! A description of a research study's method should not be confused with a description of the sources of information. Such a list of sources is useful in itself, especially if it is accompanied by an explanation about the selection and use of the sources. The description of the project's methodology complements a list of sources in that it sets forth the organization and interpretation of information emanating from those sources.

Azevedo, L.F. et al. How to Write a Scientific Paper: Writing the Methods Section. Revista Portuguesa de Pneumologia 17 (2011): 232-238; Butin, Dan W. The Education Dissertation A Guide for Practitioner Scholars . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin, 2010; Carter, Susan. Structuring Your Research Thesis . New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012; Lunenburg, Frederick C. Writing a Successful Thesis or Dissertation: Tips and Strategies for Students in the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2008. Methods Section . The Writer’s Handbook. Writing Center. University of Wisconsin, Madison; Writing the Experimental Report: Methods, Results, and Discussion . The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Methods and Materials . The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper. Department of Biology. Bates College.

Writing Tip

Statistical Designs and Tests? Do Not Fear Them!

Don't avoid using a quantitative approach to analyzing your research problem just because you fear the idea of applying statistical designs and tests. A qualitative approach, such as conducting interviews or content analysis of archival texts, can yield exciting new insights about a research problem, but it should not be undertaken simply because you have a disdain for running a simple regression. A well designed quantitative research study can often be accomplished in very clear and direct ways, whereas, a similar study of a qualitative nature usually requires considerable time to analyze large volumes of data and a tremendous burden to create new paths for analysis where previously no path associated with your research problem had existed.

Another Writing Tip

Knowing the Relationship Between Theories and Methods

There can be multiple meaning associated with the term "theories" and the term "methods" in social sciences research. A helpful way to delineate between them is to understand "theories" as representing different ways of characterizing the social world when you research it and "methods" as representing different ways of generating and analyzing data about that social world. Framed in this way, all empirical social sciences research involves theories and methods, whether they are stated explicitly or not. However, while theories and methods are often related, it is important that, as a researcher, you deliberately separate them in order to avoid your theories playing a disproportionate role in shaping what outcomes your chosen methods produce.

Introspectively engage in an ongoing dialectic between theories and methods to help enable you to use the outcomes from your methods to interrogate and develop new theories, or ways of framing conceptually the research problem. This is how scholarship grows and branches out into new intellectual territory.

Reynolds, R. Larry. Ways of Knowing. Alternative Microeconomics. Part 1, Chapter 3. Boise State University; The Theory-Method Relationship . S-Cool Revision. United Kingdom.

• << Previous: What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
• Next: Qualitative Methods >>
• Last Updated: Jul 18, 2023 11:58 AM
• URL: https://library.sacredheart.edu/c.php?g=29803
• QuickSearch
• Library Catalog
• Databases A-Z
• Publication Finder
• Course Reserves
• Citation Linker
• Digital Commons
• Our Website

Research Support

• Ask a Librarian
• Appointments
• Interlibrary Loan (ILL)
• Research Guides
• Databases by Subject
• Citation Help

Using the Library

• Reserve a Group Study Room
• Renew Books
• Honors Study Rooms
• Off-Campus Access
• Library Policies
• Library Technology

User Information

• Grad Students
• Online Students
• COVID-19 Updates
• Staff Directory
• News & Announcements
• Library Newsletter

My Accounts

• Interlibrary Loan
• Staff Site Login

FIND US ON  

Research Methodologies

• Quantitative Research Methodologies
• Qualitative Research Methodologies
• Systematic Reviews
• Finding Articles by Methodology
• Design Your Research Project

Library Help

Searching with keywords.

One option for finding articles that used a specific research methodology is to run a database search using your methodology as a keyword. You can often search just by a type of methodology if you're looking for any examples using the method, or you can combine your topic with a type of methodology.

For best results, make sure that filters for peer-reviewed/scholarly journals are checked.

• cancer AND treatment AND "systematic review"
• "consumer behavior" AND "grounded theory"
• "alternative fuels" AND experiment

Because methodologies are not always readily apparent in the title or abstract, you may need to skim through the methodology section of an article to make sure it's relevant. 

• OneSearch This link opens in a new window OneSearch is the default search on the library's homepage and can be used to find research articles on a wide variety of topics. Use the Scholarly (Peer Reviewed) Journals filter to limit your results to scholarly articles.

Searching With Filters

Some databases include filters among their advanced search options that you can use to search for studies that use specific research methodologies. This method isn't foolproof. Not all methodologies will be available in these filters and articles that don't have their methodologies listed in the database record may be overlooked.

Using the Methodology Filter

• Use the library's list of databases to find a subject-appropriate database. Not all databases have a methodology filter, but there are several databases in health sciences, behavioral sciences, and the physical sciences that do, such as APA PsycInfo.
• A-Z Database List Full list of databases available through the Fulton Library, with recommendations for researching specific subjects.
• If necessary, navigate to the database's advanced search page and look for the methodology filter. This example comes from APA PsycINFO:

• Choose the methodology you need and run your search. You don't always need to have a topic in the main search box to run this type of search, if you are simply looking for examples.

Using the Subject Filter

Another option — which is available in databases that don't have a specific filter for methodologies — is to use the subject filter that appears on the results page of many of the library's databases. These filters take the most frequently occurring assigned keywords and subjects to help you weed out irrelevant results. Because these assigned terms can also include methodology information, you can use these filters to locate articles that use specific methodologies. 

To get started:

• Begin a search on your topic. 
• Click  All Filters  below the search box.
• Open  Subjects . You will need to expand the list of subjects to find all relevant methodologies. 
• Select the relevant methodologies. 
• Click  Apply Filters
• The options on the subject filter will change as your search changes. Check back periodically to see if there are additional useful items that you can filter for.

Full List, With Methodologies Highlighted

• Call : 801.863.8840
• Text : 801.290.8123
• In-Person Help
• Email a Librarian
• Make an Appointment
• << Previous: Systematic Reviews
• Next: Design Your Research Project >>
• Last Updated: Jun 20, 2024 3:16 PM
• URL: https://uvu.libguides.com/methods

Research Methodologies

• What are research designs?

What are research methodologies?

Quantitative research methodologies, qualitative research methodologies, mixed method methodologies, selecting a methodology.

• What are research methods?
• Additional Sources

According to Dawson (2019),a research methodology is the primary principle that will guide your research.  It becomes the general approach in conducting research on your topic and determines what research method you will use. A research methodology is different from a research method because research methods are the tools you use to gather your data (Dawson, 2019).  You must consider several issues when it comes to selecting the most appropriate methodology for your topic.  Issues might include research limitations and ethical dilemmas that might impact the quality of your research.  Descriptions of each type of methodology are included below.

Quantitative research methodologies are meant to create numeric statistics by using survey research to gather data (Dawson, 2019).  This approach tends to reach a larger amount of people in a shorter amount of time.  According to Labaree (2020), there are three parts that make up a quantitative research methodology:

• Sample population
• How you will collect your data (this is the research method)
• How you will analyze your data

Once you decide on a methodology, you can consider the method to which you will apply your methodology.

Qualitative research methodologies examine the behaviors, opinions, and experiences of individuals through methods of examination (Dawson, 2019).  This type of approach typically requires less participants, but more time with each participant.  It gives research subjects the opportunity to provide their own opinion on a certain topic.

Examples of Qualitative Research Methodologies

• Action research:  This is when the researcher works with a group of people to improve something in a certain environment.  It is a common approach for research in organizational management, community development, education, and agriculture (Dawson, 2019).
• Ethnography:  The process of organizing and describing cultural behaviors (Dawson, 2019).  Researchers may immerse themselves into another culture to receive in "inside look" into the group they are studying.  It is often a time consuming process because the researcher will do this for a long period of time.  This can also be called "participant observation" (Dawson, 2019).
• Feminist research:  The goal of this methodology is to study topics that have been dominated by male test subjects.  It aims to study females and compare the results to previous studies that used male participants (Dawson, 2019).
• Grounded theory:  The process of developing a theory to describe a phenomenon strictly through the data results collected in a study.  It is different from other research methodologies where the researcher attempts to prove a hypothesis that they create before collecting data.  Popular research methods for this approach include focus groups and interviews (Dawson, 2019).

A mixed methodology allows you to implement the strengths of both qualitative and quantitative research methods.  In some cases, you may find that your research project would benefit from this.  This approach is beneficial because it allows each methodology to counteract the weaknesses of the other (Dawson, 2019).  You should consider this option carefully, as it can make your research complicated if not planned correctly.

What should you do to decide on a research methodology?  The most logical way to determine your methodology is to decide whether you plan on conducting qualitative or qualitative research.  You also have the option to implement a mixed methods approach.  Looking back on Dawson's (2019) five "W's" on the previous page , may help you with this process.  You should also look for key words that indicate a specific type of research methodology in your hypothesis or proposal.  Some words may lean more towards one methodology over another.

Quantitative Research Key Words

• How satisfied

Qualitative Research Key Words

• Experiences
• Thoughts/Think
• Relationship
• << Previous: What are research designs?
• Next: What are research methods? >>
• Last Updated: Aug 2, 2022 2:36 PM
• URL: https://library.tiffin.edu/researchmethodologies

• How it works
• Pay for essays
• Do my homework
• Term Paper Writing Service
• Do my assignment
• Coursework help
• Our Writers

How to write a research proposal: a detailed guide for students

A professional writer with ten years of experience and a Ph.D. in Modern History, Catharine Tawil writes engaging and insightful papers for academic exchange. With deep insight into the impact of historical events on the present, she provides a unique perspective in giving students a feel for the past. Her writing educates and stimulates critical thinking, making her a treasure to those wading through the complexities of history.

How to write a research proposal? Although writing academic papers and completing projects is part of the routine of any young learner, this assignment can often be troublesome. Still, if you are looking for professional research proposal guidelines, you’ve come to the right place. In this post, we’ll go down the rabbit hole and discover all the best ways to complete this assignment easily and quickly. 

Research proposal: meaning and description

Research proposals are not easy to write. However, if you follow our tips and tricks, you will achieve all your academic goals. As a rule, you need to develop a strong research proposal before you start working on your research paper. In other words, it’s like preparing a list of ingredients for cooking your main course. 

Your paper will generally contain a topic (well, that’s the most straightforward component), your research questions, methodology, and the significance of the chosen field. However, the requirements might differ depending on your academic level and the overall complexity of your paper. 

Why a good research proposal matters

What do I need to compose a proposal writing? Many bright minds ask this question. The answer is that it has many goals. First and foremost, it allows learners to clarify their ideas and get approval from their teachers or professors. The second thing about this writing is that it helps students create a well-structured and properly formatted paper before diving too deep into the research paper. As a rule, you must submit your proposal before you start working on your research project, thesis, or dissertation. 

Top components of a research proposal

Your research proposal must cover many experts. For your convenience, we’ve prepared a list of top features you are expected to have in this type of writing. 

• Topic: Similar to a research paper, your proposal must have a precise topic. It should be understandable, fresh, and sharp. And, of course, it should be focused on your research for 100%.
• Intro: This is background info for your topic. In most cases, it highlights the importance of your study and describes the research objectives. 
• Literature review: What literature is related to the chosen niche? What unresolved questions does your field have? Why do you need to conduct the research? Your literature review helps you prove that you have already conducted the primary research and understand the selected topic well. This point is a must-to-write for all research proposals.
• Research questions: What questions will your study address? Make sure they are unique, measurable, and achievable.
• Methodology: In this field, you must specify the methods and techniques you will use to collect and process your findings. 
• Timeline: Every project has its deadlines and milestones. You will need to create an approximate schedule for completing your assignment. This schedule must include time for collecting information, advanced data analysis, and writing. 
• Reference: As with the other academic assignments, you must develop a reference list for your paper proposal. 
• Appendices: This is the best place to provide your supplementary artifacts and other materials. 

How can you understand your research problem 

Now that you have a better understanding of a research proposal, what’s next? Below is a simple step-by-step solution for writing a research proposal. 

Spotlighting the research gap

Identifying a research gap for a research proposal involves several stages. Firstly, you will need to review existing literature in your field. This will allow you to pinpoint areas where knowledge is lacking or contradictory. For example, you can search for some unanswered questions that require more investigation. After that, you may consider recent developments or emerging trends that created new gaps in existing research. Finally, you should critically evaluate your expertise and interests. 

Developing your main research question

Developing your main research question for a research proposal usually involves the following critical steps: 

• Brainstorming ideas and narrowing down your topic to a specific field. 
• Clarify the gaps you’ve discovered in the previous stage.
• Formulate your main research question.
• Double-check your question for relevance and clarity.
• Refine your research question and make sure it fully aligns with your goals. 

Choosing your top-notch research objectives

Now, it’s time to dive into the ocean of your research proposal objectives. Although there might be too many goals, you must select only the most important ones. Moreover, it requires careful consideration and strategic planning. The best approach to this task is to start by identifying the main purpose of your research. After that, you may try to connect your goals with the main questions and the research gap. Not to mention, make sure to focus only on realistic goals during your objective’s research design. 

Working on your literature review

If you look at any good-written research proposal example, you will notice that it always has a literature review section. To complete it easily, feel free to follow these easy steps:

• Gather articles and texts that address these themes.
• Critically analyze and synthesize the findings from the chosen sources.
• Organize your literature review thematically or chronologically.
• Conclude by summarizing the current state of knowledge and explaining your proposed research's contribution.

Selecting the research methodology 

When choosing the most fitting research methodology, consider the following parameters: 

• Define the research questions to guide your methodology selection.
• Evaluate different research methodologies (for example, you can choose quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods.)
• Consider practical factors, including resources, time constraints, and access to participants.
• Choose a methodology that aligns with your research goals and theoretical framework.
• Explain how the chosen methodology enables you to collect relevant data and generate insights for your research proposal.

Developing the introduction

There is nothing new about the introduction being one of the most impactful parts of any academic paper. To succeed in writing your assignment, you must follow many rules and requirements. So, here is a quick start on how to complete this part like a real pro. 

Collecting the background information

Writing a research proposal is never an easy task. However, a good introduction with properly arranged background information is one of the keys to success. You can begin by introducing the broad study area and its significance in the academic or practical realm. After that, you can provide historical context or foundational theories relevant to the research topic. It is always a brilliant idea to summarize past research and scholarly discussions related to the subject and highlight your key findings and knowledge gaps. After all, connect your background info and the proposed research. You can also add a smooth transition to your problem statements and research proposal purpose. 

Arranging the study context

This part of writing is one of the most complicated. However, the tips below might help you cope with it more easily. 

• Describe your research's social, cultural, economic, or environmental context.
• Identify any trends, developments, or events that underscore the relevance of the research significance.
• Highlight any specific challenges or opportunities presented by the research context.
• Emphasize the need to address the identified research problem.

Describing the research problem and objectives

This section articulates the specific research problem the proposal aims to address. The research problem is the focal point of the study, representing the gap or issue in knowledge that the research seeks to explore. Always make sure your objectives provide clear and measurable targets for the study.

Demonstrating the significance of the study

All excellent research proposal examples can boast of having an outstanding demonstration of the significance of the study. And you can do that, too! For these purposes, follow this easy schema: 

• Discuss the broader significance of the research topic within its field or discipline, emphasizing its relevance and timeliness.
• Identify the potential contributions that the proposed research is expected to make.

Composing the research methodology

You might feel tired of all the rules, but it’s not the time to give up. Your research proposal template desperately needs a sound research methodology. So, let’s get started! 

Determining the right research design

When determining the right research design for your proposal, consider the following tips:

• Clarify your research questions and objectives.
• Explore various research designs and methodologies that can fit the research proposal structure well. This approach will help you identify the best options for your research aims.
• Consider practical constraints. You need to consider time, budget, access to participants or data, and ethical considerations.
• Pilot-test your research design. It is always good to conduct a pilot study or small-scale test to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of your chosen research design in the primary stage of the research proposal template development. 

Choosing the research participants

Always consider the practical aspects of participant selection, such as accessibility and feasibility. Finally, be transparent about the participant selection process in your research proposal.

Collecting data: your most fitting methods

Any student is required to select the most suitable methods of data collection for their assignment. Here are a few tips for your convenience: 

• Choose methods that best capture the data needed to address your research questions and objectives.
• Assess the practicality of each method in terms of resources, time, and access to participants or data sources.
• Select methods that yield data with high reliability and validity.

The truth is that every research proposal format requires diverse methods of collecting data. So, always adapt them to your specific writing. 

Creating the plan for data analysis

In this step, you will outline the specific techniques and procedures you will use to analyze your research data. This includes selecting appropriate statistical or qualitative analysis methods and organizing and coding your data. The data analysis plan should align with your research objectives. This is the essential feature of all research proposals.

Ensuring the validity and reliability of your research

Ensuring validity and reliability means making sure your research methods accurately measure what they're supposed to and produce consistent results. Remember that ensuring research study validity is a must for this type of academic paper. 

Crafting the literature review

According to research proposal format rules, your paper must contain a literature review. Some students believe that completing this task during the data collection step is easier, while others admit they usually craft it at the final steps of writing a proposal. Anyway, the process usually has several steps. 

Choosing the relevant literature

Identifying the foundational studies and key sources that will guide your research is essential. Although you can look for some research proposal examples, it is still good to follow this plan during writing:

• Search academic databases and scholarly sources related to your research topic.
• Look for key studies, articles, and books that provide insights into your research area.
• Focus on literature that directly addresses your research questions and objectives.

Summarizing the literature lists

Once you've gathered relevant literature for your paper proposal, synthesizing it will be your next step. Here's how to approach it:

• Summarize the main findings and arguments of the chosen literature list.
• Identify common themes, trends, and patterns in different sources.
• Analyze how the literature contributes to the understanding of your research topic.

Evaluating the literature sources

Now, it's high time to evaluate the resources’ quality and relevance critically:

• Assess each source's credibility, relevance, and methodological rigor for your proposal writing.
• Consider the strengths and weaknesses of different research methods used in the literature.

Exploring the research gaps

At the final step of working with your literature sources, you need to find out the areas for further investigation: 

• Evaluate the existing literature to identify unanswered questions.
• Look for contradictions, inconsistencies, or limitations in the current research.
• Consider emerging trends, recent developments, or advancements in your field.

Now, the work with literature lists for your research proposal is done. 

Note: Failure to effectively analyze your sources is one of the most common mistakes in writing a research proposal, so don’t underestimate it. 

Creating the conclusion 

Every research proposal has a conclusion. Although many students don’t like this part of writing, it is still necessary to pay attention to it. Here is how to do that. 

Summarizing your findings

• Condense the primary outcomes of your study into clear statements.
• Make sure that your summary captures the essential research findings derived from your research.

Adding recommendations for future research

• Suggest areas for further investigation based on the limitations identified in your research proposal.
• Offer suggestions or directions for future research.

Showing off the implications of your study

• Discuss the broader significance and relevance of your study's findings for theory, practice, or policy.
• Articulate the potential impact or practical applications of your research results.

Note: The conclusion is a must-have writing piece in every research proposal format. Always add it to your paper. 

Composing the abstract

If you look at any professionally written research proposal example, you will discover it also has an abstract. 

Offering a concise study overview

Start your abstract with a brief overview of the study. In other words, you can provide a snapshot of your paper’s purpose and significance. You will also need to summarize the main topic and objectives. If you are feeling a bit lost in what to write in this part, read the introduction of your research proposal once more - you will find some basic info to write about. 

Introducing the research problem and objectives

Regardless of your writing style, it is crucial to add your research paper objectives to your abstract: 

• Clearly present your research problem and objectives.
• Define the research problem, emphasizing its importance.
• Clearly state the specific research questions that your study aims to address.

Detailing the research methodology

• Ensure the credibility of your study by providing a detailed overview of your research methodology.
• Describe your research design and methods used while composing a research proposal briefly.
• Justify your methodology choice.
• Briefly outline your data collection, analysis, and interpretation procedures.

Recapping the research findings

• Summarize your key findings.
• Outline the main outcomes of your study in clear and straightforward language.
• Highlight how your findings address the research objectives and contribute to filling the research gap.

Note: According to research proposal format requirements, all these abstract parts are obligatory.

Style and formatting

If you look for a fresh and up-to-date research proposal example online, you will likely discover they all have different formats. However, there are still some rules you are expected to follow. 

Following the research proposal guidelines

Employing clear and concise writing, proofreading and editing the proposal, conclusion .

Of course, writing papers is usually a tricky process. Fortunately, you can always get professional help and pay for essay online. Still, if you want to complete it by yourself, remember about these critical aspects. 

Most universities and colleges have a solid view of the components of the proposal:

• Introduction;
• Literature Review;
• Methodology;
• Research Timeline;
• References;
• Appendices.

A perfectly written research proposal is a roadmap for the entire research project. In other words, it guides the researcher in defining objectives, methods, and expected outcomes. A research proposal is also necessary to secure funding, gain approval from ethics committees, and attract collaborators or participants.

Final thoughts and recommendations

The best recommendation for creating this type of writing is to begin far in advance and follow all the professor’s requirements. Still, if you have an urgent deadline or writing difficulties, you can always rely on the Write my paper for me professional service. So, how to write a research proposal? It’s up to you!

What is the main goal of a research proposal?

The purpose of a research proposal is to outline the planned research project, including its objectives, methodology, and significance.

How long should a typical research proposal be?

Research proposal length typically ranges from 1500 to 2500 words.

What are the common mistakes to avoid when composing a research proposal?

The list of mistakes includes unclear objectives, inadequate literature review, and lack of coherence in the methodology.

Can I revise a research proposal after submission?

Yes, a research proposal can be revised after submission based on reviewer feedback or research plan changes.

How is it better to ensure the validity and reliability of my research study?

Use appropriate research designs and methods, maintain consistency in data collection and analysis, and address potential sources of bias.

Related posts

8 Answers on How to Write an Annotated Bibliography

How to write a research proposal: top tips for busy students

Exploring the Creative Universe of Jenny Parks Illustration 🎨

What are you waiting for?

You are a couple of clicks away from tranquility at an affordable price!

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper: The Methodology

• Purpose of Guide
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• The Research Problem/Question
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Evaluating Sources
• Reading Research Effectively
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
• Is it Peer-Reviewed?
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism [linked guide]
• Annotated Bibliography
• Grading Someone Else's Paper

The methods section describes actions to be taken to investigate a research problem and the rationale for the application of specific procedures or techniques used to identify, select, process, and analyze information applied to understanding the problem, thereby, allowing the reader to critically evaluate a study’s overall validity and reliability. The methodology section of a research paper answers two main questions: How was the data collected or generated? And, how was it analyzed? The writing should be direct and precise and always written in the past tense.

Kallet, Richard H. "How to Write the Methods Section of a Research Paper." Respiratory Care 49 (October 2004): 1229-1232.

Importance of a Good Methodology Section

You must explain how you obtained and analyzed your results for the following reasons:

• Readers need to know how the data was obtained because the method you chose affects the results and, by extension, how you interpreted their significance.
• Methodology is crucial for any branch of scholarship because an unreliable method produces unreliable results and, as a consequence, undermines the value of your interpretations of the findings.
• In most cases, there are a variety of different methods you can choose to investigate a research problem. The methodology section of your paper should clearly articulate the reasons why you chose a particular procedure or technique.
• The reader wants to know that the data was collected or generated in a way that is consistent with accepted practice in the field of study. For example, if you are using a multiple choice questionnaire, readers need to know that it offered your respondents a reasonable range of answers to choose from.
• The method must be appropriate to fulfilling the overall aims of the study. For example, you need to ensure that you have a large enough sample size to be able to generalize and make recommendations based upon the findings.
• The methodology should discuss the problems that were anticipated and the steps you took to prevent them from occurring. For any problems that do arise, you must describe the ways in which they were minimized or why these problems do not impact in any meaningful way your interpretation of the findings.
• In the social and behavioral sciences, it is important to always provide sufficient information to allow other researchers to adopt or replicate your methodology. This information is particularly important when a new method has been developed or an innovative use of an existing method is utilized.

Bem, Daryl J. Writing the Empirical Journal Article . Psychology Writing Center. University of Washington; Denscombe, Martyn. The Good Research Guide: For Small-Scale Social Research Projects . 5th edition. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press, 2014; Lunenburg, Frederick C. Writing a Successful Thesis or Dissertation: Tips and Strategies for Students in the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2008.

Structure and Writing Style

The introduction to your methodology section should begin by restating the research problem and underlying assumptions underpinning your study. This is followed by situating the methods you will use to gather, analyze, and process information within the overall “tradition” of your field of study and within the particular research design you have chosen to study the problem. If the method you choose lies outside of the tradition of your field [i.e., your review of the literature demonstrates that the method is not commonly used], provide a justification for how your choice of methods specifically addresses the research problem in ways that have not been utilized in prior studies.

The remainder of your methodology section should describe the following:

• Decisions made in selecting the data you have analyzed or, in the case of qualitative research, the subjects and research setting you have examined,
• Tools and methods used to identify and collect information, and how you identified relevant variables,
• The ways in which you processed the data and the procedures you used to analyze that data, and
• The specific research tools or strategies that you utilized to study the underlying hypothesis and research questions.

In addition, an effectively written methodology section should:

• Introduce the overall methodological approach for investigating your research problem . Is your study qualitative or quantitative or a combination of both (mixed method)? Are you going to take a special approach, such as action research, or a more neutral stance?
• Indicate how the approach fits the overall research design . Your methods for gathering data should have a clear connection to your research problem. In other words, make sure that your methods will actually address the problem. One of the most common deficiencies found in research papers is that the proposed methodology is not suitable to achieving the stated objective of your paper.
• Describe the specific methods of data collection you are going to use , such as, surveys, interviews, questionnaires, observation, archival research. If you are analyzing existing data, such as a data set or archival documents, describe how it was originally created or gathered and by whom. Also be sure to explain how older data is still relevant to investigating the current research problem.
• Explain how you intend to analyze your results . Will you use statistical analysis? Will you use specific theoretical perspectives to help you analyze a text or explain observed behaviors? Describe how you plan to obtain an accurate assessment of relationships, patterns, trends, distributions, and possible contradictions found in the data.
• Provide background and a rationale for methodologies that are unfamiliar for your readers . Very often in the social sciences, research problems and the methods for investigating them require more explanation/rationale than widely accepted rules governing the natural and physical sciences. Be clear and concise in your explanation.
• Provide a justification for subject selection and sampling procedure . For instance, if you propose to conduct interviews, how do you intend to select the sample population? If you are analyzing texts, which texts have you chosen, and why? If you are using statistics, why is this set of data being used? If other data sources exist, explain why the data you chose is most appropriate to addressing the research problem.
• Describe potential limitations . Are there any practical limitations that could affect your data collection? How will you attempt to control for potential confounding variables and errors? If your methodology may lead to problems you can anticipate, state this openly and show why pursuing this methodology outweighs the risk of these problems cropping up.

NOTE :  Once you have written all of the elements of the methods section, subsequent revisions should focus on how to present those elements as clearly and as logically as possibly. The description of how you prepared to study the research problem, how you gathered the data, and the protocol for analyzing the data should be organized chronologically. For clarity, when a large amount of detail must be presented, information should be presented in sub-sections according to topic.

ANOTHER NOTE : If you are conducting a qualitative analysis of a research problem , the methodology section generally requires a more elaborate description of the methods used as well as an explanation of the processes applied to gathering and analyzing of data than is generally required for studies using quantitative methods. Because you are the primary instrument for generating the data, the process for collecting that data has a significantly greater impact on producing the findings. Therefore, qualitative research requires a more detailed description of the methods used.

III.  Problems to Avoid

Irrelevant Detail The methodology section of your paper should be thorough but to the point. Do not provide any background information that does not directly help the reader understand why a particular method was chosen, how the data was gathered or obtained, and how the data was analyzed in relation to the research problem [note: analyzed, not interpreted! Save how you interpreted the findings for the discussion section]. With this in mind, the page length of your methods section will generally be less than any other section of your paper except the conclusion.

Unnecessary Explanation of Basic Procedures Remember that you are not writing a how-to guide about a particular method. You should make the assumption that readers possess a basic understanding of how to investigate the research problem on their own and, therefore, you do not have to go into great detail about specific methodological procedures. The focus should be on how you applied a method , not on the mechanics of doing a method. An exception to this rule is if you select an unconventional methodological approach; if this is the case, be sure to explain why this approach was chosen and how it enhances the overall process of discovery.

Problem Blindness It is almost a given that you will encounter problems when collecting or generating your data, or, gaps will exist in existing data or archival materials. Do not ignore these problems or pretend they did not occur. Often, documenting how you overcame obstacles can form an interesting part of the methodology. It demonstrates to the reader that you can provide a cogent rationale for the decisions you made to minimize the impact of any problems that arose.

Literature Review Just as the literature review section of your paper provides an overview of sources you have examined while researching a particular topic, the methodology section should cite any sources that informed your choice and application of a particular method [i.e., the choice of a survey should include any citations to the works you used to help construct the survey].

It’s More than Sources of Information! A description of a research study's method should not be confused with a description of the sources of information. Such a list of sources is useful in and of itself, especially if it is accompanied by an explanation about the selection and use of the sources. The description of the project's methodology complements a list of sources in that it sets forth the organization and interpretation of information emanating from those sources.

Azevedo, L.F. et al. "How to Write a Scientific Paper: Writing the Methods Section." Revista Portuguesa de Pneumologia 17 (2011): 232-238; Blair Lorrie. “Choosing a Methodology.” In Writing a Graduate Thesis or Dissertation , Teaching Writing Series. (Rotterdam: Sense Publishers 2016), pp. 49-72; Butin, Dan W. The Education Dissertation A Guide for Practitioner Scholars . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin, 2010; Carter, Susan. Structuring Your Research Thesis . New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012; Kallet, Richard H. “How to Write the Methods Section of a Research Paper.” Respiratory Care 49 (October 2004):1229-1232; Lunenburg, Frederick C. Writing a Successful Thesis or Dissertation: Tips and Strategies for Students in the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2008. Methods Section . The Writer’s Handbook. Writing Center. University of Wisconsin, Madison; Rudestam, Kjell Erik and Rae R. Newton. “The Method Chapter: Describing Your Research Plan.” In Surviving Your Dissertation: A Comprehensive Guide to Content and Process . (Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications, 2015), pp. 87-115; What is Interpretive Research . Institute of Public and International Affairs, University of Utah; Writing the Experimental Report: Methods, Results, and Discussion . The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Methods and Materials . The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper. Department of Biology. Bates College.

Writing Tip

Statistical designs and tests do not fear them.

Don't avoid using a quantitative approach to analyzing your research problem just because you fear the idea of applying statistical designs and tests. A qualitative approach, such as conducting interviews or content analysis of archival texts, can yield exciting new insights about a research problem, but it should not be undertaken simply because you have a disdain for running a simple regression. A well designed quantitative research study can often be accomplished in very clear and direct ways, whereas, a similar study of a qualitative nature usually requires considerable time to analyze large volumes of data and a tremendous burden to create new paths for analysis where previously no path associated with your research problem had existed.

To locate data and statistics, GO HERE .

Another Writing Tip

Knowing the relationship between theories and methods.

There can be multiple meaning associated with the term "theories" and the term "methods" in social sciences research. A helpful way to delineate between them is to understand "theories" as representing different ways of characterizing the social world when you research it and "methods" as representing different ways of generating and analyzing data about that social world. Framed in this way, all empirical social sciences research involves theories and methods, whether they are stated explicitly or not. However, while theories and methods are often related, it is important that, as a researcher, you deliberately separate them in order to avoid your theories playing a disproportionate role in shaping what outcomes your chosen methods produce.

Introspectively engage in an ongoing dialectic between the application of theories and methods to help enable you to use the outcomes from your methods to interrogate and develop new theories, or ways of framing conceptually the research problem. This is how scholarship grows and branches out into new intellectual territory.

Reynolds, R. Larry. Ways of Knowing . Alternative Microeconomics . Part 1, Chapter 3. Boise State University; The Theory-Method Relationship . S-Cool Revision. United Kingdom.

• << Previous: Is it Peer-Reviewed?
• Next: Qualitative Methods >>
• Last Updated: Sep 8, 2023 12:19 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.txstate.edu/socialscienceresearch

Breakthrough in auditory research: Supranormal hearing achieved

• Download PDF Copy

A study from Michigan Medicine's Kresge Hearing Research Institute was able to produce supranormal hearing in mice, while also supporting a hypothesis on the cause of hidden hearing loss in humans.

The researchers had previously used similar methods-;increasing the amount of the neurotrophic factor neurotrophin-3 in the inner ear-;to promote the recovery of auditory responses in mice that had experienced acoustic trauma, and to improve hearing in middle-aged mice. 

This study is the first to use the same approach in otherwise healthy young mice to create improved auditory processing, beyond what's naturally occurring.

"We knew that providing Ntf3 to the inner ear in young mice increased the number of synapses between inner hair cells and auditory neurons, but we did not know what having more synapses would do to hearing," said Gabriel Corfas, Ph.D., director of the Kresge Institute, who led the research team. 

"We now show that animals with extra inner ear synapses have normal thresholds-;what an audiologist would define as normal hearing-;but they can process the auditory information in supranormal ways."

The resulting paper, "From hidden hearing loss to supranormal auditory processing by neurotrophin 3-mediated modulation of inner hair cell synapse density," was published in  PLOS Biology .

About the paper 

As in previous studies, the researchers altered the expression of the Ntf3 to increase the number of synapses between inner hair cells and neurons. 

Inner hair cells exist inside the cochlea and convert sound waves into signals sent-;via those synapses-;to the brain. 

This time, however, two groups of young mice were created and studied: one in which synapses were reduced, and a second-;the supranormal hearing mice-;in which synapses were increased.

"Previously, we have used that same molecule to regenerate synapses lost due to noise exposure in young mice, and to improve hearing in middle-aged mice, when they already start showing signs of age-related hearing loss ," said Corfas. 

"This suggests that this molecule has the potential to improve hearing in humans in similar situations. The new results indicate the regenerating synapses or increasing their numbers will improve their auditory processing."

Both groups of mice underwent a Gap-Prepulse Inhibition test, which measures their ability to detect very brief auditory stimuli. 

For this test, the subject is placed in a chamber with a background noise, then a loud tone that startles the mouse is presented alone or preceded by a very brief silent gap. 

That gap, when detected by the mouse, reduces the startle response. Researchers then determine how long the silent gap needs to be for the mice to detect it.

Mice with fewer synapses required a much longer silent gap. That result supports a hypothesis about the relationship between synapse density and hidden hearing loss in humans. 

Hidden hearing loss describes a difficulty in hearing that cannot be detected by standard testing. 

People with hidden hearing loss may struggle to understand speech-;or discern sounds in the presence of background noise. And results of the Gap-Prepulse Inhibition test had been previously shown to be correlated with auditory processing in humans. 

A surprising find

Less expected, however, were the results of the subjects with increased synapses. 

Not only did they show enhanced peaks in measured Acoustic Brain Stem response, but the mice also performed better on the Gap-Prepulse Inhibition test, suggesting an ability to process an increased amount of auditory information.

We were surprised to find that when we increased the number of synapses, the brain was able to process the extra auditory information. And those subjects performed better than the control mice in the behavioral test." Gabriel Corfas, Ph.D., director of the Kresge Institute

Hair cell loss had once been believed to be the primary cause of hearing loss in humans as we age. 

Now, however, it's understood that the loss of inner hair cell synapses can be the first event in the hearing loss process, making therapies that preserve, regenerate and/or increase synapses exciting possible approaches for treating some hearing disorders. 

"Some neurodegenerative disorders also start with loss of synapses in the brain," Corfas said. 

"Therefore, the lessons from the studies in the inner ear could help in finding new therapies for some of these devastating diseases." 

Michigan Medicine - University of Michigan

Ji, L., et al. (2024). From hidden hearing loss to supranormal auditory processing by neurotrophin 3-mediated modulation of inner hair cell synapse density.  PLoS Biology . doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3002665 .

Posted in: Medical Science News | Medical Research News

Tags: Brain , Cell , Ear , Hair , Hearing , Hearing Loss , Medicine , Molecule , Neurons , pH , Research , Speech , Synapse , Therapeutics , Trauma

Suggested Reading

Cancel reply to comment

• Trending Stories
• Latest Interviews
• Top Health Articles

Revolutionizing Life Science: An Interview with SCIEX on ASMS, the SCIEX 7500+ System, and AI-Driven Quantitation

Jose Castro-Perez and Chris Lock, SCIEX

In our latest interview, News Medical speaks with SCIEX, a global leader in life science analytical technologies, about their exciting announcements at ASMS, the SCIEX 7500+ System, and how they utilize AI quantitation software to streamline solutions.

From Discovery Biology to ELRIG Chair

Melanie Leveridge

In this interview, we speak with Melanie Leveridge, Vice President of Discovery Biology at AstraZeneca and Chair of the Board for ELRIG UK, to discuss her extensive career in the pharmaceutical industry, her role in fostering scientific innovation, and her vision for ELRIG's future.

Breathing New Life into Diagnostics: Plasmion's SICRIT Technology

Revolutionizing Non-Invasive Diagnostics with Plasmion’s SICRIT Breath Analysis.

Latest News

Newsletters you may be interested in

Your AI Powered Scientific Assistant

Hi, I'm Azthena, you can trust me to find commercial scientific answers from News-Medical.net.

A few things you need to know before we start. Please read and accept to continue.

• Use of “Azthena” is subject to the terms and conditions of use as set out by OpenAI .
• Content provided on any AZoNetwork sites are subject to the site Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy .
• Large Language Models can make mistakes. Consider checking important information.

Great. Ask your question.

Azthena may occasionally provide inaccurate responses. Read the full terms .

While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses. Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for medical information you must always consult a medical professional before acting on any information provided.

Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their privacy principles.

Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential information.

Read the full Terms & Conditions .

Provide Feedback

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• What Is a Research Design | Types, Guide & Examples

What Is a Research Design | Types, Guide & Examples

Published on June 7, 2021 by Shona McCombes . Revised on November 20, 2023 by Pritha Bhandari.

A research design is a strategy for answering your   research question  using empirical data. Creating a research design means making decisions about:

• Your overall research objectives and approach
• Whether you’ll rely on primary research or secondary research
• Your sampling methods or criteria for selecting subjects
• Your data collection methods
• The procedures you’ll follow to collect data
• Your data analysis methods

A well-planned research design helps ensure that your methods match your research objectives and that you use the right kind of analysis for your data.

Table of contents

Step 1: consider your aims and approach, step 2: choose a type of research design, step 3: identify your population and sampling method, step 4: choose your data collection methods, step 5: plan your data collection procedures, step 6: decide on your data analysis strategies, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about research design.

• Introduction

Before you can start designing your research, you should already have a clear idea of the research question you want to investigate.

There are many different ways you could go about answering this question. Your research design choices should be driven by your aims and priorities—start by thinking carefully about what you want to achieve.

The first choice you need to make is whether you’ll take a qualitative or quantitative approach.

Qualitative research designs tend to be more flexible and inductive , allowing you to adjust your approach based on what you find throughout the research process.

Quantitative research designs tend to be more fixed and deductive , with variables and hypotheses clearly defined in advance of data collection.

It’s also possible to use a mixed-methods design that integrates aspects of both approaches. By combining qualitative and quantitative insights, you can gain a more complete picture of the problem you’re studying and strengthen the credibility of your conclusions.

Practical and ethical considerations when designing research

As well as scientific considerations, you need to think practically when designing your research. If your research involves people or animals, you also need to consider research ethics .

• How much time do you have to collect data and write up the research?
• Will you be able to gain access to the data you need (e.g., by travelling to a specific location or contacting specific people)?
• Do you have the necessary research skills (e.g., statistical analysis or interview techniques)?
• Will you need ethical approval ?

At each stage of the research design process, make sure that your choices are practically feasible.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Within both qualitative and quantitative approaches, there are several types of research design to choose from. Each type provides a framework for the overall shape of your research.

Types of quantitative research designs

Quantitative designs can be split into four main types.

• Experimental and   quasi-experimental designs allow you to test cause-and-effect relationships
• Descriptive and correlational designs allow you to measure variables and describe relationships between them.

With descriptive and correlational designs, you can get a clear picture of characteristics, trends and relationships as they exist in the real world. However, you can’t draw conclusions about cause and effect (because correlation doesn’t imply causation ).

Experiments are the strongest way to test cause-and-effect relationships without the risk of other variables influencing the results. However, their controlled conditions may not always reflect how things work in the real world. They’re often also more difficult and expensive to implement.

Types of qualitative research designs

Qualitative designs are less strictly defined. This approach is about gaining a rich, detailed understanding of a specific context or phenomenon, and you can often be more creative and flexible in designing your research.

The table below shows some common types of qualitative design. They often have similar approaches in terms of data collection, but focus on different aspects when analyzing the data.

Your research design should clearly define who or what your research will focus on, and how you’ll go about choosing your participants or subjects.

In research, a population is the entire group that you want to draw conclusions about, while a sample is the smaller group of individuals you’ll actually collect data from.

Defining the population

A population can be made up of anything you want to study—plants, animals, organizations, texts, countries, etc. In the social sciences, it most often refers to a group of people.

For example, will you focus on people from a specific demographic, region or background? Are you interested in people with a certain job or medical condition, or users of a particular product?

The more precisely you define your population, the easier it will be to gather a representative sample.

• Sampling methods

Even with a narrowly defined population, it’s rarely possible to collect data from every individual. Instead, you’ll collect data from a sample.

To select a sample, there are two main approaches: probability sampling and non-probability sampling . The sampling method you use affects how confidently you can generalize your results to the population as a whole.

Probability sampling is the most statistically valid option, but it’s often difficult to achieve unless you’re dealing with a very small and accessible population.

For practical reasons, many studies use non-probability sampling, but it’s important to be aware of the limitations and carefully consider potential biases. You should always make an effort to gather a sample that’s as representative as possible of the population.

Case selection in qualitative research

In some types of qualitative designs, sampling may not be relevant.

For example, in an ethnography or a case study , your aim is to deeply understand a specific context, not to generalize to a population. Instead of sampling, you may simply aim to collect as much data as possible about the context you are studying.

In these types of design, you still have to carefully consider your choice of case or community. You should have a clear rationale for why this particular case is suitable for answering your research question .

For example, you might choose a case study that reveals an unusual or neglected aspect of your research problem, or you might choose several very similar or very different cases in order to compare them.

Data collection methods are ways of directly measuring variables and gathering information. They allow you to gain first-hand knowledge and original insights into your research problem.

You can choose just one data collection method, or use several methods in the same study.

Survey methods

Surveys allow you to collect data about opinions, behaviors, experiences, and characteristics by asking people directly. There are two main survey methods to choose from: questionnaires and interviews .

Observation methods

Observational studies allow you to collect data unobtrusively, observing characteristics, behaviors or social interactions without relying on self-reporting.

Observations may be conducted in real time, taking notes as you observe, or you might make audiovisual recordings for later analysis. They can be qualitative or quantitative.

Other methods of data collection

There are many other ways you might collect data depending on your field and topic.

If you’re not sure which methods will work best for your research design, try reading some papers in your field to see what kinds of data collection methods they used.

Secondary data

If you don’t have the time or resources to collect data from the population you’re interested in, you can also choose to use secondary data that other researchers already collected—for example, datasets from government surveys or previous studies on your topic.

With this raw data, you can do your own analysis to answer new research questions that weren’t addressed by the original study.

Using secondary data can expand the scope of your research, as you may be able to access much larger and more varied samples than you could collect yourself.

However, it also means you don’t have any control over which variables to measure or how to measure them, so the conclusions you can draw may be limited.

As well as deciding on your methods, you need to plan exactly how you’ll use these methods to collect data that’s consistent, accurate, and unbiased.

Planning systematic procedures is especially important in quantitative research, where you need to precisely define your variables and ensure your measurements are high in reliability and validity.

Operationalization

Some variables, like height or age, are easily measured. But often you’ll be dealing with more abstract concepts, like satisfaction, anxiety, or competence. Operationalization means turning these fuzzy ideas into measurable indicators.

If you’re using observations , which events or actions will you count?

If you’re using surveys , which questions will you ask and what range of responses will be offered?

You may also choose to use or adapt existing materials designed to measure the concept you’re interested in—for example, questionnaires or inventories whose reliability and validity has already been established.

Reliability and validity

Reliability means your results can be consistently reproduced, while validity means that you’re actually measuring the concept you’re interested in.

For valid and reliable results, your measurement materials should be thoroughly researched and carefully designed. Plan your procedures to make sure you carry out the same steps in the same way for each participant.

If you’re developing a new questionnaire or other instrument to measure a specific concept, running a pilot study allows you to check its validity and reliability in advance.

Sampling procedures

As well as choosing an appropriate sampling method , you need a concrete plan for how you’ll actually contact and recruit your selected sample.

That means making decisions about things like:

• How many participants do you need for an adequate sample size?
• What inclusion and exclusion criteria will you use to identify eligible participants?
• How will you contact your sample—by mail, online, by phone, or in person?

If you’re using a probability sampling method , it’s important that everyone who is randomly selected actually participates in the study. How will you ensure a high response rate?

If you’re using a non-probability method , how will you avoid research bias and ensure a representative sample?

Data management

It’s also important to create a data management plan for organizing and storing your data.

Will you need to transcribe interviews or perform data entry for observations? You should anonymize and safeguard any sensitive data, and make sure it’s backed up regularly.

Keeping your data well-organized will save time when it comes to analyzing it. It can also help other researchers validate and add to your findings (high replicability ).

On its own, raw data can’t answer your research question. The last step of designing your research is planning how you’ll analyze the data.

Quantitative data analysis

In quantitative research, you’ll most likely use some form of statistical analysis . With statistics, you can summarize your sample data, make estimates, and test hypotheses.

Using descriptive statistics , you can summarize your sample data in terms of:

• The distribution of the data (e.g., the frequency of each score on a test)
• The central tendency of the data (e.g., the mean to describe the average score)
• The variability of the data (e.g., the standard deviation to describe how spread out the scores are)

The specific calculations you can do depend on the level of measurement of your variables.

Using inferential statistics , you can:

• Make estimates about the population based on your sample data.
• Test hypotheses about a relationship between variables.

Regression and correlation tests look for associations between two or more variables, while comparison tests (such as t tests and ANOVAs ) look for differences in the outcomes of different groups.

Your choice of statistical test depends on various aspects of your research design, including the types of variables you’re dealing with and the distribution of your data.

Qualitative data analysis

In qualitative research, your data will usually be very dense with information and ideas. Instead of summing it up in numbers, you’ll need to comb through the data in detail, interpret its meanings, identify patterns, and extract the parts that are most relevant to your research question.

Two of the most common approaches to doing this are thematic analysis and discourse analysis .

There are many other ways of analyzing qualitative data depending on the aims of your research. To get a sense of potential approaches, try reading some qualitative research papers in your field.

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

A research design is a strategy for answering your   research question . It defines your overall approach and determines how you will collect and analyze data.

A well-planned research design helps ensure that your methods match your research aims, that you collect high-quality data, and that you use the right kind of analysis to answer your questions, utilizing credible sources . This allows you to draw valid , trustworthy conclusions.

Quantitative research designs can be divided into two main categories:

• Correlational and descriptive designs are used to investigate characteristics, averages, trends, and associations between variables.
• Experimental and quasi-experimental designs are used to test causal relationships .

Qualitative research designs tend to be more flexible. Common types of qualitative design include case study , ethnography , and grounded theory designs.

The priorities of a research design can vary depending on the field, but you usually have to specify:

• Your research questions and/or hypotheses
• Your overall approach (e.g., qualitative or quantitative )
• The type of design you’re using (e.g., a survey , experiment , or case study )
• Your data collection methods (e.g., questionnaires , observations)
• Your data collection procedures (e.g., operationalization , timing and data management)
• Your data analysis methods (e.g., statistical tests  or thematic analysis )

A sample is a subset of individuals from a larger population . Sampling means selecting the group that you will actually collect data from in your research. For example, if you are researching the opinions of students in your university, you could survey a sample of 100 students.

In statistics, sampling allows you to test a hypothesis about the characteristics of a population.

Operationalization means turning abstract conceptual ideas into measurable observations.

For example, the concept of social anxiety isn’t directly observable, but it can be operationally defined in terms of self-rating scores, behavioral avoidance of crowded places, or physical anxiety symptoms in social situations.

Before collecting data , it’s important to consider how you will operationalize the variables that you want to measure.

A research project is an academic, scientific, or professional undertaking to answer a research question . Research projects can take many forms, such as qualitative or quantitative , descriptive , longitudinal , experimental , or correlational . What kind of research approach you choose will depend on your topic.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, November 20). What Is a Research Design | Types, Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved June 29, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/research-design/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, guide to experimental design | overview, steps, & examples, how to write a research proposal | examples & templates, ethical considerations in research | types & examples, what is your plagiarism score.

UVA’s Mircea Stan and ECE’s Wayne Burleson Ace the “Test of Time” with their IEEE Technical Impact Award

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) has selected Professor Mircea Stan of the University of Virginia (UVA) and his former mentor at UMass Amherst, Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) Wayne Burleson, to receive the 2024  A. Richard Newton Technical Impact Award in Electronic Design Automation for their 1995 paper based on Stan’s research. According to the IEEE, the award was established “to honor a person or persons for an outstanding technical contribution within the scope of electronic-design automation, as evidenced by a paper published at least 10 years before the presentation of the award.” The winning paper – published in the March 1, 1995, issue of  IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration Systems – was titled  Bus-invert Coding for Low-Power I/O .

Stan and Burleson’s pioneering 1995 paper offered an elegant solution to the troublesome issue of inefficient power dissipation in the input/output (I/O) of an integrated circuit.

In their 1995 paper, Stan and Burleson suggested a visionary proposal: “the bus-invert method of coding the I/O, which lowers the bus activity and thus decreases the I/O peak power dissipation by 50 percent and the I/O average power dissipation by up to 25 percent.” 

Stan and Burleson added that “The method is general but applies best for dealing with buses. This is fortunate because buses are indeed most likely to have very large capacitances associated with them and consequently dissipate a lot of power.”

As Stan and Burleson explained the backstory to their paper, “Technology trends and especially portable applications drive the quest for low-power, very-large-scale-integration (VLSI) design. Solutions that involve algorithmic, structural, or physical transformations are sought. The focus is on developing low-power circuits without affecting too much the performance (area, latency, period).” 

Stan and Burleson went on to say that “For complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor (CMOS) circuits, most power is dissipated as dynamic power for charging and discharging node capacitances. This is why many promising results in low-power design are obtained by minimizing the number of transitions inside the CMOS circuit.” 

According to Stan and Burleson, “While it is generally accepted that (because of the large capacitances involved) much of the power dissipated by an integrated circuit is at the I/O, little has been specifically done for decreasing the I/O power dissipation.” Their 1995 paper tackled that specific problem in what has proven to be a groundbreaking way over the past three decades.

Stan is currently the director of the UVA School of Engineering and Applied Science’s Computer Engineering Program and director of the Computer Engineering Virginia Microelectronics Consortium. He received his diploma degree from the Politehnica University of Bucharest in Romania in 1984 and later earned his M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from UMass Amherst in 1994 and 1996, respectively. He teaches in the UVA Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering and does research in high-performance, low-power VLSI, temperature-aware circuits and architecture, embedded systems, and nanoelectronics.

Stan is a member of the Association for Computing Machinery, Eta Kappa Nu, Phi Kappa Phi, and Sigma Xi. He was a recipient of the National Science Foundation CAREER Award in 1997. He was also an associate editor of the IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems—Part I: Regular Papers from 2004 to 2008 and the IEEE Transactions on Very Large-scale Integration Systems from 2001 to 2003. Currently, he is an associate editor of the IEEE Transactions on Nanotechnology . He was a Distinguished Lecturer of the IEEE Circuits and Systems Society from 2004 to 2005 and from 2012 to 2013.

Burleson has been in the ECE department at UMass Amherst since 1990. From 2012-2017, he was a Senior Fellow at AMD Research on a team whose research led to the most powerful and green supercomputers in the world. He has also had previous sabbaticals at EPFL, LIRM Montpellier, and Telecom Paris. 

Burleson has also worked as a custom-chip designer and consultant in the semiconductor industry with VLSI Technology, DEC, Compaq/HP, Intel, Rambus, and AMD, as well as several start-ups. His research is in the general area of security engineering and VLSI, including medical devices, radio-frequency identification, lightweight security, post-CMOS circuits, and computer-aided design for low-power, interconnects, clocking, reliability, thermal effects, process variation, and noise mitigation. 

Burleson has published more than 200 papers in refereed publications in these areas and is a Fellow of the IEEE for contributions to integrated-circuit design and signal processing. He has electrical-engineering degrees from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Colorado. (June 2024)

Wayne Burleson

I develop integrated circuit hardware and software solutions for secure applications, including medical devices, transportation, payments and defense.

Global footer

• ©2024 University of Massachusetts Amherst
• Site policies
• Non-discrimination notice
• Accessibility
• Terms of use

• - Google Chrome

Intended for healthcare professionals

• My email alerts
• BMA member login
• Username * Password * Forgot your log in details? Need to activate BMA Member Log In Log in via OpenAthens Log in via your institution

Search form

• Advanced search
• Search responses
• Search blogs
• Trends in...

Trends in cardiovascular disease incidence among 22 million people in the UK over 20 years: population based study

• Related content
• Peer review
• Geert Molenberghs , professor 4 ,
• Geert Verbeke , professor 4 ,
• Francesco Zaccardi , associate professor 5 ,
• Claire Lawson , associate professor 5 ,
• Jocelyn M Friday , data scientist 1 ,
• Huimin Su , PhD student 2 ,
• Pardeep S Jhund , professor 1 ,
• Naveed Sattar , professor 6 ,
• Kazem Rahimi , professor 3 ,
• John G Cleland , professor 1 ,
• Kamlesh Khunti , professor 5 ,
• Werner Budts , professor 1 7 ,
• John J V McMurray , professor 1
• 1 School of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Health, British Heart Foundation Cardiovascular Research Centre, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
• 2 Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
• 3 Deep Medicine, Nuffield Department of Women’s and Reproductive Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
• 4 Interuniversity Institute for Biostatistics and statistical Bioinformatics (I-BioStat), Hasselt University and KU Leuven, Belgium
• 5 Leicester Real World Evidence Unit, Diabetes Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
• 6 College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
• 7 Congenital and Structural Cardiology, University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium
• Correspondence to: N Conrad nathalie.conrad{at}kuleuven.be (or @nathalie_conrad on X)
• Accepted 1 May 2024

Objective To investigate the incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) overall and by age, sex, and socioeconomic status, and its variation over time, in the UK during 2000-19.

Design Population based study.

Setting UK.

Participants 1 650 052 individuals registered with a general practice contributing to Clinical Practice Research Datalink and newly diagnosed with at least one CVD from 1 January 2000 to 30 June 2019.

Main outcome measures The primary outcome was incident diagnosis of CVD, comprising acute coronary syndrome, aortic aneurysm, aortic stenosis, atrial fibrillation or flutter, chronic ischaemic heart disease, heart failure, peripheral artery disease, second or third degree heart block, stroke (ischaemic, haemorrhagic, and unspecified), and venous thromboembolism (deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism). Disease incidence rates were calculated individually and as a composite outcome of all 10 CVDs combined and were standardised for age and sex using the 2013 European standard population. Negative binomial regression models investigated temporal trends and variation by age, sex, and socioeconomic status.

Results The mean age of the population was 70.5 years and 47.6% (n=784 904) were women. The age and sex standardised incidence of all 10 prespecified CVDs declined by 19% during 2000-19 (incidence rate ratio 2017-19 v 2000-02: 0.80, 95% confidence interval 0.73 to 0.88). The incidence of coronary heart disease and stroke decreased by about 30% (incidence rate ratios for acute coronary syndrome, chronic ischaemic heart disease, and stroke were 0.70 (0.69 to 0.70), 0.67 (0.66 to 0.67), and 0.75 (0.67 to 0.83), respectively). In parallel, an increasing number of diagnoses of cardiac arrhythmias, valve disease, and thromboembolic diseases were observed. As a result, the overall incidence of CVDs across the 10 conditions remained relatively stable from the mid-2000s. Age stratified analyses further showed that the observed decline in coronary heart disease incidence was largely restricted to age groups older than 60 years, with little or no improvement in younger age groups. Trends were generally similar between men and women. A socioeconomic gradient was observed for almost every CVD investigated. The gradient did not decrease over time and was most noticeable for peripheral artery disease (incidence rate ratio most deprived v least deprived: 1.98 (1.87 to 2.09)), acute coronary syndrome (1.55 (1.54 to 1.57)), and heart failure (1.50 (1.41 to 1.59)).

Conclusions Despite substantial improvements in the prevention of atherosclerotic diseases in the UK, the overall burden of CVDs remained high during 2000-19. For CVDs to decrease further, future prevention strategies might need to consider a broader spectrum of conditions, including arrhythmias, valve diseases, and thromboembolism, and examine the specific needs of younger age groups and socioeconomically deprived populations.

Introduction

Since the 1970s, the prevention of coronary disease, both primary and secondary, has improved considerably, largely attributable to public health efforts to control risk factors, such as antismoking legislation, and the widespread use of drugs such as statins. 1 2

Improvements in mortality due to heart disease have, however, stalled in several high income countries, 3 and reports suggest that the incidence of heart disease might even be increasing among younger people. 4 5 6 Conversely, along with coronary heart disease, other cardiovascular conditions are becoming relatively more prominent in older people, altering the profile of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in ageing societies. The importance of non-traditional risk factors for atherosclerotic diseases, such as socioeconomic deprivation, has also been increasingly recognised. Whether socioeconomic deprivation is as strongly associated with other CVDs as with atherosclerosis is uncertain, but it is important to understand as many countries have reported an increase in socioeconomic inequalities. 7

Large scale epidemiological studies are therefore needed to investigate secular trends in CVDs to target future preventive efforts, highlight the focus for future clinical trials, and identify healthcare resources required to manage emerging problems. Existing comprehensive efforts, such as statistics on CVD from leading medical societies or the Global Burden of Diseases studies, have helped toward this goal, but reliable age standardised incidence rates for all CVDs, how these vary by population subgroups, and changes over time are currently not available. 8 9 10

We used a large longitudinal database of linked primary care, secondary care, and death registry records from a representative sample of the UK population 11 12 to assess trends in the incidence of 10 of the most common CVDs in the UK during 2000-19, and how these differed by sex, age, socioeconomic status, and region.

Data source and study population

We used anonymised electronic health records from the GOLD and AURUM datasets of Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). CPRD contains information on about 20% of the UK population and is broadly representative of age, sex, ethnicity, geographical spread, and socioeconomic deprivation. 11 12 It is also one of the largest databases of longitudinal medical records from primary care in the world and has been validated for epidemiological research for a wide range of conditions. 11 We used the subset of CPRD records that linked information from primary care, secondary care from Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES admitted patient care and HES outpatient) data, and death certificates from the Office for National Statistics (ONS). Linkage was possible for a subset of English practices, covering about 50% of the CPRD records. Data coverage dates were 1 January 1985 to 31 December 2019 for primary care data (including drug prescription data), 1 April 1997 to 30 June 2019 for secondary care data, and 2 January 1998 to 30 May 2019 for death certificates.

Included in the study were men and women registered with a general practice for at least one year during the study period (1 January 2000 to 30 June 2019) whose records were classified by CPRD as acceptable for use in research and approved for HES and ONS linkage.

Study endpoints

The primary endpoint was the first presentation of CVD as recorded in primary or secondary care. We investigated 10 CVDs: acute coronary syndrome, aortic aneurysm, aortic stenosis, atrial fibrillation or flutter, chronic ischaemic heart disease, heart failure, peripheral artery disease, second or third degree heart block, stroke (ischaemic, haemorrhagic, or unspecified), and venous thromboembolism (deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism). We defined incident diagnoses as the first record of that condition in primary care or secondary care regardless of its order in the patient’s record.

Diseases were considered individually and as a composite outcome of all 10 CVDs combined. For the combined analyses, we calculated the primary incidence (considering only the first recorded CVD in each patient, reflecting the number of patients affected by CVDs) and the total incidence (considering all incident CVD diagnoses in each patient, reflecting the cumulative number of CVD diagnoses). We performed sensitivity analyses including diagnoses recorded on death certificates.

To identify diagnoses, we compiled a list of diagnostic codes based on the coding schemes in use in each data source following previously established methods. 13 14 15 We used ICD-10 (international classification of diseases, 10th revision) codes for diagnoses recorded in secondary care, ICD-9 (international classification of diseases, ninth revision) (in use until 31 December 2000) and ICD-10 codes for diagnoses recorded on death certificates (used in sensitivity analyses only), the UK Office of Population Censuses and Surveys classification (OPCS-4) for procedures performed in secondary care settings, and a combination of Read, SNOMED, and local EMIS codes for diagnoses recorded in primary care records (see supplementary table S1). 16 Supplementary texts S1, S2, and S3 describe our approach to the generation of the diagnostic code list as well as considerations and sensitivity analyses into the validity of diagnoses recorded in UK electronic health records.

We selected covariates to represent a range of known cardiovascular risk factors. For clinical data, including systolic and diastolic blood pressure, smoking status, cholesterol (total:high density lipoprotein ratio), and body mass index (BMI), we abstracted data from primary care records as the most recent measurement within two years before the incident CVD diagnosis. BMI was categorised as underweight (<18.5), normal (18.5-24.9), overweight (25-29.9), and obesity (≥30). Information on the prevalence of chronic kidney disease, dyslipidaemia, hypertension, and type 2 diabetes was obtained as the percentage of patients with a diagnosis recorded in their primary care or secondary care record at any time up to and including the date of a first CVD diagnosis. Patients’ socioeconomic status was described using the index of multiple deprivation 2015, 17 a composite measure of seven dimensions (income, employment, education, health, crime, housing, living environment) and provided by CPRD. Measures of deprivation are calculated at small area level, covering an average population of 1500 people, and are presented in fifths, with the first 20% and last 20% representing the least and most deprived areas, respectively. We extracted information on ethnicity from both primary and secondary care records, and we used secondary care data when records differed. Ethnicity was grouped into four categories: African/Caribbean, Asian, white, and mixed/other. Finally, we extracted information on cardiovascular treatments (ie, aspirin and other antiplatelets, alpha adrenoceptor antagonists, aldosterone antagonists/mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor antagonists, beta blockers, calcium channel blockers, diuretics, nitrates, oral anticoagulants, and statins) as the number of patients with at least two prescriptions of each drug class within six months after incident CVD, among patients alive and registered with a general practitioner 30 days after the diagnosis. Supplementary table S2 provides a list of substances included in each drug class. Prescriptions were extracted from primary care records up to 31 December 2019.

Statistical analyses

Categorical data for patient characteristics are presented as frequencies (percentages), and continuous data are presented as means and standard deviations (SDs) for symmetrically distributed data or medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs) for non-symmetrically distributed data, over the whole CVD cohort and stratified by age, sex, socioeconomic status, region, and calendar year of diagnosis. For variables with missing entries, we present numbers and percentages of records with missing data. For categorical variables, frequencies refer to complete cases.

Incidence rates of CVD were calculated by dividing the number of incident diagnoses by the number of patient years in the cohort. Category specific rates were computed separately for subgroups of age, sex, socioeconomic status, region, and calendar year of diagnosis. Age calculations were updated for each calendar year. To ensure calculations referred to incident diagnoses, we excluded individuals, from both the numerator and the denominator populations, with a disease of interest diagnosed before the study start date (1 January 2000), or within the first 12 months of registration with their general practice. Time at risk started at the latest of the patient’s registration date plus 12 months, 30 June of their birth year, or study start date; and stopped at the earliest of death, transfer out of practice, last collection date of the practice, incidence of the disease of interest, or linkage end date (30 June 2019). Disease incidence was standardised for age and sex 18 using the 2013 European standard population 19 in five year age bands up to age 90 years.

Negative binomial regression models were used to calculate overall and category specific incidence rate ratios and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). 20 Models were adjusted for calendar year of diagnosis, age (categorised into five years age bands), sex, socioeconomic status, and region. We chose negative binomial models over Poisson models to account for potential overdispersion in the data. Sensitivity analyses comparing Poisson and negative binomial models showed similar results.

Study findings are reported according to the RECORD (reporting of studies conducted using observational routinely collected health data) recommendations. 21 We performed statistical analyses in R, version 4.3.3 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).

Patient and public involvement

No patients or members of the public were directly involved in this study owing to constraints on funding and time.

A total of 22 009 375 individuals contributed data between 1 January 2000 and 30 June 2019, with 146 929 629 patient years of follow-up. Among those we identified 2 906 770 new CVD diagnoses, affecting 1 650 052 patients. Mean age at first CVD diagnosis was 70.5 (SD 15.0) years, 47.6% (n=784 904) of patients were women, and 11.6% (n=191 421), 18.0% (n=296 554), 49.7% (n=820 892), and 14.2% (n=233 833) of patients had a history of chronic kidney disease, dyslipidaemia, hypertension, and type 2 diabetes, respectively, at the time of their first CVD diagnosis ( table 1 ).

Characteristics of patients with a first diagnosis of CVD, 2000-19. Values are number (percentage) unless stated otherwise

• View inline

During 2017-19, the most common CVDs were atrial fibrillation or flutter (age-sex standardised incidence 478 per 100 000 person years), heart failure (367 per 100 000 person years), and chronic ischaemic heart disease (351 per 100 000 person years), followed by acute coronary syndrome (190 per 100 000 person years), venous thromboembolism (183 per 100 000 person years), and stroke (181 per 100 000 patient years) ( fig 1 ).

Incidence of a first diagnosis of cardiovascular disease per 100 000 person years, 2000-19. Incidence rates are age-sex standardised to the 2013 European standard population. Any cardiovascular disease refers to the primary incidence of cardiovascular disease across the10 conditions investigated (ie, number of patients with a first diagnosis of cardiovascular disease). See supplementary table S4 for crude incidence rates by age and sex groups. IRR=incidence rate ratio

• Download figure
• Open in new tab
• Download powerpoint

Temporal trends

The primary incidence of CVDs (ie, the number of patients with CVD) decreased by 20% during 2000-19 (age-sex standardised incidence rate ratio 2017-19 v 2000-02: 0.80 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.88)). However, the total incidence of CVD (ie, the total number of new CVD diagnoses) remained relatively stable owing to an increasing number of subsequent diagnoses among patients already affected by a first CVD (incidence rate ratio 2017-19 v 2000-02: 1.00 (0.91 to 1.10)).

The observed decline in CVD incidence was largely due to declining rates of atherosclerotic diseases, in particular acute coronary syndrome, chronic ischaemic heart disease, and stroke, which decreased by about 30% during 2000-19. The incidence of peripheral artery disease also declined, although more modestly (incidence rate ratio 2017-19 v 2000-02: 0.89 (0.80 to 0.98)) ( fig 1 ).

The incidence of non-atherosclerotic heart diseases increased at varying rates, with incidence of aortic stenosis and heart block more than doubling over the study period (2017-19 v 2000-02: 2.42 (2.13 to 2.74) and 2.22 (1.99 to 2.46), respectively) ( fig 1 ). These increasing rates of non-atherosclerotic heart diseases balanced the reductions in ischaemic diseases so that the overall incidence of CVD across the 10 conditions appeared to reach a plateau and to remain relatively stable from 2007-08 (incidence rate ratio 2017-19 v 2005-07: 1.00 (0.91 to 1.10)) ( fig 2 ).

Age standardised incidence of cardiovascular disease by sex, 2000-19. Any cardiovascular disease refers to the primary incidence of cardiovascular disease across the 10 conditions investigated (ie, number of patients with a first diagnosis of cardiovascular disease). IRR=incidence rate ratio

Age stratified analyses further showed that the observed decrease in incidence of chronic ischaemic heart disease, acute coronary syndrome, and stroke was largely due to a reduced incidence in those aged >60 years, whereas incidence rates in those aged <60 years remained relatively stable ( fig 3 and fig 4 ).

Sex standardised incidence of cardiovascular disease in all age groups. Any cardiovascular disease refers to the primary incidence of cardiovascular disease across the 10 conditions investigated (ie, number of patients with a first diagnosis of cardiovascular disease)

Sex standardised incidence of cardiovascular diseases by age subgroups <69 years. Any cardiovascular disease refers to the primary incidence of cardiovascular disease across the 10 conditions investigated (ie, number of patients with a first diagnosis of cardiovascular disease)

Age at diagnosis

CVD incidence was largely concentrated towards the end of the life span, with a median age at diagnosis generally between 65 and 80 years. Only venous thromboembolism was commonly diagnosed before age 45 years ( fig 5 ). Over the study period, age at first CVD diagnosis declined for several conditions, including stroke (on average diagnosed 1.9 years earlier in 2019 than in 2000), heart block (1.3 years earlier in 2019 than in 2000), and peripheral artery disease (1 year earlier in 2019 than in 2000) (see supplementary figure S1). Adults with a diagnosis before age 60 years were more likely to be from lower socioeconomic groups and to have a higher prevalence of several risk factors, including obesity, smoking, and high cholesterol levels (see supplementary table S3).

Incidence rates of cardiovascular diseases calculated by one year age bands and divided into a colour gradient of 20 quantiles to reflect incidence density by age. IQR=interquartile range

Incidence by sex

Age adjusted incidence of all CVDs combined was higher in men (incidence rate ratio for women v men: 1.46 (1.41 to 1.51)), with the notable exception of venous thromboembolism, which was similar between men and women. The incidence of aortic aneurysms was higher in men (3.49 (3.33 to 3.65)) ( fig 2 ). The crude incidence of CVD, however, was similar between men and women (1069 per 100 000 patient years and 1176 per 100 000 patient years, respectively), owing to the higher number of women in older age groups. Temporal trends in disease incidence were generally similar between men and women ( fig 2 ).

Incidence by socioeconomic status

The most deprived socioeconomic groups had a higher incidence of any CVDs (incidence rate ratio most deprived v least deprived: 1.37 (1.30 to 1.44)) ( fig 6 ). A socioeconomic gradient was observed across almost every condition investigated. That gradient did not decrease over time, and it was most noticeable for peripheral artery disease (incidence rate ratio most deprived v least deprived: 1.98 (1.87 to 2.09)), acute coronary syndrome (1.55 (1.54 to 1.57)), and heart failure (1.50 (1.41 to 1.59)). For aortic aneurysms, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, and aortic stenosis, socioeconomic inequalities in disease incidence appeared to increase over time.

Age-sex standardised incidence rates of cardiovascular diseases by socioeconomic status (index of multiple deprivation 2015). Any cardiovascular disease refers to the primary incidence of cardiovascular disease across the 10 conditions investigated (ie, number of patients with a first diagnosis of cardiovascular disease). Yearly incidence estimates were smoothed using loess (locally estimated scatterplot smoothing) regression lines

Regional differences

Higher incidence rates were seen in northern regions (north west, north east, Yorkshire and the Humber) of England for all 10 conditions investigated, even after adjusting for socioeconomic status. Aortic aneurysms and aortic stenosis had the strongest regional gradients, with incidence rates about 30% higher in northern regions compared with London. Geographical variations remained modest, however, and did not appear to change considerably over time (see supplementary figure S2).

Sensitivity analyses

In sensitivity analyses that used broader disease definitions, that included diagnoses recorded on death certificates, that relied on longer lookback periods for exclusion of potentially prevalent diagnoses, or that were restricted to diagnoses recorded during hospital admissions, temporal trends in disease incidence appeared similar (see supplementary figures S3-S6).

Secondary prevention treatments

The proportion of patients using statins and antihypertensive drugs after a first CVD diagnosis increased over time, whereas the use of non-dihydropyridines calcium channel blockers, nitrates, and diuretics decreased over time. Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants increasingly replaced vitamin K anticoagulants (see supplementary figure S7).

The findings of this study suggest that important changes occurred in the distribution of CVDs during 2000-19 and that several areas are of concern. The incidence of non-atherosclerotic heart diseases was shown to increase, the decline in atherosclerotic disease in younger people was stalling, and socioeconomic inequalities had a substantial association across almost every CVD investigated.

Implications for clinical practice and policy

Although no causal inference can be made from our data, the decline in rates of ischaemic diseases coincided with reductions in the prevalence of risk factors such as smoking, hypertension, and raised cholesterol levels in the general population over the same period, 22 and this finding suggests that efforts in the primary and secondary prevention of atherosclerotic diseases have been successful. The decline in stroke was not as noticeable as that for coronary heart disease, which may reflect the rising incidence of atrial fibrillation. The variation in trends for peripheral artery disease could be due to differences in risk factors (eg, a stronger association with diabetes), the multifaceted presentations and causes, and the introduction of systematic leg examinations for people with diabetes. 23 24

All the non-atherosclerotic diseases, however, appeared to increase during 2000-19. For some conditions, such as heart failure, the observed increase remained modest, whereas for others, such as aortic stenosis and heart block, incidence rates doubled. All analyses in this study were standardised for age and sex, to illustrate changes in disease incidence independently of changes in population demographics. Whether these trends solely reflect increased awareness, access to diagnostic tests, or even screening (eg, for abdominal aortic aneurysm 25 ) and coding practices, is uncertain. Reductions in premature death from coronary heart disease may have contributed to the emergence of these other non-atherosclerotic CVDs. Regardless, the identification of increasing numbers of people with these problems has important implications for health services, especially the provision of more surgical and transcatheter valve replacement, pacemaker implantation, and catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. Importantly, these findings highlight the fact that for many cardiovascular conditions such as heart block, aortic aneurysms, and non-rheumatic valvular diseases, current medical practice remains essentially focused on the management of symptoms and secondary prevention and that more research into underlying causes and possible primary prevention strategies is needed. 26 27

These varying trends also mean that the contribution of individual CVDs towards the overall burden has changed. For example, atrial fibrillation or flutter are now the most common CVDs in the UK. Atrial fibrillation is also a cause (and consequence) of heart failure, and these two increasingly common problems may amplify the incidence of each other. Venous thromboembolism and heart block also appeared as important contributors to overall CVD burden, with incidence rates similar to those of stroke and acute coronary syndrome, yet both receive less attention in terms of prevention efforts.

The stalling decline in the rate of coronary heart disease in younger age groups is of concern, has also been observed in several other high income countries, and may reflect rising rates of physical inactivity, obesity, and type 2 diabetes in young adults. 4 6 28 The stalled decline suggests prevention approaches may need to be expanded beyond antismoking legislation, blood pressure control, and lipid lowering interventions to include the promotion of physical activity, weight control, and use of new treatments shown to reduce cardiovascular risk in people with type 2 diabetes. 29 Although CVD incidence is generally low in people aged <60 years, identifying those at high risk of developing CVD at a young age and intervening before problems occur could reduce premature morbidity and mortality and have important economic implications.

Our study further found that socioeconomic inequalities may contribute to CVD burden, and that this association is not restricted to selected conditions but is visible across most CVDs. The reasons behind the observed increase in risk in relation to socioeconomic inequalities are likely to be multifactorial and to include environmental, occupational, psychosocial, and behavioural risk factors, including established cardiovascular risk factors such as smoking, obesity, nutrition, air pollution, substance misuse, and access to care. 30 How these findings apply to different countries is likely to be influenced by socioeconomic structures and healthcare systems, although health inequalities have been reported in numerous countries. 30 One important factor in the present study is that access to care is free at the point of care in the UK, 31 and yet socioeconomic inequalities persist despite universal health coverage and they did not appear to improve over time. Independently of the specificities of individual countries, our findings highlight the importance of measuring and considering health inequalities and suggest that dealing with the social determinants of health—the conditions under which people are born, live, work, and age—could potentially bring substantial health improvements across a broad range of chronic conditions.

Finally, our results reflect disease incidence based on diagnostic criteria, screening practices, availability, and accuracy of diagnostic tests in place at a particular time and therefore must be interpreted within this context. 32 Several of the health conditions investigated are likely to being sought and detected with increased intensity over the study period. For example, during the study period the definition of myocardial infarction was revised several times, 33 34 35 and high sensitivity troponins were progressively introduced in the UK from 2010. These more sensitive markers of cardiac injury are thought to have increased the detection rates for less severe disease. 36 37 Similarly, increased availability of computed tomography may have increased detection rates for stroke. 38 These changes could have masked an even greater decline in these conditions than observed in the present study. Conversely, increased use of other biochemical tests (such as natriuretic peptides) and more sensitive imaging techniques might have increased the detection of other conditions. 39 40 41 The implementation of a screening programme for aortic aneurysm and incentive programmes aimed at improving coding practices, including the documentation of CVD, associated risk factors and comorbidities, and treatment of these, are also likely to have contributed to the observed trends. 25 42 43 As a result, the difference in incidence estimates and prevalence of comorbidities over time may not reflect solely changes in the true incidence but also differences in ascertainment of people with CVD. 44 Nonetheless, long term trends in large and unconstrained populations offer valuable insights for healthcare resource planning and for the design of more targeted prevention strategies that could otherwise not be answered by using smaller cohorts, cross sectional surveys, or clinical trials; and precisely because they are based on routinely reported diagnoses they are more likely to capture the burden of disease as experienced by doctors and health services.

Strengths and limitations of this study

A key strength of this study is its statistical power, with >140 million person years of data. The large size of the cohort allowed us to perform incidence calculations for a broad spectrum of conditions, and to examine the influence of age, sex, and socioeconomic status as well as trends over 20 years. One important limitation of our study was the modest ethnic diversity in our cohort and the lack of information on ethnicity for the denominator population, which precluded us from stratifying incidence estimates by ethnic group. Our analyses were also limited by the unavailability or considerable missingness of additional variables potentially relevant to the development of CVD, such as smoking, body mass index, imaging data, women specific cardiovascular risk factors (eg, pregnancy associated hypertension and gestational diabetes), and blood biomarkers. Further research may also need to consider an even wider spectrum of CVDs, including individual types of valve disease, pregnancy related conditions, and infection related heart diseases. Research using databases with electronic health records is also reliant on the accuracy of clinical coding input by doctors in primary care as part of a consultation, or in secondary care as part of a hospital admission. We therefore assessed the validity of diagnoses in UK electronic health records data and considered it to be appropriate in accordance with the >200 independent validation studies reporting an average positive predictive value of about 90% for recorded diagnoses. 45 Observed age distributions were also consistent with previous studies and added to the validity of our approach. Nevertheless, our results must be interpreted within the context and limitations of routinely collected data from health records, diagnostic criteria, screening practices, the availability and accuracy of diagnostic tests in place at that time, and the possibility that some level of miscoding is present or that some bias could have been introduced by restricting the cohort to those patients with at least 12 months of continuous data.

Conclusions

Efforts to challenge the notion of the inevitability of vascular events with ageing, and evidence based recommendations for coronary heart disease prevention, have been successful and can serve as a model for other non-communicable diseases. Our findings show that it is time to expand efforts to improve the prevention of CVDs. Broadening research and implementation efforts in both primary and secondary prevention to non-atherosclerotic diseases, tackling socioeconomic inequalities, and introducing better risk prediction and management among younger people appear to be important opportunities to tackle CVDs.

What is already known on this topic

Recent data show that despite decades of declining rates of cardiovascular mortality, the burden from cardiovascular disease (CVD) appears to have stalled in several high income countries

What this study adds

This observational study of a representative sample of 22 million people from the UK during 2000-19 found reductions in CVD incidence to have been largely restricted to ischaemic heart disease and stroke, and were paralleled by a rising number of diagnoses of cardiac arrhythmias, valve disease, and thromboembolic events

Venous thromboembolism and heart block were important contributors to the overall burden of CVDs, with incidence rates similar to stroke and acute coronary syndromes

Improvements in rates of coronary heart disease almost exclusively appeared to benefit those aged >60 years, and the CVD burden in younger age groups appeared not to improve

Ethics statements

Ethical approval.

This study was approved by the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Independent Scientific Advisory Committee.

Data availability statement

Access to Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) data is subject to a license agreement and protocol approval process that is overseen by CPRD’s research data governance process. A guide to access is provided on the CPRD website ( https://www.cprd.com/data-access ) To facilitate the subsequent use and replication of the findings from this study, aggregated data tables are provided with number of events and person years at risk by individual condition and by calendar year, age (by five year age band), sex, socioeconomic status, and region (masking field with fewer than five events, as per CPRD data security and privacy regulations) on our GitHub repository ( https://github.com/nathalieconrad/CVD_incidence ).

Acknowledgments

We thank Hilary Shepherd, Sonia Coton, and Eleanor L Axson from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink for their support and expertise in preparing the dataset underlying these analyses.

Contributors: NC and JJVM conceived and designed the study. NC, JJVM, GM, and GV designed the statistical analysis plan and NC performed the statistical analysis. All authors contributed to interpreting the results, drafting the manuscript, and the revisions. NC, GM, and GV had permission to access the raw data and NC and GM verified the raw data. All authors gave final approval of the version to be published and accept responsibility to submit the manuscript for publication. NC and JJVM accept full responsibility for the conduct of the study, had access to aggregated data, and controlled the decision to publish. They are the guarantors. The corresponding author attests that all listed authors meet authorship criteria and that no others meeting the criteria have been omitted.

Funding: This study was funded by a personal fellowship from the Research Foundation Flanders (grant No 12ZU922N), a research grant from the European Society of Cardiology (grant No App000037070), and the British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence (grant No RE/18/6/34217). The funders had no role in considering the study design or in the collection, analysis, interpretation of data, writing of the report, or decision to submit the article for publication.

Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: NC is funded by a personal fellowship from the Research Foundation Flanders and a research grant from the European Society of Cardiology. JMF, PSJ, JGC, NS, and JJVM are supported by British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence. PSJ and JJVM are further supported by the Vera Melrose Heart Failure Research Fund. JJVM has received funding to his institution from Amgen and Cytokinetics for his participation in the steering sommittee for the ATOMIC-HF, COSMIC-HF, and GALACTIC-HF trials and meetings and other activities related to these trials; has received payments through Glasgow University from work on clinical trials, consulting, and other activities from Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardurion, Dal-Cor, GlaxoSmithKline, Ionis, KBP Biosciences, Novartis, Pfizer, and Theracos; and has received personal lecture fees from the Corpus, Abbott, Hikma, Sun Pharmaceuticals, Medscape/Heart.Org, Radcliffe Cardiology, Alkem Metabolics, Eris Lifesciences, Lupin, ProAdWise Communications, Servier Director, and Global Clinical Trial Partners. NS declares consulting fees or speaker honorariums, or both, from Abbott Laboratories, Afimmune, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, Hanmi Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Roche Diagnostics, and Sanofi; and grant support paid to his university from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, and Roche Diagnostics. KK has acted as a consultant or speaker or received grants for investigator initiated studies for Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi-Aventis, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Boehringer Ingelheim, Oramed Pharmaceuticals, Roche, and Applied Therapeutics. KK is supported by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration East Midlands (ARC EM) and the NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). CL is funded by an NIHR Advanced Research Fellowship (NIHR-300111) and supported by the Leicester BRC. PSJ has received speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Alkem Metabolics, ProAdWise Communications, Sun Pharmaceuticals, and Intas Pharmaceuticals; has received advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novartis; has received research funding from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Analog Devices; his employer, the University of Glasgow, has been remunerated for clinical trial work from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Novartis, and Novo Nordisk; and is the Director of Global Clinical Trial Partners. HS is supported by the China Scholarship Council. Other authors report no support from any organisation for the submitted work, no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years, and no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Transparency: The lead author (NC) affirms that the manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study being reported; that no important aspects of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as planned (and, if relevant, registered) have been explained.

Dissemination to participants and related patient and public communities: Results from this study will be shared with patient associations and foundations dedicated to preventing cardiovascular diseases, such as the European Heart Network and the American Heart Association. To reach the public, findings will also be press released alongside publication of this manuscript. Social media (eg, X) will be used to draw attention to the work and stimulate debate about its findings. Finally, the underlying developed algorithms will be freely available for academic use at https://github.com/nathalieconrad/CVD_incidence .

Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

• ↵ Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. Gobal Burden of Diseases Viz Hub. 2023. https://vizhub.healthdata.org/gbd-compare/
• Ananth CV ,
• Rutherford C ,
• Rosenfeld EB ,
• O’Flaherty M ,
• Allender S ,
• Scarborough P ,
• Andersson C ,
• Abdalla SM ,
• Mensah GA ,
• Johnson CO ,
• GBD-NHLBI-JACC Global Burden of Cardiovascular Diseases Writing Group
• Almarzooq ZI ,
• American Heart Association Council on Epidemiology and Prevention Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee
• Townsend N ,
• Atlas Writing Group, European Society of Cardiology
• Herrett E ,
• Gallagher AM ,
• Bhaskaran K ,
• ↵ Wolf A, Dedman D, Campbell J, et al. Data resource profile: Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum. International Journal of Epidemiology. 2019 Mar 11 [cited 2019 Mar 22]; https://academic.oup.com/ije/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ije/dyz034/5374844
• Verbeke G ,
• Molenberghs G ,
• Ferguson LD ,
• ↵ Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. What coding systems are used in CPRD data? 2023. https://www.cprd.com/defining-your-study-population
• ↵ Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG). The English Index of Multiple Deprivation 2015: Guidance. 2015; pp1-7. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-indices-of-deprivation-2015
• ↵ Kirkwood B, Sterne J. Essential medical statistics. 2010.
• ↵ Eurostat’s task force. Revision of the European Standard Population Report. 2013.
• Benchimol EI ,
• Guttmann A ,
• RECORD Working Committee
• ↵ NHS Digital. Health Survey for England, 2021 part 1. https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/health-survey-for-england/2021
• Criqui MH ,
• ↵ Health and Social Care Information Centre. Quality and Outcomes Framework - Indicators 2011-12. 2011. https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/quality-and-outcomes-framework-achievement-prevalence-and-exceptions-data/quality-and-outcomes-framework-2011-12
• Jacomelli J ,
• Summers L ,
• Stevenson A ,
• Earnshaw JJ
• Vahanian A ,
• Beyersdorf F ,
• ESC/EACTS Scientific Document Group
• Glikson M ,
• Nielsen JC ,
• Kronborg MB ,
• ESC Scientific Document Group
• Stevenson C ,
• Peeters A ,
• Federici M ,
• Schultz WM ,
• Verbakel JY ,
• Thygesen K ,
• Alpert JS ,
• Joint ESC/ACCF/AHA/WHF Task Force for the Redefinition of Myocardial Infarction
• Joint ESC/ACCF/AHA/WHF Task Force for the Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction
• Sandoval Y ,
• High-STEACS investigators
• Camargo ECS ,
• Singhal AB ,
• Wiener RS ,
• Schwartz LM ,
• Sappler N ,
• Roalfe AK ,
• Lay-Flurrie SL ,
• Ordóñez-Mena JM ,
• Herbert A ,
• Wijlaars L ,
• Zylbersztejn A ,
• Cromwell D ,
• ↵ NHS Digital. Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF), 2019-20. Indicator definitions. 2020. https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/quality-and-outcomes-framework-achievement-prevalence-and-exceptions-data/2019-20
• Pronovost PJ
• Thomas SL ,
• Schoonen WM ,

Facility for Rare Isotope Beams

At michigan state university, investigating the conditions for a new stellar process.

A scientific research team studied how the barium-139 nucleus captures  neutrons in the stellar environment in an experiment at  Argonne National Laboratory ’s (ANL)  CARIBU facility using FRIB’s Summing Nal (SuN) detector . The team’s goal was to lessen uncertainties related to lanthanum production. Lanthanum is a rare earth element sensitive to intermediate neutron capture process (i process) conditions. Uncovering the conditions of the i process allows scientists to determine its required neutron density and reveal potential sites where it might occur. The team recently published its findings in  Physical Review Letters   (“First Study of the 139Ba(𝑛,𝛾)140Ba Reaction to Constrain the Conditions for the Astrophysical i Process”).

Artemis Spyrou , professor of physics at FRIB and in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at Michigan State University (MSU), and Dennis Mücher , professor of physics at the  University of Cologne in Germany, led the experiment. MSU is home to FRIB, the only accelerator-based U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE-SC) user facility on a university campus. FRIB is operated by MSU to support the mission of the DOE-SC Office of Nuclear Physics as one of 28 DOE-SC user facilities.

Combining global collaboration and world-class educational experiences

The experiment was a collaborative effort involving more than 30 scientists and students from around the world. Participating institutions included the  University of Victoria in Canada, the  University of Oslo in Norway, and the  University of Jyväskyla in Finland. 

“The collaboration is essential because everyone comes from different backgrounds with different areas of expertise,” Spyrou said. “Together, we’re much stronger. It’s really an intellectual sharing of that knowledge and bringing new ideas to the experiment.”

The international collaboration also included five FRIB graduate and two FRIB undergraduate students. FRIB is an educational resource for the next generation of science and technical talent. Students enrolled in nuclear physics at MSU can work with scientific researchers from around the world to conduct groundbreaking research in accelerator science, cryogenic engineering, and astrophysics. 

“Our students contribute to every aspect of the experiment, from transporting the instrumentation to unpacking and setting it up, then testing and calibrating it to make sure everything works,” Spyrou said. “Then, we all work together to identify what’s in the beam. Is it reasonable? Do we accept it? Once everything is set up and ready, we all take shifts.”

Measuring the i process 

Producing some of the heaviest elements found on Earth, like platinum and gold, requires stellar environments rich in neutrons. Inside stars, neutrons combine with an atomic nucleus to create a heavier nucleus. These nuclear reactions, called neutron capture processes, are what create these heavy elements. Two neutron capture processes are known to occur in stars: the rapid neutron capture process ( r process) and the slow neutron capture process ( s process). Yet, neither process can explain some astronomic observations, such as unusual abundance patterns found on very old stars. A new stellar process—the i process—may help. The i process represents neutron densities that fall between those of the r and s processes.

“Through this reaction we are constraining, we discovered that compared to what theory predicted, the amount of lanthanum is actually less,” said Spyrou. 

Spyrou said that combining lanthanum with other elements, like barium and europium, helps provide a signature of the i process. 

“It’s a new process, and we don’t know the conditions where the i process is happening. It’s all theoretical, so unless we constrain the nuclear physics, we will never find out,” Spyrou said. “This was the first strong constraint from the nuclear physics point of view that validates that yes, the i process should be making these elements under these conditions.”

Neutron capture processes are difficult to measure directly, Spyrou said. Indirect techniques, like the beta-Oslo and shape methods, help constrain neutron capture reaction rates in exotic  nuclei . These two methods formed the basis of the barium-139 nucleus experiment.

To measure the data, beams provided by ANL’s CARIBU facility produced a high-intensity beam and delivered it to the center of the SuN detector, a device that measures gamma rays emitted from decaying  isotope beams. This tool was pivotal in producing strong data constraints during the study.

“I developed SuN with my group at the National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory, the predecessor to FRIB,” Spyrou said. “It’s a very efficient and large detector. Basically, every gamma ray that comes out, we can detect. This is an advantage compared to other detectors, which are smaller.”

The first i process constraint paves the way for more research

Studying the barium-139 neutron capture was only the first step in discovering the conditions of the i  process. Mücher is starting a new program at the University of Cologne that aims to measure some significant i  process reactions directly. Spyrou said that she and her FRIB team plan to continue studying the i process through different reactions that can help constrain the production of different elements or neutron densities. They recently conducted an experiment at ANL to study the neodymium-151 neutron capture. This neutron capture is the dominant reaction for europium production.

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation.

Michigan State University operates the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams (FRIB) as a user facility for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE-SC), supporting the mission of the DOE-SC Office of Nuclear Physics. Hosting what is designed to be the most powerful heavy-ion accelerator, FRIB enables scientists to make discoveries about the properties of rare isotopes in order to better understand the physics of nuclei, nuclear astrophysics, fundamental interactions, and applications for society, including in medicine, homeland security, and industry.

The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science is the single largest supporter of basic research in the physical sciences in the United States and is working to address some of today’s most pressing challenges. For more information, visit  energy.gov/science .

• Bihar Board

WB 10th PPS/PPR Results

James dyson award, sanskriti university, srm university.

• Education News
• Web Stories
• Current Affairs
• Short Videos
• School & Boards
• College Admission
• Govt Jobs Alert & Prep
• GK & Aptitude

UGC NET Syllabus 2024: Download Paper 1 & Paper 2 Syllabus PDF

Ugc net syllabus 2024 for paper 1 and 2 has been released by the university grants commission. prospective candidates should review the subject-wise ugc net syllabus and exam pattern in both hindi and english before commencing their preparation. additionally, you can find the direct link to download the ugc net syllabus 2024 pdf here..

UGC NET Syllabus 2024 is prescribed by the University Grants Commission along with the notification. Aspirants planning to appear for the UGC NET exam, scheduled to be held on June 18,  must be conversant with the detailed syllabus. The exam is divided into two papers: Paper 1 and Paper 2. While Paper 1 is compulsory for all candidates, Paper 2 depends on the subject chosen by the candidates. There are a total of 83 UGC NET subjects from which the candidates have to choose.

UGC NET Syllabus 2024

The UGC NET exam is held twice a year to ascertain candidates' eligibility for Assistant Professor positions or both Junior Research Fellowship (JRF) and Assistant Professor roles in Indian universities and colleges. Lakhs of candidates appear for the exam; however, only a few are able to crack it. For the December 2023 session, 9.45 lakh candidates registered for the exam, but only 6.55 lakh candidates appeared for it.

UGC NET Syllabus 2024 for Paper 1

UGC NET Paper 1 Syllabus 2024 Subject-wise

Unit-i: teaching aptitude syllabus.

• Teaching: Concept, Objectives, Levels of teaching (Memory, Understanding and Reflection), Characteristics and basic requirements.
• Learner’s characteristics: Characteristics of adolescent and adult learners (Academic, Social, Emotional and Cognitive), Individual differences.
• Factors affecting teaching related to Teacher, Learner, Support material, Instructional facilities, Learning environment and Institution.
• Methods of teaching in Institutions of higher learning: Teacher centred vs. Learner-centred methods; offline vs. Online methods (Swayam, Swayamprabha, MOOCs etc.).
• Teaching Support System: Traditional, Modern and ICT based.
• Evaluation Systems: Elements and Types of evaluation, Evaluation in Choice Based Credit System in Higher education, Computer-based testing, Innovations in evaluation systems.

Unit-II: Research Aptitude Syllabus

• Research: Meaning, Types, and Characteristics, Positivism and Postpositivistic approach to research.
• Methods of Research: ExperimeUGCl, Descriptive, Historical, Qualitative and Quantitative Methods, Steps of Research.
• Thesis and Article writing: Format and styles of referencing.
• Application of ICT in research.
• Research ethics.

Unit-III Comprehension Syllabus

Unit-iv: communication.

• Communication: Meaning, types and characteristics of communication.
• Effective communication: Verbal and Non-verbal, Inter-Cultural and group communications, Classroom communication.
• Barriers to effective communication.
• Mass-Media and Society.

Unit-V: Mathematical Reasoning and Aptitude Syllabus

• Types of reasoning.
• Number series, Letter series, Codes and Relationships.
• Mathematical Aptitude (Fraction, Time & Distance, Ratio, Proportion and PerceUGCge, Profit and Loss, Interest and Discounting, Averages etc.).

Unit-VI: Logical Reasoning Syllabus

• Understanding the structure of arguments: argument forms, the structure of categorical propositions, Mood and Figure, Formal and Informal fallacies, Uses of language, Connotations and denotations of terms, Classical square of opposition.
• Evaluating and distinguishing deductive and inductive reasoning.
• Venn diagram: Simple and multiple uses for establishing the validity of arguments.
• Indian Logic: Means of knowledge.
• Pramanas: Pratyaksha (Perception), Anumana (Inference), Upamana (Comparison), Shabda (Verbal testimony), Arthapatti (Implication) and Anupalabddhi (Non-apprehension).
• Structure and kinds of Anumana (inference), Vyapti (invariable relation), Hetvabhasas (fallacies of inference).

UGC NET Exam Pattern

• UGC NET Eligibility
• UGC NET Preparation

Unit-VII: Data Interpretation Syllabus

• Sources, acquisition and classification of Data.
• Quantitative and Qualitative Data.
• Graphical representation (Bar-chart, Histograms, Pie-chart, Table-chart and Line-chart) and mapping of Data.
• Data Interpretation.
• Data and Governance.
• Unit-VIII: Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Syllabus
• ICT: General abbreviations and terminology.
• Basics of the Internet, Intranet, E-mail, Audio and Video-conferencing.
• Digital initiatives in higher education.
• ICT and Governance.

Unit-IX: People, Development and Environment Syllabus

• Development and environment: Millennium development and Sustainable development goals.
• Human and environment interaction: Anthropogenic activities and their impacts on the environment.
• EnvironmeUGCl issues: Local, Regional and Global; Air pollution, Water pollution, Soil pollution, Noise pollution, Waste (solid, liquid, biomedical, hazardous, electronic), Climate change and its Socio-Economic and Political dimensions.
• Impacts of pollutants on human health.
• Natural and energy resources: Solar, Wind, Soil, Hydro, Geothermal, Biomass, Nuclear and Forests.
• Natural hazards and disasters: Mitigation strategies.
• EnvironmeUGCl Protection Act (1986), National Action Plan on Climate Change, International agreements/efforts -Montreal Protocol, Rio Summit, Convention on Biodiversity, Kyoto Protocol, Paris Agreement, International Solar Alliance.

Unit-X: Higher Education System Syllabus

• Institutions of higher learning and education in ancient India.
• Evolution of higher learning and research in Post Independence India.
• OrieUGCl, Conventional and Non-conventional learning programmes in India.
• Professional, Technical and Skill-Based education.
• Value education and environmeUGCl education.
• Policies, Governance, and Administration.

UGC NET Syllabus PDF Paper 1

Individuals preparing for exam can access the UGC NET Paper 1 syllabus PDF either on the official website or click on the direct link mentioned below. Downloading UGC NET Syllabus Paper 1 PDF 2024 will be highly beneficial while preparing for the exam. 

⇒   UGC NET Paper 1 Syllabus PDF in English

UGC NET Paper 2 Syllabus PDF

UGC NET Paper 2 includes 83 subjects. Candidates should choose the subject in which they have completed their master's degree. If their chosen subject is not listed, they should select a related subject. The UGC NET Syllabus PDF for Paper 2 is mentioned in the article below for your convenience.

UGC NET Paper 2 Syllabus 2024 Subject-wise

UGC NET Syllabus Political Science

Candidates who have completed their master's in Political Science and selected this subject for UGC NET Paper 2 must possess a comprehensive understanding of the syllabus.

• Political Traditions
• Conservatism
• Multiculturalism
• Postmodernism
• Confucius, Plato, Aristotle, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Hegel, Mary Wollstonecraft, John Stuart Mill, Karl Marx, Gramsci, Hannah Arendt, Frantz
• Fanon, Mao Zedong, John Rawls

UGC NET Syllabus Law

Candidates gearing up for the UGC NET Law examination should thoroughly review the syllabus to devise an effective study plan. The subject code for UGC NET Law is 58, encompassing a syllabus consisting of 10 units. Check out the UGC NET Law Syllabus below.

• Nature and sources of law
• Schools of jurisprudence
• Law and morality
• Concept of rights and duties
• Legal personality
• Concepts of property, ownership, and possession
• Concept of liability
• Law, poverty, and development
• Global justice
• Modernism and post-modernism
• Preamble, fundameUGCl rights and duties, directive principles of state
• Union and State executive and their interrelationship
• Union and State legislature and distribution of legislative powers
• Emergency provisions
• Temporary, transitional and special provisions in respect of certain states
• Election Commission of India
• Nature, scope and importance of administrative law
• Principle of natural justice
• Judicial review of administrative actions 
• International law – Definition, nature and basis
• Sources of International law
• Recognition of states and governments
• Nationality, immigrants, refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs)
• Extradition and asylum
• United Nations and its organs
• Settlement of international disputes
• World Trade Organization (WTO)
• International humanitarian law (IHL) - Conventions and protocols
• ImplemeUGCtion of IHL - Challenges
• General principles of criminal liability – Actus reus and mens rea, individual and group liability and constructive liability
• Stages of crime and inchoate crimes - Abetment, criminal conspiracy and attempt
• General exceptions
• Offences against human body
• Offences against state and terrorism
• Offences against property
• Offences against women and children
• Drug trafficking and counterfeiting
• Offences against public tranquility
• Theories and kinds of punishments, compensation to the victims of crime
• Nature and definition of tort
• General principles of tortious liability
• General defenses
• Specific torts – Negligence, nuisance, trespass and defamation
• Remoteness of damages
• Strict and absolute liability
• Tortious liability of the State
• The Consumer Protection Act 1986 - Definitions, consumer rights and redressal mechanism
• The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - No fault liability, third party insurance and claims tribunal
• The Competition Act, 2002 - Prohibition of certain agreements, abuse of dominant position and regulation of combinations
• Essential elements of contract and e-contract
• Breach of contract, frustration of contract, void and voidable agreements
• Standard form of contract and quasi-contract
• Specific contracts - Bailment, pledge, indemnity, guarantee and agency
• Sale of Goods Act, 1930
• Partnership and limited liability partnership
• Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
• Company law – Incorporation of a company, prospectus, shares and debentures
• Company law – Directors and meetings
• Corporate social responsibility
• Sources and schools
• Marriage and dissolution of marriage
• Matrimonial remedies - Divorce and theories of divorce
• Changing dimensions of institution of marriage – Live-in relationship
• Recognition of foreign decrees in India on marriage and divorce
• Maintenance, dower and stridhan
• Adoption, guardianship and acknowledgement
• Succession and inheritance
• Will, gift and wakf
• Uniform Civil Code
• Meaning and concept of ‘environment’ and ‘environmeUGCl pollution’
• International environmeUGCl law and UN Conferences
• Constitutional and legal framework for protection of environment in India
• EnvironmeUGCl Impact Assessment and control of hazardous waste in India
• National Green Tribunal
• Concept and development of human rights
• Universalism and cultural relativism
• International Bill of Rights
• Group rights – Women, children, persons with disabilities, elderly persons, minorities and weaker sections
• Protection and enforcement of human rights in India – National Human Rights Commission, National Commission for Minorities, National Commission for Women, National Commission for Scheduled Castes, National Commission for Schedule Tribes and National Commission for Backward Classes
• Concept and meaning of intellectual property
• Theories of intellectual property
• International conventions pertaining to intellectual properties
• Copyright and neighboring rights – Subject matters, limitations and exceptions, infringement and remedies
• Law of patent – PateUGCbility, procedure for grant of patent, limitations and exceptions, infringement and remedies
• Law of trademark – Registration of trademarks, kinds of trademarks, infringement and passing off, remedies
• Protection of Geographical Indications
• Bio-diversity and Traditional Knowledge
• Information technology law- digital signature and electronic signature, electronic governance, electronic records and duties of subscribers
• Cyber crimes, penalties and adjudication
• Comparative Law – Relevance, methodology, problems and concerns in Comparison
• Forms of governments – Presidential and parliameUGCry, unitary and federal
• Models of federalism – USA, Canada and India
• Rule of Law – ‘Formal’ and ‘substantive’ versions
• Separation of powers – India, UK, USA and France
• Independence of judiciary, judicial activism and accouUGCbility – India, UK and USA
• Systems of constitutional review – India, USA, Switzerland and France
• Amendment of the Constitution – India, USA and South Africa
• Ombudsman –Sweden, UK and India
• Open Government and Right to Information - USA, UK and India

UGC NET English Literature

UGC NET Environmental Science Syllabus 2024

• Unit-I: Fundamentals of Environmental Sciences
• Unit-II: Environmental Chemistry
• Unit-III: Environmental Biology
• Unit-IV: Environmental Geosciences Unit-V: Energy and Environment
• Unit-IV: Environmental Geosciences
• Unit-V: Energy and Environment
• Unit-VI: Environmental Pollution and Control Unit-VII: Solid and Hazardous Waste Management

UGC NET History Syllabus

Best Books for Covering UGC NET Syllabus

Get here latest School , CBSE and Govt Jobs notification in English and Hindi for Sarkari Naukari and Sarkari Result . Download the Jagran Josh Sarkari Naukri App .

• How to download UGC NET Syllabus 2024 PDF for Paper 1 and Paper 2? + Candidates can download the UGC NET Syllabus PDF either from the official website or from the direct link provided here.
• Who prescribes NTA UGC NET Syllabus? + The syllabus of UGC NET exam is prescribed by the National Testing Agency and University Grant Commission.
• What is UGC NET Paper 1 Syllabus 2024? + The UGC NET Syllabus for Paper 1 comprises 10 units, namely, Teaching Aptitude, Research Aptitude, Communication, Mathematical Reasoning, Data Interpretation, Comprehension, Higher Education System, Logical Reasoning, and People, Development and Environment.
• What is UGC NET Syllabus 2024? + UGC NET Syllabus is divided into two parts: Paper 1 and Paper 2. Paper 1 is common to all candidates, while paper 2 is subject specific. The UGC NET Syllabus includes topics like Teaching Aptitude, Research Aptitude, Communication, Mathematical Reasoning, Comprehension, Logical Reasoning, and Data Interpretation.
• SSC CGL 2024 Notification
• SSC MTS 2024 Exam
• SSC MTS 2024 Notification
• MP Board Result 2024
• UPSC Prelims Cut Off 2024
• Bihar BEd Admit Card 2024
• Rajasthan BSTC Admit Card 2024
• APSC SO Result 2024
• APSC SO Admit Card 2024
• UPSC CSE Admit Card 2024

Latest Education News

India vs South Africa T20 World Cup 2024 Final: Live Score

T20 World Cup 2024 Final Live Scorecard Updates, Streaming, Match and Predictions, Pitch Report Here

India vs South Africa Final 2024: कोहली-अक्षर ने पारी संभाली, बारबाडोस से मैच की हर एक अपडेट देखें

Most Runs and Wickets by Indian and South African Players in T20 World Cup 2024

India vs South Africa World Cup Final 2024: Match Time, Playing 11, Pitch Report and Weather Forecast

PUP Result 2024 OUT at punjabiuniversity.ac.in; Direct Link to Download UG, PG Marksheet PDF

Kerala University Result 2024 OUT at exams.keralauniversity.ac.in; Direct Link to Download UG and PG Marksheet

ICC T20 World Cup 2024: IND vs SA Final भारतीय शेर बनाम अफ्रीकी शेर, कौन बनेगा किंग? चेक करें फाइनल डिटेल्स

You are a sharp-eyed genius if you can find the odd cat in 4 seconds!

Jiwaji University Result 2024 OUT at jiwaji.edu; Direct Link to Download UG, PG Marksheet PDF

Optical Illusion IQ Test: Can You Spot The Whale Among Elephants In 8 Seconds?

Optical Illusion IQ Test: Use Your Exceptional Pattern Recognition Skills To Spot The Bicycle In 12 Seconds!

Optical Illusion IQ Test: Only 1% With Sharpest Vision Can Spot A Piano Among Zebras In 8 Seconds!

Most Runs In T20 World Cup 2024

Bharathidasan University Result 2024 OUT on bdu.ac.in, Download BDU UG and PG Semester Marksheet

Picture Puzzle IQ Test: Can You Spot The Ring In This Busy Street Scene In 12 Seconds?

T20 World Cup Final 2024 Broadcast Channel Number List: Star Sports on Tata Sky, Airtel, Dish TV, Videocon, Sun Direct

T20 World Cup 2024 Commentators List: हिंदी कमेंट्री पैनल में शामिल है ये भारतीय दिग्गज, देखें पूरी सूची

JKBOSE 11th Result 2024 Releasing Shortly at jkbose.nic.in, Download JK Board Soft, Hard Zone Marksheet Here

T20 World Cup Winners List: भारत सहित किस देश ने कब जीता टी20 वर्ल्ड कप का टाइटल, देखें पूरी लिस्ट