how to identify a research problem in an article

• Thesis Action Plan New
• Academic Project Planner
• Literature Navigator
• Thesis Dialogue Blueprint
• Writing Wizard's Template
• Research Proposal Compass
• Why students love us
• Why professors love us
• Why we are different
• All Products
• Coming Soon

How to Write Your Thesis in 30 Days: A Comprehensive Guide

What Is a Dissertation Proposal: A Comprehensive Guide

Which Thesis Statement Is the Most Effective? Tips and Examples

Essential Tips for Research: A Guide for Beginners

Friends and Thesis Writing: Striking the Right Balance for Your Thesis

Mastering the Art of Communication: Effective Strategies for Voice Your Research in Interviews

Navigating ethical dilemmas: the morality of conducting interviews.

Data Anomalies: Strategies for Analyzing and Interpreting Outlier Data

Identifying a research problem: a step-by-step guide.

Identifying a research problem is a crucial first step in the research process, serving as the foundation for all subsequent research activities. This guide provides a comprehensive overview of the steps involved in identifying a research problem, from understanding its essence to employing advanced strategies for refinement.

Key Takeaways

• Understanding the definition and importance of a research problem is essential for academic success.
• Exploring diverse sources such as literature reviews and consultations can help in formulating a solid research problem.
• A clear problem statement, aligned research objectives, and well-defined questions are crucial for a focused study.
• Evaluating the feasibility and potential impact of a research problem ensures its relevance and scope.
• Advanced strategies, including interdisciplinary approaches and technology utilization, can enhance the identification and refinement of research problems.

Understanding the Essence of Identifying a Research Problem

Defining the research problem.

A research problem is the focal point of any academic inquiry. It is a concise and well-defined statement that outlines the specific issue or question that the research aims to address. This research problem usually sets the tone for the entire study and provides you, the researcher, with a clear purpose and a clear direction on how to go about conducting your research.

Importance in Academic Research

It also demonstrates the significance of your research and its potential to contribute new knowledge to the existing body of literature in the world. A compelling research problem not only captivates the attention of your peers but also lays the foundation for impactful and meaningful research outcomes.

Initial Steps to Identification

To identify a research problem, you need a systematic approach and a deep understanding of the subject area. Below are some steps to guide you in this process:

• Conduct a thorough literature review to understand what has been studied before.
• Identify gaps in the existing research that could form the basis of your study.
• Consult with academic mentors to refine your ideas and approach.

Exploring Sources for Research Problem Identification

Literature review.

When you embark on the journey of identifying a research problem, a thorough literature review is indispensable. This process involves scrutinizing existing research to find literature gaps and unexplored areas that could form the basis of your research. It's crucial to analyze recent studies, seminal works, and review articles to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the topic.

Existing Theories and Frameworks

The exploration of existing theories and frameworks provides a solid foundation for developing a research problem. By understanding the established models and theories, you can identify inconsistencies or areas lacking in depth which might offer fruitful avenues for research.

Consultation with Academic Mentors

Engaging with academic mentors is vital in shaping a well-defined research problem. Their expertise can guide you through the complexities of your field, offering insights into feasible research questions and helping you refine your focus. This interaction often leads to the identification of unique and significant research opportunities that align with current academic and industry trends.

Formulating the Research Problem

Crafting a clear problem statement.

To effectively address your research problem, start by crafting a clear problem statement . This involves succinctly describing who is affected by the problem, why it is important, and how your research will contribute to solving it. Ensure your problem statement is concise and specific to guide the entire research process.

Setting Research Objectives

Setting clear research objectives is crucial for maintaining focus throughout your study. These objectives should directly align with the problem statement and guide your research activities. Consider using a bulleted list to outline your main objectives:

• Understand the underlying factors contributing to the problem
• Explore potential solutions
• Evaluate the effectiveness of proposed solutions

Determining Research Questions

The formulation of precise research questions is a pivotal step in defining the scope and direction of your study. These questions should be directly derived from your research objectives and designed to be answerable through your chosen research methods. Crafting well-defined research questions will help you maintain a clear focus and avoid common pitfalls in the research process.

Evaluating the Scope and Relevance of the Research Problem

Feasibility assessment.

Before you finalize a research problem, it is crucial to assess its feasibility. Consider the availability of resources, time, and expertise required to conduct the research. Evaluate potential constraints and determine if the research problem can be realistically tackled within the given limitations.

Significance to the Field

Ensure that your research problem has a clear and direct impact on the field. It should aim to contribute to existing knowledge and address a real-world issue that is relevant to your academic discipline.

Potential Impact on Existing Knowledge

The potential impact of your research problem on existing knowledge cannot be understated. It should challenge, extend, or refine current understanding in a meaningful way. Consider how your research can add value to the existing body of work and potentially lead to significant advancements in your field.

Techniques for Refining the Research Problem

Narrowing down the focus.

To effectively refine your research problem, start by narrowing down the focus . This involves pinpointing the specific aspects of your topic that are most significant and ensuring that your research problem is not too broad. This targeted approach helps in identifying knowledge gaps and formulating more precise research questions.

Incorporating Feedback

Feedback is crucial in the refinement process. Engage with academic mentors, peers, and experts in your field to gather insights and suggestions. This collaborative feedback can lead to significant improvements in your research problem, making it more robust and relevant.

Iterative Refinement Process

Refinement should be seen as an iterative process, where you continuously refine and revise your research problem based on new information and feedback. This approach ensures that your research problem remains aligned with current trends and academic standards, ultimately enhancing its feasibility and relevance.

Challenges in Identifying a Research Problem

Common pitfalls and how to avoid them.

Identifying a research problem can be fraught with common pitfalls such as selecting a topic that is too broad or too narrow. To avoid these, you should conduct a thorough literature review and seek feedback from peers and mentors. This proactive approach ensures that your research question is both relevant and manageable.

Dealing with Ambiguity

Ambiguity in defining the research problem can lead to significant challenges down the line. Ensure clarity by operationalizing variables and explicitly stating the research objectives. This clarity will guide your entire research process, making it more structured and focused.

Balancing Novelty and Practicality

While it's important to address a novel issue in your research, practicality should not be overlooked. A research problem should not only contribute new knowledge but also be feasible and have clear implications. Balancing these aspects often requires iterative refinement and consultation with academic mentors to align your research with real-world applications.

Advanced Strategies for Identifying a Research Problem

Interdisciplinary approaches.

Embrace the power of interdisciplinary approaches to uncover unique and comprehensive research problems. By integrating knowledge from various disciplines, you can address complex issues that single-field studies might overlook. This method not only broadens the scope of your research but also enhances its applicability and depth.

Utilizing Technology and Data Analytics

Leverage technology and data analytics to refine and identify research problems with precision. Advanced tools like machine learning and big data analysis can reveal patterns and insights that traditional methods might miss. This approach is particularly useful in fields where large datasets are involved, or where real-time data integration can lead to more dynamic research outcomes.

Engaging with Industry and Community Needs

Focus on the needs of industry and community to ensure your research is not only academically sound but also practically relevant. Engaging with real-world problems can provide a rich source of research questions that are directly applicable and beneficial to society. This strategy not only enhances the relevance of your research but also increases its potential for impact.

Dive into the world of academic success with our 'Advanced Strategies for Identifying a Research Problem' at Research Rebels. Our expertly crafted guides and action plans are designed to simplify your thesis journey, transforming complex academic challenges into manageable tasks. Don't wait to take control of your academic future. Visit our website now to learn more and claim your special offer!

In conclusion, identifying a research problem is a foundational step in the academic research process that requires careful consideration and systematic approach. This guide has outlined the essential steps involved, from understanding the context and reviewing existing literature to formulating clear research questions. By adhering to these guidelines, researchers can ensure that their studies are grounded in a well-defined problem, enhancing the relevance and impact of their findings. It is crucial for scholars to approach this task with rigor and critical thinking to contribute meaningfully to the body of knowledge in their respective fields.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a research problem.

A research problem is a specific issue, inconsistency, or gap in knowledge that needs to be addressed through scientific inquiry. It forms the foundation of a research study, guiding the research questions, methodology, and analysis.

Why is identifying a research problem important?

Identifying a research problem is crucial as it determines the direction and scope of the study. It helps researchers focus their inquiry, formulate hypotheses, and contribute to the existing body of knowledge.

How do I identify a suitable research problem?

To identify a suitable research problem, start with a thorough literature review to understand existing research and identify gaps. Consult with academic mentors, and consider relevance, feasibility, and your own interests.

What are some common pitfalls in identifying a research problem?

Common pitfalls include choosing a problem that is too broad or too narrow, not aligning with existing literature, lack of originality, and failing to consider the practical implications and feasibility of the study.

Can technology help in identifying a research problem?

Yes, technology and data analytics can aid in identifying research problems by providing access to a vast amount of data, revealing patterns and trends that might not be visible otherwise. Tools like digital libraries and research databases are particularly useful.

How can I refine my research problem?

Refine your research problem by narrowing its focus, seeking feedback from peers and mentors, and continually reviewing and adjusting the problem statement based on new information and insights gained during preliminary research.

• Rebels Blog
• Blog Articles
• Terms and Conditions
• Payment and Shipping Terms
• Privacy Policy
• Return Policy

© 2024 Research Rebels, All rights reserved.

Your cart is currently empty.

• QUICK LINKS
• How to enroll
• Career services

How to Identify an Appropriate Research Problem

By Mansureh Kebritchi, Ph.D.

A research problem is the heart of the study. It is a clear, definite statement of the area of concern or investigation and is backed by evidence (Bryman, 2007).  It drives the research questions and processes and provides the framework for understanding the research findings. To begin, you will need to know where to look for your research problem and how to evaluate when a research problem for success.

Where to Find a Research Problem

Ideas for research problems tend to come from two sources: real life and the scholarly arena.  First, identifying a research problem can be as simple as observing the complications and issues in your local workplace. You may encounter ongoing issues on a daily basis in your workplace or observe your colleagues struggle with major issues or questions in your field. These ongoing obstacles and issues in the workplace can be the catalyst for developing a research problem.  

Alternatively, research problems can be identified by reviewing recent literature, reports, or databases in your field. Often the section on “recommendations for future studies” provided at the end of journal articles or doctoral dissertations suggests potential research problems. In addition, major reports and databases in the field may reveal findings or data-based facts that call for additional investigation or suggest potential issues to be addressed. Looking at what theories need to be tested is another opportunity to develop a research problem.

How to Evaluate a Research Problem 

Once you find your potential research problem, you will need to evaluate the problem and ensure that it is appropriate for research. A research problem is deemed appropriate when it is supported by the literature and considered significant, timely, novel, specific, and researchable.  Stronger research problems are more likely to succeed in publication, presentation, and application.

Supported by the Literature

Your research problem should be relevant to the field and supported by a number of recent peer-reviewed studies in the field. Even if you identify the problem based on the recommendation of one journal article or dissertation, you will still need to conduct a literature search and ensure that other researchers support the problem and the need for conducting research to further address the problem.

Significant

Your research problem should have a positive impact on the field. The impact can be practical, in the form of direct application of the results in the field, or conceptual, where the work advances the field by filling a knowledge gap.  

Your research problem should be related to the current needs in the field and well-suited for the present status of the issues in your field. Explore what topics are being covered in current journals in the field. Look at calls from relevant disciplinary organizations. Review your research center agenda and focused topics. For example, the topics of the Research Labs at the Center for Educational and Instructional Technology Research including critical thinking, social media and cultural competency, diversity, and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) in higher education are representative of the current timely topics in the field of education.  Identifying a current question in the field and supporting the problem with recent literature can justify the problem's timeliness.

Your research problem should be original and unique. It should seek to address a gap in our knowledge or application. An exhaustive review of the literature can help you identify whether the problem has already been addressed with your particular sample and/or context. Talking to experts in the research area can illuminate a problem.  Replication of an existing study warrants a discussion of value elsewhere, but the novelty can be found in determining if an already-resolved problem holds in a new sample and/or context.

Specific and Clear

Your research problem should be specific enough to set the direction of the study, raise research question(s), and determine an appropriate research method and design. Vague research problems may not be useful to specify the direction of the study or develop research questions.  

Researchable

Research problems are solved through the scientific method. This means researchability, or feasibility of the problem, is more important than all of the above characteristics. You as the researcher should be able to solve the problem with your abilities and available research methods, designs, research sites, resources, and timeframe. If a research problem retains all of the aforementioned characteristics but it is not researchable, it may not be an appropriate research problem.

References and More Information

Bryman, Alan. “The Research Question in Social Research: What is its Role?”  International Journal of Social Research Methodology  10 (2007): 5-20.

Root out friction in every digital experience, super-charge conversion rates, and optimize digital self-service

Uncover insights from any interaction, deliver AI-powered agent coaching, and reduce cost to serve

Increase revenue and loyalty with real-time insights and recommendations delivered to teams on the ground

Know how your people feel and empower managers to improve employee engagement, productivity, and retention

Take action in the moments that matter most along the employee journey and drive bottom line growth

Whatever they’re are saying, wherever they’re saying it, know exactly what’s going on with your people

Get faster, richer insights with qual and quant tools that make powerful market research available to everyone

Run concept tests, pricing studies, prototyping + more with fast, powerful studies designed by UX research experts

Track your brand performance 24/7 and act quickly to respond to opportunities and challenges in your market

Explore the platform powering Experience Management

• Free Account
• For Digital
• For Customer Care
• For Human Resources
• For Researchers
• Financial Services
• All Industries

Popular Use Cases

• Customer Experience
• Employee Experience
• Net Promoter Score
• Voice of Customer
• Customer Success Hub
• Product Documentation
• Training & Certification
• XM Institute
• Popular Resources
• Customer Stories
• Artificial Intelligence
• Market Research
• Partnerships
• Marketplace

The annual gathering of the experience leaders at the world’s iconic brands building breakthrough business results, live in Salt Lake City.

• English/AU & NZ
• Español/Europa
• Español/América Latina
• Português Brasileiro
• REQUEST DEMO

Academic Experience

How to identify and resolve research problems

Updated July 12, 2023

In this article, we’re going to take you through one of the most pertinent parts of conducting research: a research problem (also known as a research problem statement).

When trying to formulate a good research statement, and understand how to solve it for complex projects, it can be difficult to know where to start.

Not only are there multiple perspectives (from stakeholders to project marketers who want answers), you have to consider the particular context of the research topic: is it timely, is it relevant and most importantly of all, is it valuable?

In other words: are you looking at a research worthy problem?

The fact is, a well-defined, precise, and goal-centric research problem will keep your researchers, stakeholders, and business-focused and your results actionable.

And when it works well, it's a powerful tool to identify practical solutions that can drive change and secure buy-in from your workforce.

Free eBook: The ultimate guide to market research

What is a research problem?

In social research methodology and behavioral sciences , a research problem establishes the direction of research, often relating to a specific topic or opportunity for discussion.

For example: climate change and sustainability, analyzing moral dilemmas or wage disparity amongst classes could all be areas that the research problem focuses on.

As well as outlining the topic and/or opportunity, a research problem will explain:

• why the area/issue needs to be addressed,
• why the area/issue is of importance,
• the parameters of the research study
• the research objective
• the reporting framework for the results and
• what the overall benefit of doing so will provide (whether to society as a whole or other researchers and projects).

Having identified the main topic or opportunity for discussion, you can then narrow it down into one or several specific questions that can be scrutinized and answered through the research process.

What are research questions?

Generating research questions underpinning your study usually starts with problems that require further research and understanding while fulfilling the objectives of the study.

A good problem statement begins by asking deeper questions to gain insights about a specific topic.

For example, using the problems above, our questions could be:

"How will climate change policies influence sustainability standards across specific geographies?"

"What measures can be taken to address wage disparity without increasing inflation?"

Developing a research worthy problem is the first step - and one of the most important - in any kind of research.

It’s also a task that will come up again and again because any business research process is cyclical. New questions arise as you iterate and progress through discovering, refining, and improving your products and processes. A research question can also be referred to as a "problem statement".

Note: good research supports multiple perspectives through empirical data. It’s focused on key concepts rather than a broad area, providing readily actionable insight and areas for further research.

Research question or research problem?

As we've highlighted, the terms “research question” and “research problem” are often used interchangeably, becoming a vague or broad proposition for many.

The term "problem statement" is far more representative, but finds little use among academics.

Instead, some researchers think in terms of a single research problem and several research questions that arise from it.

As mentioned above, the questions are lines of inquiry to explore in trying to solve the overarching research problem.

Ultimately, this provides a more meaningful understanding of a topic area.

It may be useful to think of questions and problems as coming out of your business data – that’s the O-data (otherwise known as operational data) like sales figures and website metrics.

What's an example of a research problem?

Your overall research problem could be: "How do we improve sales across EMEA and reduce lost deals?"

This research problem then has a subset of questions, such as:

"Why do sales peak at certain times of the day?"

"Why are customers abandoning their online carts at the point of sale?"

As well as helping you to solve business problems, research problems (and associated questions) help you to think critically about topics and/or issues (business or otherwise). You can also use your old research to aid future research -- a good example is laying the foundation for comparative trend reports or a complex research project.

(Also, if you want to see the bigger picture when it comes to research problems, why not check out our ultimate guide to market research? In it you'll find out: what effective market research looks like, the use cases for market research, carrying out a research study, and how to examine and action research findings).

The research process: why are research problems important?

A research problem has two essential roles in setting your research project on a course for success.

1. They set the scope

The research problem defines what problem or opportunity you’re looking at and what your research goals are. It stops you from getting side-tracked or allowing the scope of research to creep off-course .

Without a strong research problem or problem statement, your team could end up spending resources unnecessarily, or coming up with results that aren’t actionable - or worse, harmful to your business - because the field of study is too broad.

2. They tie your work to business goals and actions

To formulate a research problem in terms of business decisions means you always have clarity on what’s needed to make those decisions. You can show the effects of what you’ve studied using real outcomes.

Then, by focusing your research problem statement on a series of questions tied to business objectives, you can reduce the risk of the research being unactionable or inaccurate.

It's also worth examining research or other scholarly literature (you’ll find plenty of similar, pertinent research online) to see how others have explored specific topics and noting implications that could have for your research.

Four steps to defining your research problem

Image credit: http://myfreeschooltanzania.blogspot.com/2014/11/defining-research-problem.html

1. Observe and identify

Businesses today have so much data that it can be difficult to know which problems to address first. Researchers also have business stakeholders who come to them with problems they would like to have explored. A researcher’s job is to sift through these inputs and discover exactly what higher-level trends and key concepts are worth investing in.

This often means asking questions and doing some initial investigation to decide which avenues to pursue. This could mean gathering interdisciplinary perspectives identifying additional expertise and contextual information.

Sometimes, a small-scale preliminary study might be worth doing to help get a more comprehensive understanding of the business context and needs, and to make sure your research problem addresses the most critical questions.

This could take the form of qualitative research using a few in-depth interviews , an environmental scan, or reviewing relevant literature.

The sales manager of a sportswear company has a problem: sales of trail running shoes are down year-on-year and she isn’t sure why. She approaches the company’s research team for input and they begin asking questions within the company and reviewing their knowledge of the wider market.

2. Review the key factors involved

As a marketing researcher, you must work closely with your team of researchers to define and test the influencing factors and the wider context involved in your study. These might include demographic and economic trends or the business environment affecting the question at hand. This is referred to as a relational research problem.

To do this, you have to identify the factors that will affect the research and begin formulating different methods to control them.

You also need to consider the relationships between factors and the degree of control you have over them. For example, you may be able to control the loading speed of your website but you can’t control the fluctuations of the stock market.

Doing this will help you determine whether the findings of your project will produce enough information to be worth the cost.

You need to determine:

• which factors affect the solution to the research proposal.
• which ones can be controlled and used for the purposes of the company, and to what extent.
• the functional relationships between the factors.
• which ones are critical to the solution of the research study.

The research team at the running shoe company is hard at work. They explore the factors involved and the context of why YoY sales are down for trail shoes, including things like what the company’s competitors are doing, what the weather has been like – affecting outdoor exercise – and the relative spend on marketing for the brand from year to year.

The final factor is within the company’s control, although the first two are not. They check the figures and determine marketing spend has a significant impact on the company.

3. Prioritize

Once you and your research team have a few observations, prioritize them based on their business impact and importance. It may be that you can answer more than one question with a single study, but don’t do it at the risk of losing focus on your overarching research problem.

Questions to ask:

• Who? Who are the people with the problem? Are they end-users, stakeholders, teams within your business? Have you validated the information to see what the scale of the problem is?
• What? What is its nature and what is the supporting evidence?
• Why? What is the business case for solving the problem? How will it help?
• Where? How does the problem manifest and where is it observed?

To help you understand all dimensions, you might want to consider focus groups or preliminary interviews with external (including consumers and existing customers) and internal (salespeople, managers, and other stakeholders) parties to provide what is sometimes much-needed insight into a particular set of questions or problems.

After observing and investigating, the running shoe researchers come up with a few candidate questions, including:

• What is the relationship between US average temperatures and sales of our products year on year?
• At present, how does our customer base rank Competitor X and Competitor Y’s trail running shoe compared to our brand?
• What is the relationship between marketing spend and trail shoe product sales over the last 12 months?

They opt for the final question, because the variables involved are fully within the company’s control, and based on their initial research and stakeholder input, seem the most likely cause of the dive in sales. The research question is specific enough to keep the work on course towards an actionable result, but it allows for a few different avenues to be explored, such as the different budget allocations of offline and online marketing and the kinds of messaging used.

Get feedback from the key teams within your business to make sure everyone is aligned and has the same understanding of the research problem and questions, and the actions you hope to take based on the results. Now is also a good time to demonstrate the ROI of your research and lay out its potential benefits to your stakeholders.

Different groups may have different goals and perspectives on the issue. This step is vital for getting the necessary buy-in and pushing the project forward.

The running shoe company researchers now have everything they need to begin. They call a meeting with the sales manager and consult with the product team, marketing team, and C-suite to make sure everyone is aligned and has bought into the direction of the research topic. They identify and agree that the likely course of action will be a rethink of how marketing resources are allocated, and potentially testing out some new channels and messaging strategies .

Can you explore a broad area and is it practical to do so?

A broader research problem or report can be a great way to bring attention to prevalent issues, societal or otherwise, but are often undertaken by those with the resources to do so.

Take a typical government cybersecurity breach survey, for example. Most of these reports raise awareness of cybercrime, from the day-to-day threats businesses face to what security measures some organizations are taking. What these reports don't do, however, is provide actionable advice - mostly because every organization is different.

The point here is that while some researchers will explore a very complex issue in detail, others will provide only a snapshot to maintain interest and encourage further investigation. The "value" of the data is wholly determined by the recipients of it - and what information you choose to include.

To summarize, it can be practical to undertake a broader research problem, certainly, but it may not be possible to cover everything or provide the detail your audience needs. Likewise, a more systematic investigation of an issue or topic will be more valuable, but you may also find that you cover far less ground.

It's important to think about your research objectives and expected findings before going ahead.

Ensuring your research project is a success

A complex research project can be made significantly easier with clear research objectives, a descriptive research problem, and a central focus. All of which we've outlined in this article.

If you have previous research, even better. Use it as a benchmark

Remember: what separates a good research paper from an average one is actually very simple: valuable, empirical data that explores a prevalent societal or business issue and provides actionable insights.

And we can help.

Sophisticated research made simple with Qualtrics

Trusted by the world's best brands, our platform enables researchers from academic to corporate to tackle the hardest challenges and deliver the results that matter.

Our CoreXM platform supports the methods that define superior research and delivers insights in real-time. It's easy to use (thanks to drag-and-drop functionality) and requires no coding, meaning you'll be capturing data and gleaning insights in no time.

It also excels in flexibility; you can track consumer behavior across segments , benchmark your company versus competitors , carry out complex academic research, and do much more, all from one system.

It's one platform with endless applications, so no matter your research problem, we've got the tools to help you solve it. And if you don't have a team of research experts in-house, our market research team has the practical knowledge and tools to help design the surveys and find the respondents you need.

Of course, you may want to know where to begin with your own market research . If you're struggling, make sure to download our ultimate guide using the link below.

It's got everything you need and there’s always information in our research methods knowledge base.

Scott Smith

Scott Smith, Ph.D. is a contributor to the Qualtrics blog.

Related Articles

April 1, 2023

How to write great survey questions (with examples)

February 8, 2023

Smoothing the transition from school to work with work-based learning

December 6, 2022

How customer experience helps bring Open Universities Australia’s brand promise to life

August 18, 2022

School safety, learning gaps top of mind for parents this back-to-school season

August 9, 2022

3 things that will improve your teachers’ school experience

August 2, 2022

Why a sense of belonging at school matters for K-12 students

July 14, 2022

Improve the student experience with simplified course evaluations

March 17, 2022

Understanding what’s important to college students

Stay up to date with the latest xm thought leadership, tips and news., request demo.

Ready to learn more about Qualtrics?

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• 1. Choosing a Research Problem
• 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

In the social and behavioral sciences, the subject of analysis is most often framed as a problem that must be researched in order to obtain a greater understanding, formulate a set of solutions or recommended courses of action, and/or develop a better approach to practice. The research problem, therefore, is the main organizing principle guiding the analysis of your research. The problem under investigation establishes an occasion for writing and a focus that governs what you want to say. It represents the core subject matter of scholarly communication and the means by which scholars arrive at other topics of conversation and the discovery of new knowledge and understanding.

Alvesson, Mats and Jörgen Sandberg. Constructing Research Questions: Doing Interesting Research . London: Sage, 2013; Jacobs, Ronald L. “Developing a Dissertation Research Problem: A Guide for Doctoral Students in Human Resource Development and Adult Education.” New Horizons in Adult Education and Human Resource Development 25 (Summer 2013): 103-117; Chapter 1: Research and the Research Problem. Nicholas Walliman . Your Research Project: Designing and Planning Your Work . 3rd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2011.

Choosing a Research Problem / How to Begin

Do not assume that identifying a research problem to investigate will be a quick and easy task! You should be thinking about it during the beginning of the course. There are generally three ways you are asked to write about a research problem : 1) your professor provides you with a general topic from which you study a particular aspect; 2) your professor provides you with a list of possible topics to study and you choose a topic from that list; or, 3) your professor leaves it up to you to choose a topic and you only have to obtain permission to write about it before beginning your investigation. Here are some strategies for getting started for each scenario.

I.  How To Begin:  You are given the topic to write about

Step 1 : Identify concepts and terms that make up the topic statement . For example, your professor wants the class to focus on the following research problem: “Is the European Union a credible security actor with the capacity to contribute to confronting global terrorism?" The main concepts in this problem are: European Union, security, global terrorism, credibility [ hint : focus on identifying proper nouns, nouns or noun phrases, and action verbs in the assignment description]. Step 2 : Review related literature to help refine how you will approach examining the topic and finding a way to analyze it . You can begin by doing any or all of the following: reading through background information from materials listed in your course syllabus; searching the USC Libraries Catalog to find a recent book on the topic and, if appropriate, more specialized works about the topic; conducting a preliminary review of the research literature using multidisciplinary databases such as ProQuest or subject-specific databases from the " By Subject Area " drop down menu located above the list of databases.

Choose the advanced search option in the database and enter into each search box the main concept terms you developed in Step 1. Also consider using their synonyms to retrieve additional relevant records. This will help you refine and frame the scope of the research problem. You will likely need to do this several times before you can finalize how to approach writing about the topic. NOTE: Always review the references from your most relevant research results cited by the authors in footnotes, endnotes, or a bibliography to locate related research on your topic. This is a good strategy for identifying important prior research about the topic because titles that are repeatedly cited indicate their significance in laying a foundation for understanding the problem. However, if you’re having trouble at this point locating relevant research literature, ask a librarian for help!

ANOTHER NOTE:   If you find an article from a database that's particularly helpful, paste it into Google Scholar , placing the title of the article in quotes. If the article record appears, look for a "cited by" reference followed by a number [e.g., C ited by 37] just below the record. This link indicates how many times other scholars have subsequently cited that article in their own research since it was first published. This is an effective strategy for identifying more current, related research on your topic. Finding additional cited by references from your original list of cited by references helps you navigate through the literature and, by so doing, understand the evolution of thought around a particular research problem. Step 3 : Since social science research papers are generally designed to encourage you to develop your own ideas and arguments, look for sources that can help broaden, modify, or strengthen your initial thoughts and arguments. For example, if you decide to argue that the European Union is inadequately prepared to take on responsibilities for broader global security because of the debt crisis in many EU countries, then focus on identifying sources that support as well as refute this position. From the advanced search option in ProQuest , a sample search would use "European Union" in one search box, "global security" in the second search box, and adding a third search box to include "debt crisis."

There are least four appropriate roles your related literature plays in helping you formulate how to begin your analysis :

• Sources of criticism -- frequently, you'll find yourself reading materials that are relevant to your chosen topic, but you disagree with the author's position. Therefore, one way that you can use a source is to describe the counter-argument, provide evidence from your own review of the literature as to why the prevailing argument is unsatisfactory, and to discuss how your approach is more appropriate based upon your interpretation of the evidence.
• Sources of new ideas -- while a general goal in writing college research papers in the social sciences is to examine a research problem with some basic idea of what position you'd like to take and on what basis you'd like to defend your position, it is certainly acceptable [and often encouraged] to read the literature and extend, modify, and refine your own position in light of the ideas proposed by others. Just make sure that you cite the sources !
• Sources for historical context -- another role your related literature plays in formulating how to begin your analysis is to place issues and events in proper historical context. This can help to demonstrate familiarity with developments in relevant scholarship about your topic, provide a means of comparing historical versus contemporary issues and events, and identifying key people, places, and events that had an important role related to the research problem. Given its archival journal coverage, a good multidisciplnary database to use in this case is JSTOR .
• Sources of interdisciplinary insight -- an advantage of using databases like ProQuest to begin exploring your topic is that it covers publications from a variety of different disciplines. Another way to formulate how to study the topic is to look at it from different disciplinary perspectives. If the topic concerns immigration reform, for example, ask yourself, how do studies from sociological journals found by searching ProQuest vary in their analysis from those in political science journals. A goal in reviewing related literature is to provide a means of approaching a topic from multiple perspectives rather than the perspective offered from just one discipline.

NOTE: Remember to keep careful notes at every stage or utilize a citation management system like EndNotes or RefWorks . You may think you'll remember what you have searched and where you found things, but it’s easy to forget or get confused. Most databases have a search history feature that allows you to go back and see what searches you conducted previously as long as you haven't closed your session. If you start over, that history could be deleted.

Step 4 : Assuming you have done an effective job of synthesizing and thinking about the results of your initial search for related literature, you're ready to prepare a detailed outline for your paper that lays the foundation for a more in-depth and focused review of relevant research literature [after consulting with a librarian, if needed!]. How will you know you haven't done an effective job of synthesizing and thinking about the results of our initial search for related literature? A good indication is that you start composing the outline and gaps appear in how you want to approach the study. This indicates the need to gather further background information and analysis about the research problem.

II.  How To Begin:  You are provided a list of possible topics to choose from Step 1 : I know what you’re thinking--which topic on this list will be the easiest to find the most information on? An effective instructor would never include a topic that is so obscure or complex that no research is available to examine and from which to design an effective study. Therefore, don't approach a list of possible topics to study from the perspective of trying to identify the path of least resistance; choose a topic that you find interesting in some way, that is controversial and that you have a strong opinion about, that has some personal meaning for you, or relates to your major or a minor. You're going to be working on the topic for quite some time, so choose one that you find interesting and engaging or that motivates you to take a position. Embrace the opportunity to learn something new! Once you’ve settled on a topic of interest from the list provided by your professor, follow Steps 1 - 4 listed above to further develop it into a research paper.

NOTE: It’s ok to review related literature to help refine how you will approach analyzing a topic, and then discover that the topic isn’t all that interesting to you. In that case, choose a different topic from the list. Just don’t wait too long to make a switch and, of course, be sure to inform your professor that you are changing your topic.

III.  How To Begin:  Your professor leaves it up to you to choose a topic

Step 1 : Under this scenario, the key process is turning an idea or general thought into a topic that can be configured into a research problem. When given an assignment where you choose the topic, don't begin by thinking about what to write about, but rather, ask yourself the question, "What do I want to understand or learn about?" Treat an open-ended research assignment as an opportunity to gain new knowledge about something that's important or exciting to you in the context of the overall subject of the course.

Step 2 : If you lack ideas, or wish to gain focus, try any or all of the following strategies:

• Review your course readings, particularly the suggested readings, for topic ideas. Don't just review what you've already read, but jump ahead in the syllabus to readings that have not been covered yet.
• Search the USC Libraries Catalog for a recently published book and, if appropriate, more specialized works related to the discipline area of the course [e.g., for the course SOCI 335: Society and Population, search for books on "population and society" or "population and social impact"]. Reviewing the contents of a book about your area of interest can give you insight into what conversations scholars are having about the topic and, thus, how you might want to contribute your own ideas to these conversations through the research paper you write for the class.
• Browse through some current scholarly [a.k.a., academic, peer reviewed] journals in your subject discipline. Even if most of the articles are not relevant, you can skim through the contents quickly. You only need one to be the spark that begins the process of wanting to learn more about a topic. Consult with a librarian and/or your professor about what constitutes the core journals within the subject area of the writing assignment.
• Think about essays you have written for other courses you have taken or academic lectures and programs you have attended outside of class. Thinking back, ask yourself why did you want to take this class or attend this event? What interested you the most? What would you like to know more about? Place this question in the context of the current course assignment. Note that this strategy also applies to anything you've watched on TV or has been shared on social media.
• Search online news media sources, such as CNN , the Los Angeles Times , Huffington Post , MSNBC , Fox News , or Newsweek , to see if your idea has been covered by the media. Use this coverage to refine your idea into something that you'd like to investigate further, but in a more deliberate, scholarly way in relation to a particular problem that needs to be researched.

Step 3 : To build upon your initial idea, use the suggestions under this tab to help narrow , broaden , or increase the timeliness of your idea so you can write it out as a research problem.

Once you are comfortable with having turned your idea into a research problem, follow Steps 1 - 4 listed in Part I above to further develop it into an outline for a research paper.

Alderman, Jim. "Choosing a Research Topic." Beginning Library and Information Systems Strategies. Paper 17. Jacksonville, FL: University of North Florida Digital Commons, 2014; Alvesson, Mats and Jörgen Sandberg. Constructing Research Questions: Doing Interesting Research . London: Sage, 2013; Chapter 2: Choosing a Research Topic. Adrian R. Eley. Becoming a Successful Early Career Researcher . New York: Routledge, 2012; Answering the Question. Academic Skills Centre. University of Canberra; Brainstorming. Department of English Writing Guide. George Mason University; Brainstorming. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; Chapter 1: Research and the Research Problem. Nicholas Walliman . Your Research Project: Designing and Planning Your Work . 3rd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2011; Choosing a Topic. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University;  Mullaney, Thomas S. and Christopher Rea. Where Research Begins: Choosing a Research Project That Matters to You (and the World) . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2022; Coming Up With Your Topic. Institute for Writing Rhetoric. Dartmouth College; How To Write a Thesis Statement. Writing Tutorial Services, Center for Innovative Teaching and Learning. Indiana University; Identify Your Question. Start Your Research. University Library, University of California, Santa Cruz; The Process of Writing a Research Paper. Department of History. Trent University; Trochim, William M.K. Problem Formulation. Research Methods Knowledge Base. 2006.

Resources for Identifying a Topic

Resources for Identifying a Research Problem

If you are having difficulty identifying a topic to study or need basic background information, the following web resources and databases can be useful:

• CQ Researcher -- a collection of single-themed public policy reports that provide an overview of an issue. Each report includes background information, an assessment of the current policy situation, statistical tables and maps, pro/con statements from representatives of opposing positions, and a bibliography of key sources.
• New York Times Topics -- each topic page collects news articles, reference and archival information, photos, graphics, audio and video files. Content is available without charge on articles going back to 1981.
• Opposing Viewpoints In Context -- an online resource covering a wide range of social issues from a variety of perspectives. The database contains a media-rich collection of materials, including pro/con viewpoint essays, topic overviews, primary source materials, biographies of social activists and reformers, journal articles, statistical tables, charts and graphs, images, videos, and podcasts.
• Policy Commons -- platform for objective, fact-based research from the world’s leading policy experts, nonpartisan think tanks, and intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations. The database provides advanced searching across millions of pages of books, articles, working papers, reports, policy briefs, data sets, tables, charts, media, case studies, and statistical publications, including archived reports from more than 200 defunct think tanks. Coverage is international in scope.

Descriptions of resources are adapted or quoted from vendor websites.

Writing Tip

Not Finding Anything on Your Topic? Ask a Librarian!

Don't assume or jump to the conclusion that your topic is too narrowly defined or obscure just because your initial search has failed to identify relevant research. Librarians are experts in locating and critically assessing information and how it is organized. This knowledge will help you develop strategies for analyzing existing knowledge in new ways. Therefore, always consult with a librarian before you consider giving up on finding information about the topic you want to investigate. If there isn't a lot of information about your topic, a librarian can help you identify a closely related topic that you can study. Use the Ask-A-Librarian link above to identify a librarian in your subject area.

Another Writing Tip

Don't be a Martyr!

In thinking about what to study, don't adopt the mindset of pursuing an esoteric or overly complicated topic just to impress your professor but that, in reality, does not have any real interest to you. Choose a topic that is challenging but that has at least some interest to you or that you care about. Obviously, this is easier for courses within your major, but even for those nasty prerequisite classes that you must take in order to graduate [and that provide an additional tuition revenue for the university], try to apply issues associated with your major to the general topic given to you. For example, if you are an international relations major taking a GE philosophy class where the assignment asks you to apply the question of "what is truth" to some aspect of life, you could choose to study how government leaders attempt to shape truth through the use of nationalistic propaganda.

Still Another Writing Tip

A Research Problem is Not a Thesis Statement

A thesis statement and a research problem are two different parts of the introduction section of your paper. The thesis statement succinctly describes in one or two sentences, usually in the last paragraph of the introduction, what position you have reached about a topic. It includes an assertion that requires evidence and support along with your opinion or argument about what you are researching. There are three general types of thesis statements: analytical statements that break down and evaluate the topic; argumentative statements that make a claim about the topic and defend that claim; and, expository statements that present facts and research about the topic. Each are intended to set forth a claim that you will seek to validate through the research you describe in your paper.

Before the thesis statement, your introduction must include a description of a problem that describes either a key area of concern, a condition to be improved upon, a difficulty to be eliminated, or a troubling issue that exists . The research problem describes something that can be empirically verified and measured; it is often followed by a set of questions that underpin how you plan to approach investigating that problem. In short, the thesis statement states your opinion or argument about the research problem and summarizes how you plan to address it.

Tips and Examples for Writing Thesis Statements. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Write a Strong Thesis Statement! The Writing Center, University of Evansville; Thesis Statements. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; Tutorial #26: Thesis Statements and Topic Sentences. Writing Center, College of San Mateo; Creswell,  John W. and J. David Creswell. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches . 5th edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2017.

• << Previous: Glossary of Research Terms
• Next: Reading Research Effectively >>
• Last Updated: May 30, 2024 9:38 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Research process
• How to Define a Research Problem | Ideas & Examples

How to Define a Research Problem | Ideas & Examples

Published on 8 November 2022 by Shona McCombes and Tegan George.

A research problem is a specific issue or gap in existing knowledge that you aim to address in your research. You may choose to look for practical problems aimed at contributing to change, or theoretical problems aimed at expanding knowledge.

Some research will do both of these things, but usually the research problem focuses on one or the other. The type of research problem you choose depends on your broad topic of interest and the type of research you think will fit best.

This article helps you identify and refine a research problem. When writing your research proposal or introduction , formulate it as a problem statement and/or research questions .

Table of contents

Why is the research problem important, step 1: identify a broad problem area, step 2: learn more about the problem, frequently asked questions about research problems.

Having an interesting topic isn’t a strong enough basis for academic research. Without a well-defined research problem, you are likely to end up with an unfocused and unmanageable project.

You might end up repeating what other people have already said, trying to say too much, or doing research without a clear purpose and justification. You need a clear problem in order to do research that contributes new and relevant insights.

Whether you’re planning your thesis , starting a research paper , or writing a research proposal , the research problem is the first step towards knowing exactly what you’ll do and why.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

As you read about your topic, look for under-explored aspects or areas of concern, conflict, or controversy. Your goal is to find a gap that your research project can fill.

Practical research problems

If you are doing practical research, you can identify a problem by reading reports, following up on previous research, or talking to people who work in the relevant field or organisation. You might look for:

• Issues with performance or efficiency
• Processes that could be improved
• Areas of concern among practitioners
• Difficulties faced by specific groups of people

Examples of practical research problems

Voter turnout in New England has been decreasing, in contrast to the rest of the country.

The HR department of a local chain of restaurants has a high staff turnover rate.

A non-profit organisation faces a funding gap that means some of its programs will have to be cut.

Theoretical research problems

If you are doing theoretical research, you can identify a research problem by reading existing research, theory, and debates on your topic to find a gap in what is currently known about it. You might look for:

• A phenomenon or context that has not been closely studied
• A contradiction between two or more perspectives
• A situation or relationship that is not well understood
• A troubling question that has yet to be resolved

Examples of theoretical research problems

The effects of long-term Vitamin D deficiency on cardiovascular health are not well understood.

The relationship between gender, race, and income inequality has yet to be closely studied in the context of the millennial gig economy.

Historians of Scottish nationalism disagree about the role of the British Empire in the development of Scotland’s national identity.

Next, you have to find out what is already known about the problem, and pinpoint the exact aspect that your research will address.

Context and background

• Who does the problem affect?
• Is it a newly-discovered problem, or a well-established one?
• What research has already been done?
• What, if any, solutions have been proposed?
• What are the current debates about the problem? What is missing from these debates?

Specificity and relevance

• What particular place, time, and/or group of people will you focus on?
• What aspects will you not be able to tackle?
• What will the consequences be if the problem is not resolved?

Example of a specific research problem

A local non-profit organisation focused on alleviating food insecurity has always fundraised from its existing support base. It lacks understanding of how best to target potential new donors. To be able to continue its work, the organisation requires research into more effective fundraising strategies.

Once you have narrowed down your research problem, the next step is to formulate a problem statement , as well as your research questions or hypotheses .

Once you’ve decided on your research objectives , you need to explain them in your paper, at the end of your problem statement.

Keep your research objectives clear and concise, and use appropriate verbs to accurately convey the work that you will carry out for each one.

I will compare …

The way you present your research problem in your introduction varies depending on the nature of your research paper . A research paper that presents a sustained argument will usually encapsulate this argument in a thesis statement .

A research paper designed to present the results of empirical research tends to present a research question that it seeks to answer. It may also include a hypothesis – a prediction that will be confirmed or disproved by your research.

Research objectives describe what you intend your research project to accomplish.

They summarise the approach and purpose of the project and help to focus your research.

Your objectives should appear in the introduction of your research paper , at the end of your problem statement .

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 Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. & George, T. (2022, November 08). How to Define a Research Problem | Ideas & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 3 June 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/the-research-process/define-research-problem/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, dissertation & thesis outline | example & free templates, example theoretical framework of a dissertation or thesis, how to write a strong hypothesis | guide & examples.

The Research Problem & Statement

What they are & how to write them (with examples)

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Expert Reviewed By: Eunice Rautenbach (DTech) | March 2023

If you’re new to academic research, you’re bound to encounter the concept of a “ research problem ” or “ problem statement ” fairly early in your learning journey. Having a good research problem is essential, as it provides a foundation for developing high-quality research, from relatively small research papers to a full-length PhD dissertations and theses.

In this post, we’ll unpack what a research problem is and how it’s related to a problem statement . We’ll also share some examples and provide a step-by-step process you can follow to identify and evaluate study-worthy research problems for your own project.

Overview: Research Problem 101

What is a research problem.

• What is a problem statement?

Where do research problems come from?

• How to find a suitable research problem
• Key takeaways

A research problem is, at the simplest level, the core issue that a study will try to solve or (at least) examine. In other words, it’s an explicit declaration about the problem that your dissertation, thesis or research paper will address. More technically, it identifies the research gap that the study will attempt to fill (more on that later).

Let’s look at an example to make the research problem a little more tangible.

To justify a hypothetical study, you might argue that there’s currently a lack of research regarding the challenges experienced by first-generation college students when writing their dissertations [ PROBLEM ] . As a result, these students struggle to successfully complete their dissertations, leading to higher-than-average dropout rates [ CONSEQUENCE ]. Therefore, your study will aim to address this lack of research – i.e., this research problem [ SOLUTION ].

A research problem can be theoretical in nature, focusing on an area of academic research that is lacking in some way. Alternatively, a research problem can be more applied in nature, focused on finding a practical solution to an established problem within an industry or an organisation. In other words, theoretical research problems are motivated by the desire to grow the overall body of knowledge , while applied research problems are motivated by the need to find practical solutions to current real-world problems (such as the one in the example above).

As you can probably see, the research problem acts as the driving force behind any study , as it directly shapes the research aims, objectives and research questions , as well as the research approach. Therefore, it’s really important to develop a very clearly articulated research problem before you even start your research proposal . A vague research problem will lead to unfocused, potentially conflicting research aims, objectives and research questions .

What is a research problem statement?

As the name suggests, a problem statement (within a research context, at least) is an explicit statement that clearly and concisely articulates the specific research problem your study will address. While your research problem can span over multiple paragraphs, your problem statement should be brief , ideally no longer than one paragraph . Importantly, it must clearly state what the problem is (whether theoretical or practical in nature) and how the study will address it.

Here’s an example of a statement of the problem in a research context:

Rural communities across Ghana lack access to clean water, leading to high rates of waterborne illnesses and infant mortality. Despite this, there is little research investigating the effectiveness of community-led water supply projects within the Ghanaian context. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the effectiveness of such projects in improving access to clean water and reducing rates of waterborne illnesses in these communities.

As you can see, this problem statement clearly and concisely identifies the issue that needs to be addressed (i.e., a lack of research regarding the effectiveness of community-led water supply projects) and the research question that the study aims to answer (i.e., are community-led water supply projects effective in reducing waterborne illnesses?), all within one short paragraph.

Need a helping hand?

Wherever there is a lack of well-established and agreed-upon academic literature , there is an opportunity for research problems to arise, since there is a paucity of (credible) knowledge. In other words, research problems are derived from research gaps . These gaps can arise from various sources, including the emergence of new frontiers or new contexts, as well as disagreements within the existing research.

Let’s look at each of these scenarios:

New frontiers – new technologies, discoveries or breakthroughs can open up entirely new frontiers where there is very little existing research, thereby creating fresh research gaps. For example, as generative AI technology became accessible to the general public in 2023, the full implications and knock-on effects of this were (or perhaps, still are) largely unknown and therefore present multiple avenues for researchers to explore.

New contexts – very often, existing research tends to be concentrated on specific contexts and geographies. Therefore, even within well-studied fields, there is often a lack of research within niche contexts. For example, just because a study finds certain results within a western context doesn’t mean that it would necessarily find the same within an eastern context. If there’s reason to believe that results may vary across these geographies, a potential research gap emerges.

Disagreements – within many areas of existing research, there are (quite naturally) conflicting views between researchers, where each side presents strong points that pull in opposing directions. In such cases, it’s still somewhat uncertain as to which viewpoint (if any) is more accurate. As a result, there is room for further research in an attempt to “settle” the debate.

Of course, many other potential scenarios can give rise to research gaps, and consequently, research problems, but these common ones are a useful starting point. If you’re interested in research gaps, you can learn more here .

How to find a research problem

Given that research problems flow from research gaps , finding a strong research problem for your research project means that you’ll need to first identify a clear research gap. Below, we’ll present a four-step process to help you find and evaluate potential research problems.

If you’ve read our other articles about finding a research topic , you’ll find the process below very familiar as the research problem is the foundation of any study . In other words, finding a research problem is much the same as finding a research topic.

Step 1 – Identify your area of interest

Naturally, the starting point is to first identify a general area of interest . Chances are you already have something in mind, but if not, have a look at past dissertations and theses within your institution to get some inspiration. These present a goldmine of information as they’ll not only give you ideas for your own research, but they’ll also help you see exactly what the norms and expectations are for these types of projects.

At this stage, you don’t need to get super specific. The objective is simply to identify a couple of potential research areas that interest you. For example, if you’re undertaking research as part of a business degree, you may be interested in social media marketing strategies for small businesses, leadership strategies for multinational companies, etc.

Depending on the type of project you’re undertaking, there may also be restrictions or requirements regarding what topic areas you’re allowed to investigate, what type of methodology you can utilise, etc. So, be sure to first familiarise yourself with your institution’s specific requirements and keep these front of mind as you explore potential research ideas.

Step 2 – Review the literature and develop a shortlist

Once you’ve decided on an area that interests you, it’s time to sink your teeth into the literature . In other words, you’ll need to familiarise yourself with the existing research regarding your interest area. Google Scholar is a good starting point for this, as you can simply enter a few keywords and quickly get a feel for what’s out there. Keep an eye out for recent literature reviews and systematic review-type journal articles, as these will provide a good overview of the current state of research.

At this stage, you don’t need to read every journal article from start to finish . A good strategy is to pay attention to the abstract, intro and conclusion , as together these provide a snapshot of the key takeaways. As you work your way through the literature, keep an eye out for what’s missing – in other words, what questions does the current research not answer adequately (or at all)? Importantly, pay attention to the section titled “ further research is needed ”, typically found towards the very end of each journal article. This section will specifically outline potential research gaps that you can explore, based on the current state of knowledge (provided the article you’re looking at is recent).

Take the time to engage with the literature and develop a big-picture understanding of the current state of knowledge. Reviewing the literature takes time and is an iterative process , but it’s an essential part of the research process, so don’t cut corners at this stage.

As you work through the review process, take note of any potential research gaps that are of interest to you. From there, develop a shortlist of potential research gaps (and resultant research problems) – ideally 3 – 5 options that interest you.

Step 3 – Evaluate your potential options

Once you’ve developed your shortlist, you’ll need to evaluate your options to identify a winner. There are many potential evaluation criteria that you can use, but we’ll outline three common ones here: value, practicality and personal appeal.

Value – a good research problem needs to create value when successfully addressed. Ask yourself:

• Who will this study benefit (e.g., practitioners, researchers, academia)?
• How will it benefit them specifically?
• How much will it benefit them?

Practicality – a good research problem needs to be manageable in light of your resources. Ask yourself:

• What data will I need access to?
• What knowledge and skills will I need to undertake the analysis?
• What equipment or software will I need to process and/or analyse the data?
• How much time will I need?
• What costs might I incur?

Personal appeal – a research project is a commitment, so the research problem that you choose needs to be genuinely attractive and interesting to you. Ask yourself:

• How appealing is the prospect of solving this research problem (on a scale of 1 – 10)?
• Why, specifically, is it attractive (or unattractive) to me?
• Does the research align with my longer-term goals (e.g., career goals, educational path, etc)?

Depending on how many potential options you have, you may want to consider creating a spreadsheet where you numerically rate each of the options in terms of these criteria. Remember to also include any criteria specified by your institution . From there, tally up the numbers and pick a winner.

Step 4 – Craft your problem statement

Once you’ve selected your research problem, the final step is to craft a problem statement. Remember, your problem statement needs to be a concise outline of what the core issue is and how your study will address it. Aim to fit this within one paragraph – don’t waffle on. Have a look at the problem statement example we mentioned earlier if you need some inspiration.

Key Takeaways

We’ve covered a lot of ground. Let’s do a quick recap of the key takeaways:

• A research problem is an explanation of the issue that your study will try to solve. This explanation needs to highlight the problem , the consequence and the solution or response.
• A problem statement is a clear and concise summary of the research problem , typically contained within one paragraph.
• Research problems emerge from research gaps , which themselves can emerge from multiple potential sources, including new frontiers, new contexts or disagreements within the existing literature.
• To find a research problem, you need to first identify your area of interest , then review the literature and develop a shortlist, after which you’ll evaluate your options, select a winner and craft a problem statement .

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

You Might Also Like:

I APPRECIATE YOUR CONCISE AND MIND-CAPTIVATING INSIGHTS ON THE STATEMENT OF PROBLEMS. PLEASE I STILL NEED SOME SAMPLES RELATED TO SUICIDES.

Very pleased and appreciate clear information.

Your videos and information have been a life saver for me throughout my dissertation journey. I wish I’d discovered them sooner. Thank you!

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

• Research Process

What is a Problem Statement? [with examples]

• 5 minute read

Table of Contents

The statement of the problem is one of the first things that a colleague or potential client will read. With the vastness of the information available at one’s fingertips in the online9 world, your work may have just a few seconds to draw in a reader to take a deeper look at your proposal before moving on to the next option. It explains quickly to the reader, the problem at hand, the need for research, and how you intend to do it.

A strong, clear description of the problem that drew you to your research has to be straightforward, easy to read and, most important, relevant. Why do you care about this problem? How can solving this problem impact the world? The problem statement is your opportunity to explain why you care and what you propose to do in the way of researching the problem.

A problem statement is an explanation in research that describes the issue that is in need of study . What problem is the research attempting to address? Having a Problem Statement allows the reader to quickly understand the purpose and intent of the research. The importance of writing your research proposal cannot be stressed enough. Check for more information on Writing a Scientific Research Project Proposal .

It is expected to be brief and concise , and should not include the findings of the research or detailed data . The average length of a research statement is generally about one page . It is going to define the problem, which can be thought of as a gap in the information base. There may be several solutions to this gap or lack of information, but that is not the concern of the problem statement. Its purpose is to summarize the current information and where a lack of knowledge may be presenting a problem that needs to be investigated .

The purpose of the problem statement is to identify the issue that is a concern and focus it in a way that allows it to be studied in a systematic way . It defines the problem and proposes a way to research a solution, or demonstrates why further information is needed in order for a solution to become possible.

What is Included in a Problem Statement?

Besides identifying the gap of understanding or the weakness of necessary data, it is important to explain the significance of this lack.

-How will your research contribute to the existing knowledge base in your field of study?

-How is it significant?

-Why does it matter?

Not all problems have only one solution so demonstrating the need for additional research can also be included in your problem statement. Once you identify the problem and the need for a solution, or for further study, then you can show how you intend to collect the needed data and present it.

How to Write a Statement of Problem in Research Proposal

It is helpful to begin with your goal. What do you see as the achievable goal if the problem you outline is solved? How will the proposed research theoretically change anything? What are the potential outcomes?

Then you can discuss how the problem prevents the ability to reach your realistic and achievable solution. It is what stands in the way of changing an issue for the better. Talk about the present state of affairs and how the problem impacts a person’s life, for example.

It’s helpful at this point to generally layout the present knowledge and understanding of the subject at hand, before then describing the gaps of knowledge that are currently in need of study. Your problem statement is a proposed solution to address one of these gaps.

A good problem statement will also layout the repercussions of leaving the problem as it currently stands. What is the significance of not addressing this problem? What are the possible future outcomes?

Example of Problem Statement in Research Proposal

If, for example , you intended to research the effect of vitamin D supplementation on the immune system , you would begin with a review of the current knowledge of vitamin D’s known function in relation to the immune system and how a deficiency of it impacts a person’s defenses.

You would describe the ideal environment in the body when there is a sufficient level of vitamin D. Then, begin to identify the problems associated with vitamin D deficiency and the difficulty of raising the level through supplementation, along with the consequences of that deficiency. Here you are beginning to identify the problem of a common deficiency and the current difficulty of increasing the level of vitamin D in the blood.

At this stage, you may begin to identify the problem and narrow it down in a way that is practical to a research project. Perhaps you are proposing a novel way of introducing Vitamin D in a way that allows for better absorption by the gut, or in a combination with another product that increases its level in the blood.

Describe the way your research in this area will contribute to the knowledge base on how to increase levels of vitamin D in a specific group of subjects, perhaps menopausal women with breast cancer. The research proposal is then described in practical terms.

How to write a problem statement in research?

Problem statements differ depending on the type and topic of research and vary between a few sentences to a few paragraphs.

However, the problem statement should not drag on needlessly. Despite the absence of a fixed format, a good research problem statement usually consists of three main parts:

Context: This section explains the background for your research. It identifies the problem and describes an ideal scenario that could exist in the absence of the problem. It also includes any past attempts and shortcomings at solving the problem.

Significance: This section defines how the problem prevents the ideal scenario from being achieved, including its negative impacts on the society or field of research. It should include who will be the most affected by a solution to the problem, the relevance of the study that you are proposing, and how it can contribute to the existing body of research.

Solution: This section describes the aim and objectives of your research, and your solution to overcome the problem. Finally, it need not focus on the perfect solution, but rather on addressing a realistic goal to move closer to the ideal scenario.

Here is a cheat sheet to help you with formulating a good problem statement.

1. Begin with a clear indication that the problem statement is going to be discussed next. You can start with a generic sentence like, “The problem that this study addresses…” This will inform your readers of what to expect next.

2. Next, mention the consequences of not solving the problem . You can touch upon who is or will be affected if the problem continues, and how.

3. Conclude with indicating the type of research /information that is needed to solve the problem. Be sure to reference authors who may have suggested the necessity of such research.

This will then directly lead to your proposed research objective and workplan and how that is expected to solve the problem i.e., close the research gap.

Language Editing Plus

Elsevier Language Editing Plus service will provide you with a thorough language review of your thesis, article or presentation. It offers review of logic and flow, reference checks, document formatting, a customized cover letter and more.

• Manuscript Preparation

What is and How to Write a Good Hypothesis in Research?

How to Use Tables and Figures effectively in Research Papers

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

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

Choosing the Right Research Methodology: A Guide for Researchers

Why is data validation important in research?

Writing a good review article

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

• SpringerLink shop

Identifying your research question

Making informed decisions about what to study, and defining your research question, even within a predetermined field, is critical to a successful research career, and can be one of the hardest challenges for a scientist.

Being knowledgeable about the state of your field and up-to-date with recent developments can help you:

• Make decisions about  what to study within niche research areas
• Identify  top researchers  in your field whose work you can follow and potentially collaborate with
• Find  important journals to read regularly and publish in
• Explain to others  why your work is important by being able to recount the bigger picture

How can you identify a research question?

Reading regularly is the most common way of identifying a good research question. This enables you to keep up to date with recent advancements and identify certain issues or unsolved problems that keep appearing.

Begin by searching for and reading literature in your field. Start with  general interest  journals, but don’t limit yourself to journal publications only; you can also look for clues in the news or on research blogs. Once you have identified a few interesting topics, you should be reading the table of contents of journals and the abstracts of most articles in that subject area. Papers that are directly related to your research you should read in their entirety.

TIP Keep an eye out for  Review papers and special issues in your chosen subject area as they are very helpful in discovering new areas and hot topics.

TIP: you can sign up to receive table of contents or notifications when articles are published in your field from most journals or publishers.

TIP: Joining a journal club is a great way to read and dissect published papers in and around your subject area. Usually consisting of 5-10 people from the same research group or institute they meet to evaluate the good and bad points of the research presented in the paper. This not only helps you keep up to date with the field but helps you become familiar with what is necessary for a good paper which can help when you come to write your own.

If possible, communicate with some of the authors of these manuscripts via email or in person. Going to conferences if possible is a great way to meet some of these authors. Often,  talking with the author  of an important work in your research area will give you more ideas than just reading the manuscript would.

Back │ Next

Research: Establishing the Problem Space

• Establishing the Problem Space
• Finding Qualitative Research
• Finding Quantitative Research
• What is Emperical Research?
• What is Seminal Research?

What is the Problem Space?

A gap is a space between two objects or a break in continuity.  A research gap is a break or missing part of the existing research when you define the research gap or the problem space you are defining what is known and what is missing in the existing research.  The "problem space" of a study is a definition of the topic, the problem statements or research gaps mentioned by other researchers, and the steps other researchers took to answer the research question. The problem space is a way to identify and establish boundaries for your research, it helps to guide what should be included or excluded from your research.  The problem statement expresses how your study will answer or fill the research gap.

The problem space is thus comprised of identifying what is known about a topic, understanding how it has come to be known (the theories, designs, methods, instruments), and then figuring out what is not yet known (or perspective not explored) .   Problem spaces are built by taking note of the limitations and recommendations discussed in the empirical research articles you gather as you build your literature review.

• Don't know where to start? 6 Tips on identifying research gaps
• What are Gap Statements? From the Middlebury University 'Write Like a Scientist" guide.
• Farooq, R. (2017). A framework for identifying research gap in social sciences: Evidence from the past. IUP Journal of Management Research, 16(4), 66-75. Retrieved from https://uscupstate.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/
• Robinson KA, Akinyede O, Dutta T, et al. Framework for Determining Research Gaps During Systematic Review: Evaluation [Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2013 Feb. Introduction. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm

Examples From Empirical Articles

When looking to find discussions of research that has yet to be done (AKA research gap) in existing articles there are a few keywords to look out for such as limitations identified, further research needed, needs clarification, not been reported (studied, reported, or elucidated), suggestions for further research, questions remains, poorly understood, and/or lack of studies

Below are two examples of types of passages to look for.

Example of a Limitations Section

From the article:

Spanhove, V., De Wandele, I., Kjær, B. H., Malfait, F., Vanderstukken, F., & Cools, A. (2020). The effect of five isometric exercises on glenohumeral translations in healthy subjects and patients with the hypermobility type of the ehlers-danlos syndrome (heds) or hypermobility spectrum disorder (hsd) with multidirectional shoulder instability: an observational study.  Physiotherapy ,  107 , 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physio.2019.06.010

From this passage, an argument could be made for performing a similar study, but with 3D analysis.

Example of a Recommendation for Further Research

Some articles will go beyond discussing their limitations and describe further research that should be done. 

For example, this article:

Carey, J., Pathak, A., & Johnson, S. C. (2020). Use, Perceptions, and Awareness of LibGuides among Undergraduate and Graduate Health Professions Students.  Evidence Based Library and Information Practice ,  15 (3), 157-172. https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip29653

Suggests several different avenues of further research:

How to Use Review Articles

Review articles can help formulate a gap, or at least point out a direction to look for one. Since they provide an overview of the published literature, they can give you a head start on what kinds of research are lacking.

How to Locate Review Articles: Systematic Reviews, Literature Reviews, and Meta-Analyses

• handwashing or hand washing or hand hygiene or hand sanitation
• systematic review or meta-analysis or literature review or scoping review
• Adjust dates to be within 2 years. 
• For instance the above search was used to locate this article:

Seo, H.-J., Sohng, K.-Y., Chang, S. O., Chaung, S. K., Won, J. S., & Choi, M.-J. (2019). Interventions to improve hand hygiene compliance in emergency departments: a systematic review. The Journal of Hospital Infection , 102(4), 394–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2019.03.013

• (hand antisepsis or handwash* or hand wash* or hand disinfection or hand hygiene or surgical scrub*)
• With terms that should be included when searching on this topic.
• "Further well-designed controlled studies are necessary to examine the true effects and identify which intervention modalities are more effective than others for HHC improvement in EDs."
• Reviewing the articles this article studied would then provide support for this gap.

Pursuing a health care topic? Search Cochrane Reviews or Joanna Biggs EBP as well as the more general databases.

Example of a Review Article With a Discussion of Areas Needing Research

Example of a Review Article

Review articles can clarify where a lack of research exists. To then establish the problem space fully, you will need to track down the articles cited in the review.

For instance, consider the following passage from this review article:

Martin, A. (2019). An acquired or heritable connective tissue disorder? A review of hypermobile Ehlers Danlos Syndrome. European Journal of Medical Genetics, 62(7), 103672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmg.2019.103672

This is indicating a need for longitudinal studies for this condition to better understand the relationship between muscle strength and muscle waste. Further examining the cited articles would establish this avenue for a study.

Problem Formulation

• Trochim, William M.K. “Problem Formulation.” Research Methods Knowledge Base, Conjoint.ly, https://conjointly.com/kb/problem-formulation/.
• << Previous: Home
• Next: Qualitative vs Quanitative >>
• Last Updated: Apr 17, 2023 9:51 AM
• URL: https://uscupstate.libguides.com/Advanced_Research

• Share full article

Ibram X. Kendi Faces a Reckoning of His Own

In 2020, the author of “How to Be an Antiracist” galvanized Americans with his ideas. The past four years have tested them — and him.

Ibram X. Kendi, the founding director of the Boston University Center for Antiracist Research. Credit... Wayne Lawrence for The New York Times

Supported by

By Rachel Poser

Rachel Poser is an editor for the magazine. She spoke to Kendi over a period of several months and visited him at his research center in Boston.

• June 4, 2024

Ibram X. Kendi has a notebook that prompts him, on every other page, to write down “Things to be grateful for.” There are many things he might put under that heading. First and foremost, his wife and two daughters, and his health, having made it through Stage 4 colon cancer in his 30s — a diagnosis with a 12 percent survival rate. Tenure at Boston University, where Martin Luther King Jr. earned his doctorate in theology. A National Book Award, and a MacArthur “genius” grant for “transforming how many people understand, discuss and attempt to redress America’s longstanding racial challenges.” Then there were the millions of people who bought “How to Be an Antiracist,” the first of five of his books to take the No. 1 spot on the New York Times best-seller list. But he was particularly grateful to the readers who wrote to him to say his work changed them for the better.

Listen to this article, read by January LaVoy

These days, he could use the reminder. Four years have gone by since George Floyd was murdered on the pavement near Cup Foods in Minneapolis, sparking the racial “reckoning” that made Kendi a household name. Many people, Kendi among them, believe that reckoning is long over. State legislatures have pushed through harsh antiprotest measures . Conservative-led campaigns against teaching Black history and against diversity, equity and inclusion programs are underway. Last June, the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action in college admissions. And Donald Trump is once again the Republican nominee for president, promising to root out “the radical-left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country.”

Kendi has become a prime target of this backlash. Books of his have been banned from schools in some districts, and his name is a kind of profanity among conservatives who believe racism is mostly a problem of the past. Though legions of readers continue to celebrate Kendi as a courageous and groundbreaking thinker, for many others he has become a symbol of everything that’s wrong in racial discourse today. Even many allies in the fight for racial justice dismiss his brand of antiracism as unworkable, wrongheaded or counterproductive. “The vast majority of my critics,” Kendi told me last year, “either haven’t read my work or willfully misrepresent it.”

Criticism of Kendi only grew in September, when he made the “painful decision” to lay off more than half the staff of the research center he runs at Boston University. The Center for Antiracist Research, which Kendi founded during the 2020 protests to tackle “seemingly intractable problems of racial inequity and injustice,” raised an enormous sum of $55 million, and the news of its downsizing led to a storm of questions. False rumors began circulating that Kendi had stolen funds, and the university announced it would investigate after former employees accused him of mismanagement and secrecy.

The controversy quickly ballooned into a national news story, fueled in large part by right-wing media, which was all too happy to speculate about “missing funds” and condemn Kendi — and the broader racial-justice movement — as a fraud. On Fox News, the conservative activist Christopher Rufo told the host John Roberts that the center’s “failure” was “poetic justice.” “This is a symbol of where we have come since 2020 and why that movement is really floundering today,” he said. In early October, a podcast affiliated with the Manhattan Institute, the conservative think tank where Rufo works, jubilantly released an episode titled “The End of Ibram X. Kendi?”

‘I don’t know of anybody more ill suited for fame than Ibram Kendi.’

In December, I met Kendi at the Center for Antiracist Research, which was by then mostly empty, though I caught signs of its former life: Space heaters sat idly under desks, and Post-it notes lingered around the edges of unplugged monitors. On the frame of one cleared-out cubicle, a sticker in the shape of Earth read “Be the change.” Kendi welcomed me into his office in a pink shirt and a periwinkle blazer with a handkerchief tucked neatly in its pocket. He was calm on the surface, but he seemed to me, as he often did during the conversations we’d had since the layoffs, to be holding himself taut, like a tensile substance under enormous strain. The furor over the center, he said, was a measure of how desperate many people were to damage his reputation: “If this had happened at another center, it would either not have been a story or a one-day story.”

In “How to Be an Antiracist,” his best-known book, Kendi challenges readers to evaluate themselves by their racial impact, by whether their actions advance or impede the cause of racial equality. “There is no neutrality in the racial struggle,” he writes. “The question for each of us is: What side of history will we stand on?” This question evinces Kendi’s confidence that ideas and policies can be dependably sorted into one of two categories: racist or antiracist.

Kendi is a vegan, a tall man with a gentle, serious nature. “He’ll laugh at a joke — he’ll never crack one,” Kellie Carter Jackson, the chair of the Africana studies department at Wellesley and someone who has known Kendi for years, told me. He considers himself an “introvert and loner” who was chased down by the spotlight and is now caught in its glare. “I don’t know of anybody more ill suited for fame than Ibram Kendi,” said Stefan Bradley, a longtime friend and professor of Black studies at Amherst. There is a corniness to Kendi that’s endearing, like his use of the gratitude notebook — a thick, pastel-colored pad with gold spiral binding — or the fact that his phone email signature is “Sent from Typoville aka my iPhone.” Though he is always soft-spoken, volume sometimes seems to be a gauge of how comfortable he feels. The first time I met him in person, he greeted me so quietly that I worried my recorder wouldn’t pick up his voice.

Kendi had hired a pair of crisis-P.R. consultants to help him manage the fallout from the layoffs, a controversy that he believed had fed into dangerous, racist stories about Black leaders, and about him in particular. In the fun-house mirror of conservative media, Kendi has long loomed as an antiwhite extremist trying to get rich by sowing racial division. Kendi told me he received regular threats; he allowed me to come to the center only on the condition that I not reveal its location. “When it comes to the white supremacists who are the greatest domestic terrorist threat of our time, I am one of their chief enemies,” he told me.

Boston University had recently released the results of its audit, which found “no issues” with how the center’s finances were handled. The center’s problem, Kendi told me, was more banal: Most of its money was in its endowment or restricted to specific uses, and after the high of 2020, donations had crashed. “At our current rate, we were going to run out in two years,” he said. “That was what ultimately led us to feel like we needed to make a major change.” The center’s new model would fund nine-month academic fellowships rather than a large full-time staff. Though inquiries into the center’s grant-management practices and workplace culture were continuing, Kendi was confident that they would absolve him, too. In the media, he’d dismissed the complaints about his leadership as “unfair,” “unfounded,” “vague,” “meanspirited” and an attempt to “settle old scores.”

In the fall, when I began talking to former employees and faculty — most of whom asked for anonymity because they remain at Boston University or signed severance agreements that included nondisparagement language — it was clear that many of them felt caught in a bind. They could already see that the story of the center’s dysfunction was being used to undermine the racial-justice movement, but they were frustrated to watch Kendi play down the problems and cast their concerns as spiteful or even racist. They felt that what they experienced at the center was now playing out in public: Kendi’s tendency to see their constructive feedback as hostile. “He doesn’t trust anybody,” one person told me. “He doesn’t let anyone in.”

To Kendi, attacks from those who claim to be allies, like attacks from political enemies, are to be expected. In his books, Kendi argues that history is not an arc bending toward justice but a war of “dueling” forces — racist and antiracist — that each escalate their response when the other advances. In the years since 2020, he believes, the country has entered a predictable period of retrenchment, when the force of racism is ascendant and the racial progress of the last several decades is under threat. To defend antiracism, to defend himself, he would simply have to fight harder.

Not so long ago, Kendi thought he saw a new world coming into being. “We are living in the midst of an antiracist revolution,” he wrote in September 2020 in an Atlantic cover story headlined, “Is This the Beginning of the End for American Racism?” Nearly 20 percent of Americans were saying that “race relations” was the most urgent problem facing the nation — more than at any point since 1968 — and many of them were turning to Kendi to figure out what to do about it. They were buying his memoir and manifesto, “How to Be an Antiracist,” much of which he wrote while undergoing chemotherapy. “This was perhaps the last thing he was going to write,” Chris Jackson, Kendi’s editor, told me. “There was no cynicism in the writing of it.” (Jackson was the editor of a 2021 book based on The 1619 Project, which originated in this magazine in 2019 ; Kendi contributed a chapter to that book.)

Kendi confesses in the introduction that he “used to be racist most of the time.” The year 1994, when he turned 12, marked three decades since the United States outlawed discrimination on the basis of race. Then why, Kendi wondered as an adolescent, were so many Black people out of work, impoverished or incarcerated? The problem, he concluded, must be Black people themselves. Not Black people like his parents, God-loving professionals who had saved enough to buy a home in Jamaica, Queens, and who never let their two sons forget the importance of education and hard work. But they were the exception. In high school, Kendi competed in an oratory contest in which he gave voice to many of the anti-Black stereotypes circulating in the ’90s — that Black youths were violent, unstudious, unmotivated. “They think it’s OK to be the most feared in our society,” he proclaimed. “They think it’s OK not to think!” Kendi also turned these ideas on himself, believing that he was a “subpar student” because of his race.

Kendi’s mind began to change when he arrived on the campus of Florida A&M, one of the largest historically Black universities in the country, in the fall of 2000 to study sports journalism. “I had never seen so many Black people together with positive motives,” he wrote at the time. Kendi was disengaged for most of high school, as concerned with his clothes as his grades. His friends at the university teased him for joining a modeling troupe and preening before parties, particularly because once he got to them he was too shy to talk to anyone. “He would come out, and you could smell the cologne from down the hall,” Grady Tripp, Kendi’s housemate, told me. But experimenting with his style, for Kendi, was part of trying on new ideas. For a while, he wore honey-colored contact lenses that turned his irises an off-putting shade of orange; he got rid of them once he decided they were a rejection of blackness, like Malcolm X’s straightening his hair with lye.

Over long hours spent reading alone in the library, Kendi found his way to some unlikely conclusions. In “How to Be an Antiracist,” he describes bursting into his housemate’s room to declare that he had “figured white people out.” “They are aliens,” he said. Kendi had gone searching for answers in conspiracy theories and Nation of Islam theology that cast whites as a “devil race” bred by an evil Black scientist to conquer the planet. “Europeans are simply a different breed of human,” he wrote in a column for the student newspaper in 2003. They are “socialized to be aggressive” and have used “the AIDS virus and cloning” to dominate the world’s peoples. Recently, the column has circulated on right-wing social media as evidence of Kendi’s antiwhite extremism, which frustrates him because it’s in his own memoir as an example of just how lost he had become.

Kendi went on to earn a Ph.D. in African American studies from Temple University. The founder of his department was Molefi Kete Asante, an Afrocentrist who has called on the descendants of enslaved people to embrace traditional African dress, languages and religions. Kendi eventually changed his middle name to Xolani, meaning “peace” in Zulu; at their wedding, he and his wife, Sadiqa, adopted the last name Kendi, meaning “loved one” in Meru. Kendi has called Asante “profoundly antiracist,” but Kendi remained an idiosyncratic thinker who did not consider himself a part of just one scholarly tradition; he knew early on that he wanted to write for the public. In a 2019 interview, when asked about his intellectual lineage, Kendi named W.E.B. Du Bois, Ida B. Wells and Malcolm X.

Kendi became part of a cohort of Black writers, among them Nikole Hannah-Jones and Ta-Nehisi Coates, who, through the sunset of the Obama presidency and the red dawn of the MAGA movement, argued that anti-Blackness remains a major force shaping American politics. They helped popularize the longstanding idea that racism in the United States is systemic — that the country’s laws and institutions perpetuate Black disadvantage despite a pledge of equal treatment. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 ended de jure white supremacy, but President Lyndon B. Johnson, who signed it into law, acknowledged that it wouldn’t uproot a racial caste system grown over centuries.

“The next and the more profound stage of the battle for civil rights,” he said, would be to achieve “not just equality as a right and a theory but equality as a fact.” Kendi and others wrote bracingly about the failure of that promise. Far from economic redress, Black Americans were met with continued discrimination in every realm of life, while being told the country was now “colorblind.” Kendi and others argued that remedying the impact of hundreds of years of subjugation would require policies that recognize, rather than ignore, that legacy, such as affirmative action and reparations.

‘The vast majority of my critics either haven’t read my work or willfully misrepresent it.’

Far too many Americans, Kendi felt, still thought of racism as conscious prejudice, so conversations got stuck in cul-de-sacs of denial, in which people protested that they were “not racist” because they harbored no anti-Black animus. To convey this, he landed on the binary that would become his most famous and perhaps most controversial idea. “There is no such thing as a not-racist idea” or a “race-neutral policy,” he wrote in “How to Be an Antiracist,” published in 2019. “The opposite of ‘racist’ isn’t ‘not racist.’ It is ‘antiracist.’”

Black activists have long used the word “antiracist” to describe active resistance to white supremacy, but “How to Be an Antiracist” catapulted the term into the American lexicon, in much the same way that Sheryl Sandberg turned “Lean In” into a mantra. After George Floyd’s death, the book sold out on Amazon, which was “unheard-of,” Kendi said. Media coverage of Kendi in those days made him sound nearly superhuman. In a GQ profile, for example, the novelist ZZ Packer describes Kendi as a “preternaturally wise” Buddha-like figure, “the antiracist guru of our time” with a “Jedi-like prowess for recognizing and neutralizing the racism pervading our society.”

During the summer of 2020, Kendi sometimes appeared onstage or onscreen alongside Robin DiAngelo, the educator whose book “White Fragility” was also a No. 1 best seller. Kendi and DiAngelo write less about the workings of systemic racism than the ideas and psychological defenses that cause people to deny their complicity in it. They share a belief in what Kendi calls “individual transformation for societal transformation.” When Kendi took over Selena Gomez’s Instagram, for example, he urged her 180 million followers to “1. Acknowledge your racism,” “2. Confess your racist ideas” and “3. Define racism and antiracism.” Then they would be ready for Steps 4 and 5, identifying and working to change racist policies.

Kendi and DiAngelo’s talk of confession — antiracism as a kind of conversion experience — inspired many people and disturbed others. By focusing so much on personal growth, critics said, they made it easy for self-help to take the place of organizing, for a conflict over the policing of Black communities, and by extension their material conditions, to become a fight not over policy but over etiquette — which words to use, whether to say “Black Lives Matter” or “All Lives Matter.” Many allies felt that Kendi and DiAngelo were merely helping white people alleviate their guilt.

They also questioned Kendi’s willingness to turn his philosophy into a brand. Following the success of “How to Be an Antiracist,” he released a deck of “antiracist” conversation-starter cards, an “antiracist” journal with prompts for self-reflection and a children’s book, “Antiracist Baby.” Christine Platt, an author and advocate who worked with Kendi at American University, recently co-wrote a novel that features a Kendi-like figure — a “soft-spoken” author named Dr. Braxton Walsh Jr., whose book “Woke Yet?” becomes a viral phenomenon. “White folks post about it on social media all the time,” rants De’Andrea, one of the main characters. “Wake up and get your copy today! Only nineteen ninety-nine plus shipping and handling.”

Those who thought of him as a self-help guru, Kendi felt, simply hadn’t read his work. Like most scholars of race, Kendi believes that Blackness is a fiction born of colonial powers’ self-interest, not just ignorance or hate, meaning that combating racism today requires upending the economic and political structures that propagate it. But Kendi doesn’t like the term “systemic racism” because it turns racism into a “hidden and unknowable” force for which there’s no one to blame, so he prefers to talk about “racist policies.”

In The Atlantic, he warned against the country going down a path of symbolic change where “monuments to racism are dismantled, but Americans shrink from the awesome task of reshaping the country with antiracist policies,” like Medicare for All, need-based school funding and reparations. Changing policy was exactly what he aimed to do at Boston University. During the protests, in the summer of 2020, the university named Kendi the Andrew W. Mellon professor of the humanities, a chair previously held by the Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Wiesel, and announced the creation of a center on campus to put his ideas into action. Donations came pouring in, led by an anonymous $25 million gift and a $10 million gift from the Twitter founder Jack Dorsey, which the provost said would give Kendi “the resources to launch the center like a rocket ship.”

Kendi started the center from his home in Boston, while Sadiqa, a pediatric E.R. doctor, came and went from the hospital in full protective gear. Kendi ran a research center as part of his old job at American University, but he felt unable to make a meaningful impact because the resources were modest and he was diagnosed with cancer just four months after its founding. Now, granted tens of millions of dollars to enact his most ambitious ideas, Kendi was determined to create an organization that could be a real engine of progress. “We’ve got to build an infrastructure to match what the right has created,” he later told a co-worker. “We’ve got to build something equally powerful.”

Kendi’s two centers were part of a wave of racial-justice spaces being founded at universities, like the Thurgood Marshall Civil Rights Center at Howard or the Ida B. Wells Just Data Lab at Princeton, that pledged to work in partnership with activists and community groups to achieve social change. Kendi envisioned an organization that supported people of color in campaigning for policies that would concretely improve their lives.

To reflect that mission, he designed a structure with four “pillars” or offices: Research, Policy, Narrative and Advocacy. He recruited data scientists, policy analysts, organizers and educators and brought in faculty members working on race from across the university. They set up a model-legislation unit, which would draft sample bills and public-comment notes; an amicus-brief practice, which would target court cases in which race was being overlooked as an issue; and a grant process to fund research on racism by interdisciplinary teams elsewhere at the university, among other programs. Kendi also struck up a partnership with The Boston Globe to revive The Emancipator, a storied abolitionist newspaper. “It was a really exciting time,” he told me.

That summer, however, Kendi found himself on the defensive beyond Boston as Republican book-banning campaigns revved up. On Fox News, Tucker Carlson denounced “How to Be an Antiracist” as “poisonous,” plucking out Kendi’s summary of the case for race-conscious policymaking, which sounded particularly maladroit when taken out of context: “ The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination ,” Carlson read in mock disbelief. “In other words, his book against racism promotes racism.” This was around the same time that Rufo, the conservative activist, started to position Kendi as a leading proponent of critical race theory, a school of thought, Rufo told The New Yorker, that he discovered by hunting through the footnotes of “How to Be an Antiracist.”

Critical race theorists were a group of legal scholars in the 1970s and ’80s who documented ways that the American legal framework of racial equality was nevertheless producing unequal treatment. They elaborated the idea of systemic racism and the critique of “colorblindness” that inform much of the writing of Kendi’s cohort. Rufo wrote on Twitter that his goal was to change the meaning of the term “critical race theory” — to “turn it toxic” by putting “all of the various cultural insanities under that brand category.” In his attacks on Kendi, Rufo also amplified the left’s critique of Kendi’s corporate-friendliness, caricaturing Kendi as a grifter out to enrich himself by raking in speaking fees. The number of threatening messages Kendi received began to rise. “I don’t feel safe anywhere,” Kendi later told a colleague. “I’m constantly looking over my shoulder.”

By the time the academic year began, in the fall of 2021, Kendi decided to take extraordinary measures. Before the center began in-person work that September, Kendi sent the staff an email about “security protocols,” instructing them to conceal the location of the center even from other Boston University faculty members and students. “It is critical to not share the address of the center with anyone or bring anyone to the center,” Kendi wrote. The email included a mock script to be used in the event of an inquiry about the center’s location, which ended abruptly with, “I gotta go.”

Though such precautions felt necessary to Kendi, they were met with incredulity and frustration by some employees who were starting to question his leadership. Problems emerged within the first six months, according to more than a dozen staff and faculty members I interviewed. Some told me they had gone to the center because they considered Kendi a visionary; others had reservations about or flat-out disagreements with his work but believed he had brought much-needed attention to issues they cared about. They would be able to find common ground, they thought. They were ready for some chaos as they tried to spin up a new organization remotely, but they quickly ran into difficulty as they tried to execute some of Kendi’s plans.

Kendi emphasizes in his books that policies alone are the cause of racial disparities today. In “Stamped From the Beginning,” his 2016 history of anti-Black ideas from the 15th century to the Obama presidency — which won the National Book Award and was recently made into a Netflix documentary that made the Oscar shortlist — Kendi writes that blaming Black people for their own oppression, by implying that Black people or Black culture are inferior or pathological, was one of the oldest cons in America. He had witnessed it again during the early days of the pandemic, when the numbers suggested that Black people were dying from Covid faster than every racial group save Native Americans. Some pundits speculated about the “soul food” diet or posited that Black communities weren’t taking the virus seriously, even though a Pew survey found that Black respondents were most likely to view the coronavirus as a major threat.

Kendi wanted the center to build “the nation’s largest online collection” of racial data to track disparities like this one and do analytical work to understand each policy responsible. In the case of Covid, for example, Black Americans are disproportionately likely to work in low-income essential jobs, to live in crowded conditions and to lack access to high-quality insurance or medical care. The center might research these conditions and propose targeted interventions, like changes to Medicaid coverage, or more transformative measures, like a universal basic income. One faculty member involved told me that she was “initially incredibly enthusiastic” about the idea. “It seemed like an opportunity to do rigorous, well-funded social-science research that would be aimed at real policy change on issues that I cared about,” she told me.

Like Kendi, his staff believed that historical oppression and ongoing discrimination explained why Black Americans fared comparatively poorly on so many measures of well-being, from education to wealth to longevity, and that centuries of injustice demanded a sweeping policy response to remedy. But understanding that past and present racism is the underlying cause of Black disadvantage is different from the work of assessing its role in any single policy, let alone figuring out how to change the policy to eliminate it. That takes careful analysis. “You have to have specificity,” the faculty member said, “or you can’t measure.”

Kendi pushed back at staff members who argued that the center should constrain its focus. There were plenty of academic centers and researchers that tracked data on racial disparities in one policy area or another, he said; he wanted to convene that pre-existing data, bringing it together in one place for easy access by the public. In a 2022 meeting, when the team tried to get a better sense of his vision, Kendi told them that he wanted a guy at a barbershop or a bar to be able to “pull up the numbers.” To many employees with data or policy backgrounds, what Kendi wanted didn’t seem feasible; at worst, they thought, it risked simply replicating others’ work or creating a mess of sloppily merged data, connected to too many policies for their small team to track rigorously. In the midst of the pandemic, the center struggled to hire a director of research who might have been able to mediate the dispute.

In November, a confidential complaint was filed with the university administration raising concerns about Kendi’s leadership. The anonymous employee told a university compliance officer that Kendi ran the center with “hypercontrol” and created an environment of “silence and secrecy” that was causing low morale and high turnover, claiming that “when Dr. Kendi is questioned, the narrative becomes that the employee must be the one with the ‘problem.’” The employee warned the university that the situation “is potentially going to blow up.”

One of Kendi’s refrains is that being antiracist demands self-criticism. “If I share an idea that people don’t understand, I’m to blame,” he told an interviewer in 2019. “I’m always to blame.” Kendi told me that his most productive conversations with critics of his ideas often happened in private, including one with a prominent Black thinker who inspired him to make a change in the revised edition of “How to Be an Antiracist.” “This person talked about how the goal should not just be equity,” Kendi said. “The goal should not be the same percentage of Black people being killed by police as white people. The goal should be no one being killed by police.” But some Black scholars, as the right-wing backlash strengthened, debated whether to make their criticisms in public. The philosopher Charles Mills, after listening to a graduate-student presentation about Kendi and DiAngelo at a conference in 2021, asked the presenter: “Are their views now sufficiently influential, or perhaps sufficiently harmful, that we should make them a part of the target?”

Kendi was frustrated to be constantly lumped in with DiAngelo, whose ideas diverge from his in important ways. DiAngelo considers “white identity” to be “inherently racist,” while Kendi argues that anyone, including Black people, can be racist or antiracist. That puts him at odds with an understanding — common in the academy and the racial-justice movement — that Black people can’t be racist because racism is a system of power relations, and that Black people as a group don’t have the structural means to enforce their prejudice; this notion is often phrased as a formula, that racism is “prejudice plus power.”

Kendi thinks of “racist” not as a pejorative but as a simple word of description. His reigning metaphor is the sticker. Racist and antiracist are “peelable name tags,” Kendi writes; they describe not who we are but who we are being in any particular moment. He says he opposes the censoriousness that has become the sharp edge of identity politics, because he doesn’t regard shame as a useful social tool. But he has no intention of taking the moral sting out of “racist” completely. “I wouldn’t say that a person is not being condemned when they’re being called a racist,” he told Ezra Klein in a 2019 interview.

Rather than replacing one definition of racism with another, Kendi is really joining two senses into one. For much of the 20th century, the white mainstream considered racism a personal moral issue, while Black civil rights activists, among others, argued that it’s also structural and systemic. In his definition, Kendi aims to connect the individual to the system. A “racist,” he writes, is “one who is expressing an idea of racial hierarchy, or through actions or inaction is supporting a policy that leads to racial inequity or injustice.”

Kendi’s focus on outcomes is not new. For decades, civil rights activists have brought lawsuits based on the legal theory of “disparate impact,” which holds that unequal outcomes prove that certain practices (by, for example, an employer or a landlord) are racially discriminatory, without evidence of malicious intent. Kendi’s definition urges us to perform this sort of disparate-impact analysis all the time. In Politico in 2020, Kendi proposed the creation of a federal agency that would clear every new policy — local, state or federal — to ensure that it wouldn’t increase racial disparities. But as his team at the center knew well, policies can have complicated effects. Let’s say that a local environmental policy would improve the air quality in Black neighborhoods near factories but would also lead to hundreds of lost jobs and worsen the area’s racial wealth gap. Should it be cleared? Is such a policy racist or antiracist?

The question is made even trickier by the fact that the racial impact of many policies might not become clear until years later. The legacy of desegregation, for example, shows that even a profoundly antiracist policy can be turned against itself in its implementation. This is what the term “systemic racism” captures that can be lost in Kendi’s translation of “racist policies.”

In “Stamped From the Beginning,” Kendi writes that “racist policy is the cause of racial disparities in this country and the world at large.” Mary Pattillo, a sociologist at Northwestern, told me that Kendi’s focus on race didn’t fully capture the complexity of social life — the roles of class, culture, religion, community. “No one variable alone explains anything ,” she said. But she thought there was value in simplifying. She understood Kendi not as an official making policy but as a thought leader making a “defensible, succinct provocation.” “We live in a country whose ideology is very individualistic, so the standard response to any failure is individual blame,” she said. “Those of us who do recognize the importance of policies, laws and so on have to always push so hard against that that we have to make statements like the one that Kendi is making.”

I came to think, after months of talking to Kendi, that this was the key to understanding him — to remember that he is trying to push so hard against that . To shove back the anti-Black stereotypes he documented in “Stamped From the Beginning,” the racist ideas that poisoned his own mind and sense of self-worth. His aim, at every turn, is to blame the policies that create unequal conditions and not the people enduring them. But Kendi is so consumed by combating the racist notion of Black inferiority that some of what he says in response is overstated, circular or uncareful, creating an easy target for his critics and discomfiting his allies. Conservatives were far from the only ones alarmed, for example, by his proposal for a constitutional amendment to appoint a panel of racism “experts” with the power to discipline public officials for “racist ideas.” (Kendi told me he modeled this proposal on European countries like Germany, where the bar for hate speech is much lower.)

Some of Kendi’s ideas are softer than they appear at first. Kendi told me that people who believe that his binary applies to “everything” are misreading him. Though he writes that “there is no such thing as a not-racist idea, only racist ideas and antiracist ideas,” he says he never meant that sentence to apply to the whole universe of ideas, only to ideas about race. When I asked him whether the environmental policy above would be racist or antiracist based on his definition, he qualified that “policies can be like people, both racist and antiracist,” and went on: “By improving the air quality in Black neighborhoods near factories, the policy is being antiracist. By exacerbating the area’s racial wealth gap, the policy is being racist.” Many of his critics might find this a more reasonable position, but it also leads to a question about how useful or powerful a dichotomy it is in the end.

Kendi wanted to remain open to criticism, but so much of what he encountered was racist mockery, lies, professional jealousy, misreadings and threats. “I have thought many times about exiting my vocation as a scholar who studies racism,” he wrote in the revised edition of “How to Be an Antiracist.” “After the experience of the last three years, it does not feel safe for me to be publicly self-reflective or self-critical. It feels dangerous for me to be vulnerable.” Though he commits to doing so anyway, the onslaught brought on by celebrity seemed to cause Kendi’s introversion to harden into distrust. “Fame can be defeating and depleting,” Stefan Bradley, Kendi’s friend, told me. “Every word he puts into the atmosphere will be chopped up a hundred different ways, and that takes a toll on somebody’s mental health.” Bradley continued: “I think that if he were a lesser spirit, he would have been destroyed.”

That Kendi felt under siege became clear to Yanique Redwood when she started her job at the Center for Antiracist Research. Redwood had met Kendi once, in 2017, and she remembered him as soft-spoken but burning with big, exciting ideas. In the fall of 2021, when she interviewed to be the center’s executive director, Kendi told her he felt as though he was failing. Fund-raising while also running the center was too much for one person, and he wanted Redwood, a Caribbean American health and racial-equity researcher who had spent nearly a decade running a small foundation, to take over internal operations. Redwood was prepared to find some disorder, but the state of the center’s finances was a mess unlike any she had ever seen. “Nothing was in place,” she said. “It was unbelievable that an institution like that, with so much spotlight on it, just did not have systems. I understood why I was being brought in.”

Before starting, she conducted a round of entry interviews with faculty and staff members, and by her 27th and last conversation, she was exhausted from absorbing their frustration. “There’s something really wrong here,” she told Kendi. Much of the staff was relieved when Redwood was hired. There had been widespread confusion as employees were asked to do “damage control” by performing jobs for which they weren’t hired, or even qualified. “Everyone was overwhelmed,” Redwood told me. “There were too many promises being made to funders. Products were being promised that could never be delivered.”

Redwood designed a process to help get researchers going on pilot projects tracking disparities relating to felony murder, the health and social safety net, reparations and student-debt forgiveness. She wanted to share some takeaways from her round of entry interviews with the staff, in a tactful and encouraging way, to start the work of repairing the center’s culture, but Kendi worried that whatever she wrote might leak. A reporter from a conservative media outlet was reaching out to former employees, asking about problems at the center. “This media storm was coming,” Redwood told me. “It was brewing.”

Employees said Kendi’s fear of leaks slowed the work and created confusion and unease. The first time Rachael DeCruz, the head of the Advocacy office, asked Kendi about the center’s finances to help her budget, in 2021, he reacted “bizarrely,” she told me. “Why do you need that information?” he asked. (Kendi denies that this conversation took place. DeCruz says that after asking repeatedly, she received the information about six months later.) The threat of outside scrutiny exacerbated what employees described as Kendi’s tendency to withhold information to avoid interpersonal conflict. “He doesn’t understand people, how to nurture them, how to make them want to do their best work,” Redwood told me. “It’s not his strength, not even a little bit.”

During her entry interviews, Redwood asked each employee what the organization’s values were, and many of them responded by saying something along the lines of “I’ve been wondering that myself.” She encouraged Kendi to hold a retreat to talk through the mission as a group. Kendi was hesitant because he found work retreats “uncomfortable” — “sitting in a room with a large group of people all day long is exhausting for me,” he told me — but he committed to holding one anyway and solicited staff comments on a document he wrote laying out his theory of social change and the center’s role in it. “I was happy to receive all this great feedback,” he wrote to Redwood. “I think the changes will make the document much stronger and clearer.”

On a spring day in 2022, the staff met at a conference center a half-hour’s drive from campus. The day’s agenda, though couched in the gentle jargon of nonprofits, contained hints of the mood: The organizers on staff had scheduled time for an acknowledgment of the center’s growing pains, for a “healing justice moment” and for a period of “wicked questions” when concerns or challenges could be raised. At the start of the day, Naima Wong, an outside facilitator, encouraged the staff not to hold back. “We’re here to really get into this,” she said.

Late in the afternoon, when it was time to wrap up, the group assembled at tables arranged in a circle. Saida Grundy, a sociologist, was seated across from Kendi. She had never been on board with Kendi’s understanding of racism, subscribing instead to the “power plus prejudice” view. Grundy had forwarded Kendi’s email about security to colleagues with the note “The paranoia is INSANE.” “Ibram is so lily-livered he probably jumps when the biscuit tin pops,” she told me. Grundy was the one who, back in November, had made the anonymous complaint, in which some charges carried a hint of paranoia of her own, like the idea that Kendi “despises academia” and had “gotten satisfaction out of pulling academics out of their own research.” She had accused the center of being an exploitative workplace and, after having conflict with her supervisor, had already mostly stepped back from her role. Grundy had told the compliance office that the center might explode, and now she was ready to blow it up herself.

Her voice raised, Grundy laid out an indictment of the document Kendi wrote. “This is a mile wide and an inch deep,” she said. She argued that the center needed to be more specific about its goals; “fighting racism” was such a broad mission that it felt cynically strategic, allowing the center to take in money for all sorts of projects. “If there is a grant for antiracism on Jupiter, great,” she said. “We do extraterrestrial antiracism.” Grundy, unlike most of the staff, thought the center should become a resource for university faculty members and students; her parents were Black student activists in the 1970s, and she believed that real change starts where you are. “If you lined up 99 Black students at B.U.,” she said, “99 will tell you the center’s made no difference to their experience.”

When she finished speaking, the room was silent. Several people were crying. Dawna Johnson, the center’s financial director at the time, called it an “explosion.” “People didn’t know what to say after that,” she said. “It just left you so unhappy and uptight.” Kendi, his face inscrutable behind a Covid mask, said nothing, and the facilitator wrapped up the session. “Scholars who study the experience of Black leaders find that the No.1 racist challenge Black leaders face is contested authority, even from other Black leaders and staff,” he wrote to me later. I asked him what he remembered from that day. “It’s almost like trying to remember a day in which you were really happy, but then something horrible happened at the end,” he told me. “It’s hard to remember anything else other than that horrible thing.”

Grundy had admittedly come in hot, many staff members agreed, but it didn’t seem to matter how they couched their concerns. Employees continued to push to make sure that the center’s research projects were both rigorous and responsive to community needs, but the issues they raised in response to Kendi’s “theory of change” document never seemed to get fully resolved. “He’s communicating one thing,” one person said. “Behind the curtain, he’s behaving a very different kind of way.” Redwood and several others said that if someone was too persistent about a concern, Kendi would slow or stop his communication with that person. “If someone disagrees or someone is being vocal, you can’t just get rid of them,” she wanted to tell him. “Like, this is how you breed distrust.”

Redwood ultimately decided that Kendi wasn’t interested in building consensus around a shared mission. “Only he had the ideas,” she said. “We were there to execute on his ideas.” Redwood resigned in October 2022.

In a memo to The Times, Kendi disputed many of the staff’s recollections of his leadership. “This is not me, and anyone close to me, who has worked with me for a long time, knows that I’m open to constructive criticism as a writer and a thinker and a leader,” he wrote. Many progressive advocacy groups, Kendi pointed out, have been torn apart by internal clashes in recent years, conflicts that he said were driven by employees who “care more about performing their radicalism” than working to “improve the lives of everyday people.” “Former employees constantly deauthorized me as the director of the center — not because they were against hierarchy — but to assume authority for themselves,” he wrote.

Even before Redwood’s departure, Kendi told me, he realized the center was in financial trouble. He was far from the only nonprofit leader caught short as funding for racial-justice work collapsed after 2020. Funders that doused organizations with cash in the wake of George Floyd’s murder proved unwilling or unable to sustain their commitment, and layoffs were taking place across the sector, even at large nonprofits like the Chan-Zuckerberg Initiative. The center had gone from raising $40 million in 2020 to a fraction of that — $420,000 — the next year.

In June 2023, after he went on parental leave, Kendi approached university leaders with the idea of switching to a fellowship model, which could adjust its number of awards to fluctuations in fund-raising. He told the staff only that he would be announcing some major changes when he returned from leave. Dawna Johnson, who succeeded Redwood as executive director, was left to manage a staff frustrated by being kept in the dark. “I think the staff thought I knew more than I actually did, as far as what the future of the center was,” she told me. “He’s like, Just don’t spend money, essentially, which is kind of difficult in an organization that needs to move forward.” (Kendi denies that he said anything like this to Johnson, who remains in her role today.)

Kendi spent the next three months taking care of his newborn daughter, Imara, and his wife, who was diagnosed with Stage 4 breast cancer while pregnant. In his absence, at another staff retreat, four employees stood up and spoke in turn about the problems at the center. Much of the staff had just learned that the center agreed to partner with the D.E.I. arm of the consulting company Deloitte, which does work for the police and prisons, on designing an antiracism training for corporate workplaces. “Why wasn’t this shared with the broader staff sooner, as a potential high-risk partnership that could impact the relationships we are forging with movement leaders?” one person said. “Why are we contemplating this partnership that arguably goes against our values?”

Kendi, who identifies as a police and prison abolitionist, suggested that donations from corporations could be seen as a “form of reparations,” and he stressed to me that the Deloitte agreement “allowed us to control the products from design to delivery.” He once again dismissed the critics at the retreat as “performative radicals” of the sort that have been “causing all kinds of havoc in Black-led social justice organizations for years, claiming that they are against hierarchy when they really are against being directed by a Black person.” He thought they were being hypocritical in objecting to the Deloitte partnership because they “do not object to personally having profiles on social media corporations that platform copaganda, or buying goods from retailers employing incarcerated labor in their supply chains, or using technology from corporations providing carceral states with technologies of surveillance.”

When I asked the employees about this, one of them called Kendi’s comments about hypocrisy a “deflection tactic.” She stressed that the staff was not making a demand but asking for an open dialogue — or at least a clearly articulated rationale — about decisions that affected them. His response fit a clear pattern, they thought, of believing that employees were trying to undermine him when they really just cared about the work. “I understand he’s coming from a place of trauma,” another told me. “He’s criticized unfairly and through a racist lens constantly. I do understand it. But then to distort that into an inability to receive feedback that’s going to ensure the success and usefulness of the center — that’s where it becomes a problem.”

In September, Kendi fired 19 of the center’s 36 employees in a series of Zoom meetings. Many told me they could understand the layoffs given the financial climate, but to change the model from an ambitious organization that had pledged to drive social change to one that handed out academic fellowships felt like a betrayal of the mission. The abruptness of the decision forced the staff to scramble to find other homes for projects, including a research program supporting Boston-area organizers on a campaign to challenge family policing in schools, for which they were in the midst of sensitive interviews with affected parents and caregivers. Breaking promises they’d made to grass-roots partners was what bothered her team most, said DeCruz, the head of the Advocacy office, because equitable and sustained relationships between communities and advocates build a strong network — a movement aligned on its goals. Pulling out damaged those relationships.

Though some staff members told me they appreciated Kendi — “My life forever, forever changed because I worked for someone who pushed me to envision what’s possible,” one said — many others had become darkly cynical about him. The most vocal among them was Grundy, who took to Twitter calling Kendi a “grifter” and fueling the rumor that he might have stolen funds. Redwood tried to have empathy. She imagined what it must be like to be constantly attacked — to have your intelligence insulted, your motives questioned. “I wonder if some of the secrecy and paranoid behavior came about as a result of that,” she told me. “I have no idea, and I had to just eventually stop trying to figure it out and just move on, because I couldn’t understand how the person I met when he was at American, when I sat down with him for lunch, the person who appeared to be so humble, so committed — and I still think he is committed — could be the person that I worked for. It is not something that I have ever been able to understand.”

Several people stressed to me that Kendi’s weaknesses as a leader were not as important as the larger forces that surrounded his leadership — the opportunism of white-led institutions, the boom and bust of trend-chasing nonprofit funding, the commodification of Black thought and activism. I asked Boston University to comment on a complaint I heard from the staff, that its administration had failed to provide adequate oversight. “Boston University provided significant financial and administrative support to Dr. Kendi and the center. Dr. Kendi did not always accept the support,” a spokesperson wrote. “In hindsight, and with the fuller knowledge of the organizational problems that arose, the university should have done more to insist on additional oversight.”

The spokesperson also said that the decision to end the center’s projects was Kendi’s choice. “Several different models were discussed with Dr. Kendi, including bringing many of the projects to completion over the next two years and lessening the impact on staff,” he wrote. “However, Dr. Kendi’s preference was to terminate the ongoing projects and ask the funders to repurpose the funds for his new endeavor.” (In a written response, Kendi accused the interim university administration of trying to undermine the center’s work. “The center has faced more oversight and scrutiny than every other center at B.U. from the Office of Research and this interim B.U. administration,” he wrote. “I’m disappointed that this interim B.U. administration is giving The Times a version of events that doesn’t reconcile with the facts.”)

The last time I saw Kendi in person was in January, when he came to New York to promote his newest book, a young readers’ adaptation of Zora Neale Hurston’s “Barracoon,” based on her 1927 interviews with Cudjo Lewis, one of the last survivors of the Middle Passage from Africa. That night, Kendi was doing an event at an independent bookstore in Brooklyn Heights, where the streets were salt-streaked after a light snowstorm and white string lights glowed on a tree outside. One of the three personal-security officers he brought with him — bearded Black men in black peacoats and dress pants, fitted with earpieces — was checking bags at the door.

Kendi was standing by a wall of books in a teal blazer, his pocket square in place. For a while, he said, he stopped doing many public events because of his security concerns, but he realized it had contributed to his feeling alienated and embattled. “Not doing live book signings prevented me from engaging with the people who were reading and appreciating my work,” he told me later. Going on tour again had “helped tremendously,” he said. But he didn’t want to be away from home long while Sadiqa was in treatment. “It’s incredibly difficult to witness someone you care about deeply facing so much pain and loss,” he said. “I’d much rather just be the one facing that pain.”

Boston University had cleared him and the center of grant mismanagement, but he was still waiting for Korn Ferry, the management consulting firm hired by the administration, to finish its culture inquiry, and he continued to attribute any dysfunction at the center to the hardships of the pandemic and employees who repeatedly contested his leadership. He was coordinating with the university on the center’s next phase, he said, but the work that felt most meaningful to him at the moment was “getting back to my roots as a writer.” He was at work on his next big project, a contemporary political history.

Kendi has spun out 13 books since “How to Be an Antiracist” in 2019, 10 of which are adaptations of his or others’ work for children. Since becoming a father, he told me, it has become even more important to him to reach young readers — particularly Black kids like him who may have internalized racist ideas about themselves. Earlier that day, Kendi spoke to 250 kids at a middle school elsewhere in Brooklyn, taking questions from a panel of seventh and eighth graders. “Barracoon” was the latest in a series of books he was adapting by Hurston, the Harlem Renaissance ethnographer he has called the “greatest antiracist novelist of the interwar era.” “I wanted it to read like a grandparent sharing their difficult life story with care and love to their grandchild,” Kendi wrote on Instagram.

During the talk, Kendi told the audience that there are some Black people who, from the way they maneuver in the world, you can tell are spiritual maroons. “This is the person who truly is living and navigating from the standpoint of a freedom,” he said. “They’re unafraid or not worried at all about the white gaze. They’re operating and navigating the world based on their own destiny, based on what they want.” Hurston, who traveled throughout the South, Jamaica and Haiti collecting folklore from the descendants of slaves, was one of those people, Kendi said.

Listening to him, I wondered how often he felt like one of them, too. I got the impression that Kendi spent a lot of time in his head, in that defensive pose, anticipating or parrying attacks from his critics. When I asked him later where he and Sadiqa had gone on vacation over the New Year holiday, he declined even to name the country for fear that “bad-faith people” would try to figure out where they had stayed and how much their hotel room cost. I told him it seemed as though he devoted a lot of thought to how something he said or did could be used against him by the least generous person on the internet. “I certainly don’t want to provide fodder for it,” he told me.

Kendi is right that there’s a mess of misinformation about what he believes. He has become a cipher for the unfinished national conversation about the post-George Floyd moment — the outrage and wild hope of the protests, the reactionary anger, the disillusionment. In tying together racism’s two senses — the personal and the systemic — Kendi has helped many more Americans understand that they are responsible not only for the ideas in their heads but also for the impact they have on the world. But this gap between intention and action, so core to his thinking, is where all the hard work takes place, DeCruz told me. That’s where organizing and movement-building happens, where you practice the kind of world you want to live in. “Having a shared language is important,” she said, but “it’s just the first step.”

Read by January LaVoy

Narration produced by Emma Kehlbeck and Krish Seenivasan

Engineered by David Mason

Rachel Poser is a story editor for the magazine. She has previously written about whiteness in classical studies, sting operations and the charms of paleoart. Wayne Lawrence is a visual artist in Brooklyn and Detroit whose work is focused on community and purpose. His work is in the permanent collection of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture.

An earlier version of this article misstated the center’s fundraising in 2021 as compared to the previous year. It was approximately one-hundredth of the amount raised in 2020, not a tenth. The article also misstated the recognition given to the documentary adaptation of “Stamped From the Beginning.” The documentary was named to the Oscar shortlist, but was not nominated for the award.

How we handle corrections

Explore The New York Times Magazine

Taking Down Roe v. Wade : A conservative Christian coalition’s plan to end the federal right to abortion  began just days after Donald Trump’s 2016 election.

The Interview : The Netflix chief Ted Sarandos has a plan to get you to binge  even more film and television on the streaming platform.

How Israeli Extremists Took Over : After 50 years of failure to stop violence and terrorism against Palestinians by Jewish ultranationalists, lawlessness has become the law .

The Dynamite Club : In early 20th-century America, political bombings by anarchists  became a constant menace — but then they helped give rise to law enforcement as we know it.

Losing Your Native Tongue : After moving abroad, a writer found her English slowly eroding. It turns out our first languages aren’t as embedded as we think .

Advertisement

What is decision making?

Decisions, decisions. When was the last time you struggled with a choice? Maybe it was this morning, when you decided to hit the snooze button—again. Perhaps it was at a restaurant, with a miles-long menu and the server standing over you. Or maybe it was when you left your closet in a shambles after trying on seven different outfits before a big presentation. Often, making a decision—even a seemingly simple one—can be difficult. And people will go to great lengths—and pay serious sums of money—to avoid having to make a choice. The expensive tasting menu at the restaurant, for example. Or limiting your closet choices to black turtlenecks, à la Steve Jobs.

Get to know and directly engage with senior McKinsey experts on decision making

Aaron De Smet is a senior partner in McKinsey’s New Jersey office, Eileen Kelly Rinaudo  is McKinsey’s global director of advancing women executives and is based in the New York office, Frithjof Lund is a senior partner in the Oslo office, and Leigh Weiss is a senior adviser in the Boston office.

If you’ve ever wrestled with a decision at work, you’re definitely not alone. According to McKinsey research, executives spend a significant portion of their time— nearly 40 percent , on average—making decisions. Worse, they believe most of that time is poorly used. People struggle with decisions so much so that we actually get exhausted from having to decide too much, a phenomenon called decision fatigue.

But decision fatigue isn’t the only cost of ineffective decision making. According to a McKinsey survey of more than 1,200 global business leaders, inefficient decision making costs a typical Fortune 500 company 530,000 days  of managers’ time each year, equivalent to about $250 million in annual wages. That’s a lot of turtlenecks.

How can business leaders ease the burden of decision making and put this time and money to better use? Read on to learn the ins and outs of smart decision making—and how to put it to work.

Learn more about our People & Organizational Performance Practice .

How can organizations untangle ineffective decision-making processes?

McKinsey research has shown that agile is the ultimate solution for many organizations looking to streamline their decision making . Agile organizations are more likely to put decision making in the right hands, are faster at reacting to (or anticipating) shifts in the business environment, and often attract top talent who prefer working at companies with greater empowerment and fewer layers of management.

For organizations looking to become more agile, it’s possible to quickly boost decision-making efficiency by categorizing the type of decision to be made and adjusting the approach accordingly. In the next section, we review three types of decision making and how to optimize the process for each.

What are three keys to faster, better decisions?

Business leaders today have access to more sophisticated data than ever before. But it hasn’t necessarily made decision making any easier. For one thing, organizational dynamics—such as unclear roles, overreliance on consensus, and death by committee—can get in the way of straightforward decision making. And more data often means more decisions to be taken, which can become too much for one person, team, or department. This can make it more difficult for leaders to cleanly delegate, which in turn can lead to a decline in productivity.

Leaders are growing increasingly frustrated with broken decision-making processes, slow deliberations, and uneven decision-making outcomes. Fewer than half  of the 1,200 respondents of a McKinsey survey report that decisions are timely, and 61 percent say that at least half the time they spend making decisions is ineffective.

What’s the solution? According to McKinsey research, effective solutions center around categorizing decision types and organizing different processes to support each type. Further, each decision category should be assigned its own practice—stimulating debate, for example, or empowering employees—to yield improvements in effectiveness.

Here are the three decision categories  that matter most to senior leaders, and the standout practice that makes the biggest difference for each type of decision.

• Big-bet decisions are infrequent but high risk, such as acquisitions. These decisions carry the potential to shape the future of the company, and as a result are generally made by top leaders and the board. Spurring productive debate by assigning someone to argue the case for and against a potential decision can improve big-bet decision making.
• Cross-cutting decisions, such as pricing, can be frequent and high risk. These are usually made by business unit heads, in cross-functional forums as part of a collaborative process. These types of decisions can be improved by doubling down on process refinement. The ideal process should be one that helps clarify objectives, measures, and targets.
• Delegated decisions are frequent but low risk and are handled by an individual or working team with some input from others. Delegated decision making can be improved by ensuring that the responsibility for the decision is firmly in the hands of those closest to the work. This approach also enhances engagement and accountability.

In addition, business leaders can take the following four actions to help sustain rapid decision making :

• Focus on the game-changing decisions, ones that will help an organization create value and serve its purpose.
• Convene only necessary meetings, and eliminate lengthy reports. Turn unnecessary meetings into emails, and watch productivity bloom. For necessary meetings, provide short, well-prepared prereads to aid in decision making.
• Clarify the roles of decision makers and other voices. Who has a vote, and who has a voice?
• Push decision-making authority to the front line—and tolerate mistakes.

Introducing McKinsey Explainers : Direct answers to complex questions

How can business leaders effectively delegate decision making.

Business is more complex and dynamic than ever, meaning business leaders are faced with needing to make more decisions in less time. Decision making takes up an inordinate amount of management’s time—up to 70 percent for some executives—which leads to inefficiencies and opportunity costs.

As discussed above, organizations should treat different types of decisions differently . Decisions should be classified  according to their frequency, risk, and importance. Delegated decisions are the most mysterious for many organizations: they are the most frequent, and yet the least understood. Only about a quarter of survey respondents  report that their organizations make high-quality and speedy delegated decisions. And yet delegated decisions, because they happen so often, can have a big impact on organizational culture.

The key to better delegated decisions is to empower employees by giving them the authority and confidence to act. That means not simply telling employees which decisions they can or can’t make; it means giving employees the tools they need to make high-quality decisions and the right level of guidance as they do so.

Here’s how to support delegation and employee empowerment:

• Ensure that your organization has a well-defined, universally understood strategy. When the strategic intent of an organization is clear, empowerment is much easier because it allows teams to pull in the same direction.
• Clearly define roles and responsibilities. At the foundation of all empowerment efforts is a clear understanding of who is responsible for what, including who has input and who doesn’t.
• Invest in capability building (and coaching) up front. To help managers spend meaningful coaching time, organizations should also invest in managers’ leadership skills.
• Build an empowerment-oriented culture. Leaders should role model mindsets that promote empowerment, and managers should build the coaching skills they want to see. Managers and employees, in particular, will need to get comfortable with failure as a necessary step to success.
• Decide when to get involved. Managers should spend effort up front to decide what is worth their focused attention. They should know when it’s appropriate to provide close guidance and when not to.

How can you guard against bias in decision making?

Cognitive bias is real. We all fall prey, no matter how we try to guard ourselves against it. And cognitive and organizational bias undermines good decision making, whether you’re choosing what to have for lunch or whether to put in a bid to acquire another company.

Here are some of the most common cognitive biases and strategies for how to avoid them:

• Confirmation bias. Often, when we already believe something, our minds seek out information to support that belief—whether or not it is actually true. Confirmation bias  involves overweighting evidence that supports our belief, underweighting evidence against our belief, or even failing to search impartially for evidence in the first place. Confirmation bias is one of the most common traps organizational decision makers fall into. One famous—and painful—example of confirmation bias is when Blockbuster passed up the opportunity  to buy a fledgling Netflix for $50 million in 2000. (Actually, that’s putting it politely. Netflix executives remember being “laughed out” of Blockbuster’s offices.) Fresh off the dot-com bubble burst of 2000, Blockbuster executives likely concluded that Netflix had approached them out of desperation—not that Netflix actually had a baby unicorn on its hands.
• Herd mentality. First observed by Charles Mackay in his 1841 study of crowd psychology, herd mentality happens when information that’s available to the group is determined to be more useful than privately held knowledge. Individuals buy into this bias because there’s safety in the herd. But ignoring competing viewpoints might ultimately be costly. To counter this, try a teardown exercise , wherein two teams use scenarios, advanced analytics, and role-playing to identify how a herd might react to a decision, and to ensure they can refute public perceptions.
• Sunk-cost fallacy. Executives frequently hold onto underperforming business units or projects because of emotional or legacy attachment . Equally, business leaders hate shutting projects down . This, researchers say, is due to the ingrained belief that if everyone works hard enough, anything can be turned into gold. McKinsey research indicates two techniques for understanding when to hold on and when to let go. First, change the burden of proof from why an asset should be cut to why it should be retained. Next, categorize business investments according to whether they should be grown, maintained, or disposed of—and follow clearly differentiated investment rules  for each group.
• Ignoring unpleasant information. Researchers call this the “ostrich effect”—when people figuratively bury their heads in the sand , ignoring information that will make their lives more difficult. One study, for example, found that investors were more likely to check the value of their portfolios when the markets overall were rising, and less likely to do so when the markets were flat or falling. One way to help get around this is to engage in a readout process, where individuals or teams summarize discussions as they happen. This increases the likelihood that everyone leaves a meeting with the same understanding of what was said.
• Halo effect. Important personal and professional choices are frequently affected by people’s tendency to make specific judgments based on general impressions . Humans are tempted to use simple mental frames to understand complicated ideas, which means we frequently draw conclusions faster than we should. The halo effect is particularly common in hiring decisions. To avoid this bias, structured interviews can help mitigate the essentializing tendency. When candidates are measured against indicators, intuition is less likely to play a role.

For more common biases and how to beat them, check out McKinsey’s Bias Busters Collection .

Learn more about Strategy & Corporate Finance consulting  at McKinsey—and check out job opportunities related to decision making if you’re interested in working at McKinsey.

Articles referenced include:

• “ Bias busters: When the crowd isn’t necessarily wise ,” McKinsey Quarterly , May 23, 2022, Eileen Kelly Rinaudo , Tim Koller , and Derek Schatz
• “ Boards and decision making ,” April 8, 2021, Aaron De Smet , Frithjof Lund , Suzanne Nimocks, and Leigh Weiss
• “ To unlock better decision making, plan better meetings ,” November 9, 2020, Aaron De Smet , Simon London, and Leigh Weiss
• “ Reimagine decision making to improve speed and quality ,” September 14, 2020, Julie Hughes , J. R. Maxwell , and Leigh Weiss
• “ For smarter decisions, empower your employees ,” September 9, 2020, Aaron De Smet , Caitlin Hewes, and Leigh Weiss
• “ Bias busters: Lifting your head from the sand ,” McKinsey Quarterly , August 18, 2020, Eileen Kelly Rinaudo
• “ Decision making in uncertain times ,” March 24, 2020, Andrea Alexander, Aaron De Smet , and Leigh Weiss
• “ Bias busters: Avoiding snap judgments ,” McKinsey Quarterly , November 6, 2019, Tim Koller , Dan Lovallo, and Phil Rosenzweig
• “ Three keys to faster, better decisions ,” McKinsey Quarterly , May 1, 2019, Aaron De Smet , Gregor Jost , and Leigh Weiss
• “ Decision making in the age of urgency ,” April 30, 2019, Iskandar Aminov, Aaron De Smet , Gregor Jost , and David Mendelsohn
• “ Bias busters: Pruning projects proactively ,” McKinsey Quarterly , February 6, 2019, Tim Koller , Dan Lovallo, and Zane Williams
• “ Decision making in your organization: Cutting through the clutter ,” McKinsey Quarterly , January 16, 2018, Aaron De Smet , Simon London, and Leigh Weiss
• “ Untangling your organization’s decision making ,” McKinsey Quarterly , June 21, 2017, Aaron De Smet , Gerald Lackey, and Leigh Weiss
• “ Are you ready to decide? ,” McKinsey Quarterly , April 1, 2015, Philip Meissner, Olivier Sibony, and Torsten Wulf.

Want to know more about decision making?

Related articles.

What is productivity?

What is the future of work?

What is leadership?

Prevalence and Characteristics of People with Disabilities Among Abused Victims in Saudi Arabia

• Research Article
• Open access
• Published: 05 June 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Abdulaziz S. Alangari   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0972-7009 1 , 2 ,
• Duaa Alammari   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3559-3841 2 , 3 ,
• Norah Alhowaish 2 , 4 , 5 ,
• Waseemah Almutairi 2 , 4 , 5 ,
• Zainab Alnjeidi 2 , 4 , 5 &
• Majid Aleissa 2 , 4 , 5  

Abuse is an ongoing public health issue that results in increased morbidity and mortality rates. Abuse against individuals with disabilities is a pervasive and deeply concerning issue, often compounded by factors of vulnerability and dependence. The majority of disabled individuals experience abuse, with the majority enduring it repeatedly. Identifying the problem is the first step towards preventing abuse. This study aimed to identify the prevalence of people with disabilities among abused victims and the victim’s associated risk factors in Saudi Arabia.

This cross-sectional study obtained data from the National Family Safety Registry. All registered children and adults between April 2017 and December 2022 from 93 centers across 13 regions of Saudi Arabia were included. Logistic regression models were used to determine the association between independent variables and victim-related risk factors such as the onset of abuse complications, the victim being an adult or child, the victim’s gender, and whether they had been previously abused.

Individuals with disabilities comprise 1.4% ( n  = 199) of all reported cases of abuse ( n  = 14,004), and the trend of violence against people with disabilities has decreased during the 6-year study period. Of the abused people with disabilities, 72.4% were children, 57.8% were males, 45.2% were previously abused, and 65.3% had complications from the abuse. Caregiver type, perpetrator gender, perpetrator age, and previous abuse status were significant factors.

Conclusions

This study highlights the disability prevalence among reported abuse cases and evaluates victim’s risk factors in Saudi Arabia, which demonstrates an urgency for targeted intervention and support. People with disabilities constitute a vulnerable demographic who require increased support and resources. Comprehensive data collection can be utilized for effective violence prevention strategies. Further research should explore qualitative methods and survey the rates of abuse among people with disabilities in the community to gain deeper insights.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Violence is a major global public health concern. More than 1.3 million individuals are estimated globally lose their lives each year due to acts of violence, and nearly 25% of children and 30% of women worldwide experience physical or sexual violence at some point in their lives [ 1 ]. In addition, interpersonal violence is among the top five causes of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) among adolescents aged 10–24 years [ 2 ]. One study estimated that 15.7% of people aged 60 years and older have been abused [ 3 ]. This violence issue is recognized internationally. The United Nations includes violence in its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for 2030 [ 4 ]. SDGs 16.1 and 16.2 are key components of the broader agenda for promoting peace, justice, and strong institutions. It specifically targets a reduction in all forms of violence and related deaths worldwide, including violence against children. Recognizing that violence in its various manifestations undermines social cohesion, impedes development, and violates human rights, these goals call for concerted efforts to address this pervasive challenge and to create safer and more secure environments for all individuals.

Approximately 16% of the world’s population suffers from some kind of disability and rates have risen in the past decade [ 5 ] primarily due to an increase in aging populations and chronic diseases. People with disabilities have a 50% increased risk of violence compared to those without disabilities because of their need for continuous support, inability to defend themselves, and reduced communication abilities [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ]. According to a national survey in the United States, 70% of people with disabilities have been exposed to abuse, and 90% have been abused on multiple occasions [ 11 ]. Verbal/emotional abuse was the most common form against people with disabilities (87.2%), followed by physical (50.6%), sexual (41.6%), neglect (37.3%), and financial (31.5%). In some studies, disability was a predictor for violence in females, especially with severe disability or impairment [ 12 , 13 ]. In addition, disability is associated with an increased risk of sexual violence for both genders [ 14 ]. Children with disabilities are prone to all forms of abuse, especially those living in disadvantaged populations [ 15 ].

In Saudi Arabia, the Ministry of Health conducted the “2019 World Health Survey-Saudi Arabia” to aid policymakers in creating and overseeing initiatives and health strategies. In the survey, approximately 3% of women had experienced physical violence [ 16 ]. Different results were obtained in a systematic review that concluded one in every three women has been a victim of interpersonal violence [ 17 ]. Another study estimated among children a prevalence of 10% for sexual abuse and 65% for psychological abuse, which are affected by the caregiver type and gender of the victim [ 18 ]. The prevalence of people with disabilities was 7.1% in 2017 [ 19 ]. Little is known about the characteristics of abuse against people with disabilities worldwide or in Saudi Arabia. This study aimed to identify the prevalence of people with disabilities among abuse victims and the victim’s associated risk factors in Saudi Arabia.

2.1 Study Design and Participants

This cross-sectional study obtained data from the National Family Safety Registry (NFSR). The NFSR is a national hospital-based registry and a platform for research data regarding child and adult maltreatment and domestic violence in Saudi Arabia. According to the Saudi Law of Protection from Abuse [ 20 ], abuse encompasses any type of exploitation, such as physical, psychological, and sexual harm, threat of such harm, and negligence.

All registered children and adults with disabilities and evidence of abuse in the NFSR between April 2017 and December 2022 were included ( n  = 199). The sample of the NFSR varies over time but includes data from a significant number of cases reported across the country, ensuring a representative overview of violence issues in Saudi Arabia. Among the 270 registered centers in the NFSR, 93 were active and had reported cases. The cases were registered in secondary and tertiary hospitals across all 13 regions of Saudi Arabia. The hospitals have a multidisciplinary team (physicians, social workers, psychologists, and legal personnel) who are responsible for the diagnosis and management of abuse and neglect cases. The healthcare workers document the incidences using a standardized form of reporting that contains information about abuse.

Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the King Abdullah International Medical Research Center (#NRC23R-022-01, Feb 2023).

2.2 Measures

Data were collected according to a predetermined list of variables designed by the NFSP. The data collection form included the following items:

Victim sociodemographic information age, gender, residence, caregivers, marital status, educational level, incident reporter (family member, victim, stranger, or healthcare worker), and employment status.

Abuse information specific information about the history and nature of the abuse; victim’s health condition before the abuse, nature of previous abuse (if any), nature of current abuse (physical, sexual, emotional; and neglect), and final status of the victim (no change, new disability, death, deterioration of health status, and psychiatric disorder).

Alleged abuser information if the abuser was known, sociodemographic information about the abuser and health information are explored. This included the relationship with the victim, gender, age, marital status, education level, employment status, and health conditions (chronic illness, disability, or addiction).

Hospitalization and final decision this stage evaluates the final disposition of the victim. The healthcare practitioner records whether the victim required hospital admission, discharge status, and referrals to the social protection committee or police.

2.3 Statistical Methods

Descriptive statistics and frequency tables were used to describe participant characteristics. Frequencies and percentages are used for categorical variables, and means with standard deviations are used for continuous variables. The prevalence of people with disabilities was calculated based on the proportion of people with disabilities from the total abuse cases for each year. Logistic regression models were used to determine the association between independent variables and victim-related risk factors such as the onset of abuse complications, the victim being an adult or child, the victim’s gender, and whether they had been previously abused. The independent variables were caregiver type (both parents, one parent, or other), perpetrator gender, perpetrator age, and prior instances of abuse. Significance was estimated at a 2-tailed p -value of < 0.05, with a 95% confidence interval. All tests were conducted using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA).

3.1 Victim Characteristics

The total number of confirmed abuse incidents was 14,004. Of these, 199 were among people with disabilities (1.4%), of which 144 were children (72.4%) and 55 were adults (27.6%). Figure  1 presents the prevalence trend, which shows an overall decline between 2017 (3.9%) and 2022 (0.8%). The average age of these participants was 16.8 years (± 19.6) years; 7 years (± 4.1) years for child victims, and 42.4 (± 21.0) years for adult victims (Table  1 ). Among the abused children, the majority were males (62.5%), cared for by both parents (73.6%), and lived in either the Eastern (35.4%) or the Riyadh region (31.9%). The majority of abused adults were females (54.5%), cared for by others (36.4%), and lived in the Eastern (27.3%), Jizan (27.3%), or Riyadh region (23.6%). Moreover, most abused adults were single (50.9%), and about a third were married (32.7%). A substantial proportion of adults were illiterate (43.6%), followed by those with a high school or equivalent education (21.8%). Regarding employment status, 36.4% were unemployed and 27.3% were housewives.

Prevalence of people with disability among abused victims 2017–2022

3.2 Abuse Information

Nearly one-quarter (23.6%) of the abused children and nearly one-seventh (14.6%) of the abused adults had chronic diseases before abuse (Table  2 ). The most common form of abuse was neglect, all participants 59.3%, children 61.8%, and adults 52.7%; followed by physical abuse, all participants 42.2%, children 39.6%, and adults 49.1%. Among all forms of abuse, approximately one-third of the victims had no change in their final health status; all participants (34.7%, children 34.1%, and adults 36.3%. Similarly, health status deterioration was the second most common outcome; all participants 33.7%, children 29.2%, and adults 45.4%. Psychiatric disorders were the third most common outcome from abuse; all participants 11.1%, children 11.9%, and adults 9.1%. Among all victims, 45.2% had been previously abused; children 44.4%, and adults 47.3%. Of those, neglect accounted for 26.6% of them: 27.1% of children and 25.5% of adults. This was followed by physical abuse; all of them 19.1%, children 16.7%, and adults 25.5%.

3.3 Perpetrator Information

Information on the abusers was available for 178 abuse incidents (Table  3 ). The most common abusers of children were fathers (35.4%), followed by mothers (33.1%) and both parents (20.0%). In contrast, the majority of those who abused adults were those other than parents (79.2%), followed by fathers (14.6%). Males were the most common abusers (all participants 50.0%, children 40.8%, and adults 75.0%) followed by females (all participants 34.8%, children 39.2%, and adults 22.9%). The most common age group for abusers was 31–40 years (40.0% of children abusers and 35.4% of adult abusers) followed by 41–50 years (31.3% of children abusers and 29.2% of adult abusers). Regarding marital status, the majority of abusers were married (for all participants 78.7%, for children 77.7%, and for adults 81.3%). Abusers commonly had a high school or equivalent degree (41.0%) and were employed (39.3%).

3.4 Probability of Victim Final Status, Adults vs. Children, Gender, and Previous Abuse

Abused adults were more likely cared for by people other than their parents (OR = 41.63, 95% CI 14.82–116.97) relative to those who were cared for by both parents (Table  4 ). Those who were cared for by one parent were more likely to have a previous abuse than those who were cared for by both parents (OR = 4.11, 95% CI 1.43–11.81). In addition, caregivers who were other than parents were more likely to abuse males than females compared to those who were cared for by both parents (OR = 2.16, 95% CI 1.03–4.50). Female perpetrators were less likely to abuse adults than their male counterparts (OR = 0.32, 95% CI 0.15–0.69), and less likely than males to abuse victims with a previous abuse (OR = 0.23, 95% CI 0.10–0.56). Perpetrators who were 51 years and older were more likely to abuse adults than those of younger age groups (31–40 years) (OR = 5.61, 95% CI 1.80–17.46). Moreover, victims who were previously abused were more likely to have complications than those who were never abused (OR = 3.98, 95% CI 1.88–8.44).

4 Discussion

This study identified the prevalence of people with disabilities among reported abuse and the victims’ associated risk factors for abuse among people with disabilities in Saudi Arabia. Disabled individuals comprised 1.4% of all reported cases of abuse during the period 2017–2022. The highest prevalence rate was observed in 2017 (3.9%). The trend of people with disabilities among abused cases in this study has gradually decreased over the last 6 years, reaching its lowest prevalence rate of 0.8 in 2022. On the contrary, a study in Taiwan analyzed a 4-year trend (2006–2009) of reported abuse among people with disabilities and showed a significant increase in the rates of violence against disabled individuals [ 21 ]. Saudi Arabia has initiated multiple efforts to protect individuals with disabilities against different forms of abuse by developing regulations and policies such as the Law of Protection from Abuse, Disability Welfare Law, and Disability Rights Law. Together, they provide essential shelter along with social, psychological, and healthcare services. Additionally, legal steps are taken to prosecute and penalize those responsible for abuse.

Although the proportion of abused disabled individuals has declined, there was a slight increase in 2021, which might be attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic, which led to a period of isolation, quarantine, and lockdown. In times of crisis, reports of violence are often linked to economic instability and high-stress environments [ 22 ]. During the COVID-19 pandemic period, victims were forced to be locked down with their perpetrators, intensifying domestic violence, especially among females, and children [ 23 ]. In addition, the limited availability and accessibility of services could have hindered support for violence during a pandemic. Circumstances during the pandemic aggravated the risk of abuse and neglect due to family dynamics and the wider social environment [ 24 ]. Loss of income contributes to stress and anxiety and increases the likelihood of domestic abuse against children [ 25 ].

In our results, violence against people with disabilities was more common among children than adults in Saudi Arabia. A study in the United States had similar findings; children were more likely to be exposed to violence than adults [ 26 , 27 , 28 ]. Children are considered a vulnerable population and are more susceptible to abuse from the adults responsible for caring for them; therefore, they are more prone to abuse compared to adults [ 29 ]. Female perpetrators are less likely to abuse adults than male perpetrators. This indicates that males tend to abuse adults, whereas females tend to abuse children. Similar observations were made in a Canadian cohort; females tended to abuse younger children more than their male counterparts [ 30 ]. We also found that caregivers who are other than parents are more likely to abuse adults than children when compared to both parents. These results might be due to the nature of caregiving in the studied sample, since 73.6% of children were cared for by both parents and 60.0% of adults were cared for by a husband/wife or others. In addition, the older the perpetrator’s age the higher the probability of abusing adults; younger perpetrators were more prevalent among children. This might be because of the age difference between parents who abuse their children and husbands/wives who abuse their partners.

Regarding the gender of the victims, males and females were similarly abused in this study; females had a slightly higher violence proportion among the adult subgroup, whereas males had a higher violence proportion among the children group. According to the general disability statistics in Saudi Arabia, disabled males (57.5%) have a slightly higher presentation in the general population than females [ 19 ]. Studies in the United States and Denmark have shown that disabled females are more likely to experience sexual violence than males with disabilities; however, males with disabilities are more likely to experience physical violence [ 13 , 31 ]. In a study in the United Kingdom, men with disabilities were more likely to be victims of physical and non-domestic violence and women were much more likely to be victims of sexual and domestic violence [ 12 ]. Moreover, according to a systematic review, women with severe mental disabilities are at a higher risk of experiencing violence [ 12 ]. However, no gender-related differences were found in the studies from Taiwan and Italy [ 21 , 32 ]. Additionally, in another study, there was no gender difference in any type of abuse, except for sexual abuse, which was more common among females [ 33 ]. It is noteworthy, that although we found a significant association between caregivers (parents vs. others) and the gender of the victim, it is unclear what sort of association exists because no other factors were significant.

Less than half of the abuse cases involved victims who experienced previous abuse. The nature of the abuse was mostly neglect or physical abuse, similar to the nature of the previous abuse. Yet another study in South Africa indicated that structural violence ranked highest, followed by psychological physical, and sexual violence ranked the lowest [ 34 ]. In many instances, abuse is not an isolated or one-time event but rather a recurrent one, which might be a repetitive incident of the same nature [ 28 ]. Multiple studies have confirmed that violence is a recurrent issue, with an average of six incidents per victim with disabilities; some participants reported up to 14 incidences of violence [ 34 , 35 ]. Therefore, in cases having previously identified abuse, a proactive approach is needed to prevent recurrent violence. These efforts might include counseling and home visits to support the victim, with ways to identify and report abuse, if needed. Looking closer at factors associated with recurrent abuse, we found that those who were cared for by one parent were more likely to have experienced previous abuse than those who were cared for by both parents. Similar results were reported in a Saudi study that identified violence among children; participants who lived with a single parent were more likely to experience violence due to a lack of protection and safety [ 36 ]. In our study, female perpetrators were less likely to abuse previously abused individuals. Similar findings were observed in other studies; male perpetrators were more likely to repeat abuse [ 37 , 38 ]. Moreover, victims who were previously abused were more likely to experience complications than those who had never been abused. A cross-sectional study also indicated that violence was associated with worse health status regardless of gender [ 33 ]. This demonstrates the seriousness of violence and the long-term effects that could impact victims and society. However, we found no association between the perpetrator’s gender and the victim’s final status.

Most cases of violence were reported by healthcare institution members or family members, and only 7% of cases were reported by the victims themselves. Individuals with disabilities might have difficulties seeking medical care without the help and support of their caregivers because of communication barriers, transportation barriers, and physical environment challenges. For instance, mobility impairments may hinder an individual’s ability to flee when physically or sexually abused. Sensory-impaired individuals may be unable to communicate about the abuse, especially when the abuser is interpreting [ 26 ]. This could also highlight the power imbalance or dominance between people with disabilities and their caregivers [ 39 ]. Moreover, most violence cases in this study were among unemployed or housewife victims, which indicated that the abused victim might be dependent on others for support, leaving them in a more vulnerable position, especially if the abuser or perpetrator is the provider (spouse or parent) [ 40 ]. In another study of Saudi children, parents were the most common perpetrators, followed by siblings [ 36 ], which indicates that power can be a contributing factor in abuse in general and specifically among the disabled.

Our study has several limitations. First, the reported incidents of violence in the registered hospitals and healthcare centers may not have captured true incidents. In addition, most abuse cases are not formally disclosed, and the reporting of incidents through other means, such as helplines, police, or others, might not be included in the NFSP database. The data were derived from registered centers. In a survey conducted among abused people with disabilities, only 37.3% reported this to authorities [ 11 ]. Moreover, children with disabilities may also lack communication skills. Second, the data lacked important variables such as the type of disability, which can provide a better understanding of the issues. Improvements in the case registration form are necessary to gather specific information systematically and ensure data accuracy. Third, although the number of cases of disability was low, this prevented further statistical analyses in which controlling for confounders could have been considered. Finally, the quantitative method applied in this study might help to understand the distribution and characteristics of the problem but not a definitive cause, since it did not consider human behavior and other important perceptions [ 41 ].

Although these limitations may have hindered the study, its strengths include the population representation of abused and people with disability. Since the data were obtained from a national registry for violence, they provided the most available results on violence against people with disabilities in Saudi Arabia. This is particularly important because there is limited literature and data on this topic. Most studies regarding this issue have been conducted in the United States and the United Kingdom [ 9 ]. The results of this study provide a broader perspective on this issue for stakeholders and policymakers. Defining the issue of violence among this population is one step in the public health approach to violence prevention.

5 Conclusions

This study helps elucidate the significant issue of disability prevalence among individuals who have experienced abuse in the general population of Saudi Arabia. These findings underscore the urgent need for targeted interventions and support systems to address the intersection between abuse and disability. By acknowledging and addressing the unique challenges faced by abused individuals with disabilities, policymakers and stakeholders can foster more inclusive and equitable communities. Moreover, this study highlights the importance of comprehensive data collection and analysis to inform evidence-based strategies aimed at preventing violence and improving survivor well-being. Further studies should consider qualitative methods to better understand the scope of this issue in this population. These studies could focus on exploring the lived experiences of individuals with disabilities regarding barriers to accessing support services for abuse, communication barriers, stigma, and institutional challenges that impact their ability to seek assistance and access resources in instances of abuse. In addition, cross-sectional surveys would be valuable to assess the prevalence of abuse among people with disabilities in the community.

Availability of Data and Material

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the National Family Safety Program but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for the current study, and so are not publicly available. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission from the National Family Safety Program, and King Abdullah International Research Center.

Butchart A, Mikton C. Global status report on violence prevention. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014.

Google Scholar  

Vos T, Lim SS, Abbafati C, et al. Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2020;396:1204–22.

Article   Google Scholar  

Yon Y, Mikton CR, Gassoumis ZD, et al. Elder abuse prevalence in community settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2017;5:e147–56.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

United Nations. Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. 2015.

World Health O. Global report on health equity for persons with disabilities. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2022.

Nosek MA, Foley CC, Hughes RB, et al. Vulnerabilities for abuse among women with disabilities. Sex Disabil. 2001;19:177–89.

Saxton M, Curry MA, Powers LE, et al. “Bring my scooter so I can leave you”: a study of disabled women handling abuse by personal assistance providers. Violence Against Women. 2001;7:393–417.

Jones L, Bellis MA, Wood S, et al. Prevalence and risk of violence against children with disabilities: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Lancet. 2012;380:899–907.

Hughes K, Bellis MA, Jones L, et al. Prevalence and risk of violence against adults with disabilities: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Lancet. 2012;379:1621–9.

Mikton C, Shakespeare T. Introduction to special issue on violence against people with disability. J Interpers Violence. 2014;29:3055–62.

Baladerian NJ, Coleman TF, Stream J. Abuse of people with disabilities. Spectrum Institute Disability and Abuse Project 2013.

Khalifeh H, Dean K. Gender and violence against people with severe mental illness. Int Rev Psychiatry. 2010;22:535–46.

Casteel C, Martin SL, Smith JB, et al. National study of physical and sexual assault among women with disabilities. Inj Prev. 2008;14:87–90.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Basile KC, Breiding MJ, Smith SG. Disability and risk of recent sexual violence in the United States. Am J Public Health. 2016;106:928–33.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Fang Z, Cerna-Turoff I, Zhang C, et al. Global estimates of violence against children with disabilities: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2022;6:313–23.

Saudi Ministry of Health. World Health Survey, Saudi Arabia. 2019.

Kazzaz YM, AlAmeer KM, AlAhmari RA, et al. The epidemiology of domestic violence in Saudi Arabia: a systematic review. Int J Public Health. 2019;64:1223–32.

Al-Eissa MA, Saleheen HN, AlMadani S, et al. Determining prevalence of maltreatment among children in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Child Care Health Dev. 2016;42:565–71.

General Authority for Statistics. Disability survey. 2017.

Saudi Law. Law of protection from abuse. 2013.

Lin JD, Lin LP, Lin PY, et al. Domestic violence against people with disabilities: prevalence and trend analyses. Res Dev Disabil. 2010;31:1264–8.

Schneider D, Harknett K, McLanahan S. Intimate partner violence in the great recession. Demography. 2016;53:471–505.

UN Women. Measuring shadow pandemic: violence against women during COVID-19 2021.

Roje Đapić M, Buljan Flander G, Prijatelj K. Children behind closed doors due to COVID-19 isolation: abuse, neglect and domestic violence. Arch Psychiatry Res Int J Psychiatry Relat Sci. 2020;56:181–92.

Kourti A, Stavridou A, Panagouli E, et al. Domestic violence during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2023;24:719–45.

Groce N. Violence against disabled children: UN Secretary Generals report on violence against children thematic group on violence against disabled children: findings and recommendations. Technical report UNICEF, New York, US 2005.

Finkelhor D, Justice US, Prevention D. Children's exposure to violence: a comprehensive national survey: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention 2009.

Finkelhor D, Turner H, Ormrod R, et al. Violence, abuse, and crime exposure in a national sample of children and youth. Pediatrics. 2009;124:1411–23.

Pereda N, Guilera G, Forns M, et al. The international epidemiology of child sexual abuse: a continuation of Finkelhor (1994). Child Abuse Negl. 2009;33:331–42.

Peter T. Exploring taboos: comparing male- and female-perpetrated child sexual abuse. J Interpers Violence. 2009;24:1111–28.

Dammeyer J, Chapman M. A national survey on violence and discrimination among people with disabilities. BMC Public Health. 2018;18:355.

Longobardi C, Badenes-Ribera L. Vulnerability to violence and abuse among people with disabilities. Life Span Disabil. 2018;21:7–29.

Platt L, Powers L, Leotti S, et al. The role of gender in violence experienced by adults with developmental disabilities. J Interpers Violence. 2017;32:101–29.

Neille J, Penn C. The interface between violence, disability, and poverty: stories from a developing country. J Interpers Violence. 2017;32:2837–61.

Umubyeyi A, Mogren I, Ntaganira J, et al. Women are considerably more exposed to intimate partner violence than men in Rwanda: results from a population-based, cross-sectional study. BMC Womens Health. 2014;14:99.

Aldharman SS, Alrasheed LS, Alotaibi WS, et al. Determining the prevalence of child maltreatment among young adults in Saudi Arabia using ISPCAN child abuse screening tool. Cureus. 2023;15: e38531.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hester M. Who does what to whom? Gender and domestic violence perpetrators in English police records. Eur J Criminol. 2013;10:623–37.

Klein AR, Tobin T. A longitudinal study of arrested batterers, 1995–2005: career criminals. Violence Against Women. 2008;14:136–57.

Alkawai FM, Alowayyed AS. Barriers in accessing care services for physically disabled in a hospital setting in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, cross-sectional study. J Community Hosp Intern Med Perspect. 2017;7:82–6.

Public Health England. Disability and domestic abuse: risk, impacts and response. Public Health England; 2015.

Almuneef MA, Alghamdi LA, Saleheen HN. Family profile of victims of child abuse and neglect in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Saudi Med J. 2016;37:882–8.

Download references

This research did not receive any specific funding.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health and Health Informatics, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Abdulaziz S. Alangari

King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Abdulaziz S. Alangari, Duaa Alammari, Norah Alhowaish, Waseemah Almutairi, Zainab Alnjeidi & Majid Aleissa

Department of Health Systems Management, College of Public Health and Health Informatics, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Duaa Alammari

King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Norah Alhowaish, Waseemah Almutairi, Zainab Alnjeidi & Majid Aleissa

National Family Safety Program, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Ministry of the National Guard-Health Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: AA, ZA, NA, SA, MA; Methodology: AA, DA; Formal analysis: AA; Investigation: ZA, NA, SA, MA; Data Curation: AA, MA; Writing – original draft preparation: AA, DA, ZA, NA, SA, MA; Writing – review and editing: AA, DA; Supervision: MA.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abdulaziz S. Alangari .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethical approval was obtained from King Abdullah International Medical Research Center (#NRC23R-022-01, Feb 2023).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Alangari, A.S., Alammari, D., Alhowaish, N. et al. Prevalence and Characteristics of People with Disabilities Among Abused Victims in Saudi Arabia. J Epidemiol Glob Health (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44197-024-00252-2

Download citation

Received : 07 May 2024

Accepted : 24 May 2024

Published : 05 June 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s44197-024-00252-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Public health
• Saudi Arabia
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Português Br
• Journalist Pass

8 innovations in neuroscience and brain research at Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic Staff

Share this:

The brain is a critical, complex organ and intricate diseases affect it. Mayo Clinic researchers are leading discoveries into many conditions, including cancer, Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia , as well as how the brain fundamentally works. Eight research advancements led by neuroscience experts include:

Researchers discover new molecular drug targets for progressive neurological disorder

Progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) is an uncurable brain disorder marked by walking and balance difficulties. Its symptoms mimic Parkinson's disease and dementia. Mayo researchers and collaborators have outlined new therapeutic targets that may lead to future treatments for PSP as well as Alzheimer's disease and related disorders.

"This research enhances our understanding of progressive supranuclear palsy and other related, incurable neurological disorders," says the study's senior author,  Nilufer Ertekin-Taner, M.D., Ph.D.,  a Mayo Clinic neurologist and neuroscientist. "Moving forward, we can target these specific genes or others that are biologically related to them to develop a potential treatment for this untreatable disease."

Mapping cell behaviors in high-grade glioma to improve treatment

High-grade gliomas are cancerous tumors that spread quickly in the brain or spinal cord. Mayo Clinic researchers found invasive brain tumor margins of high-grade  glioma contain biologically distinct genetic and molecular alterations that indicate aggressive behavior and disease recurrence. They also found that MRI techniques, such as  dynamic susceptibility contrast  and diffusion tensor imaging, can help distinguish between the genetic and molecular alterations of invasive tumors, which is important for clinically characterizing areas that are difficult to surgically biopsy.

"We need to understand what is driving tumor progression," says lead author Leland Hu, M.D. , a neuroradiologist at Mayo Clinic. "Our results demonstrate an expanded role of advanced MRI for clinical decision-making for high-grade glioma."

Researchers identify new criteria to detect rapidly progressive dementia

Rapidly progressive dementia (RPD) is caused by several disorders that quickly impair intellectual functioning and interfere with normal activities and relationships. If patients' symptoms appear suddenly causing rapid decline, a physician may diagnose RPD. These patients can progress from initial symptoms of  dementia  to complete incapacitation, requiring full-time care, in less than two years. Mayo Clinic researchers have identified new scoring criteria allowing for the detection of treatable forms of RPD with reasonably high confidence during a patient's first clinical visit. This scoring criteria may allow physicians to substantially reduce the time it takes to begin treatment. 

"Many conditions that cause rapidly progressive dementia can be treated and even reversed. We found that more than half of the patients in our study with rapidly progressive dementia had a treatable underlying condition. We may be able to identify many of these patients early in the symptomatic course by intentionally searching for key clinical symptoms and exam findings and integrating these with results of a brain MRI and spinal tap," says the study's senior author,  Gregg Day, M.D. , a clinical researcher at Mayo Clinic.

Global consortium to study Pick’s disease, rare form of early-onset dementia

Pick's disease , a neurodegenerative disease of unknown genetic origin, is a rare type of  frontotemporal dementia  that affects people under the age of 65. The condition causes changes in personality, behavior and sometimes language impairment. In patients with the disease, tau proteins build up and form abnormal clumps called Pick bodies, which restrict nutrients to the brain and cause neurodegeneration. Researchers at Mayo Clinic and collaborators worldwide have established the Pick's Disease International Consortium to study a specific MAPT gene variation known as MAPT H2 that makes the tau protein and acts as a driver of disease. They investigated a connection between the gene and disease risk, age at onset and duration of Pick's disease.  "We found that the MAPT H2 genetic variant is associated with an increased risk of Pick's disease in people of European descent," says  Owen Ross, Ph.D. , a Mayo Clinic neuroscientist and senior author of the paper. "We were only able to determine that because of the global consortium, which greatly increased the sample size of pathology cases to study Pick's disease."

Moments of clarity in the fog of dementia

Researchers define lucid episodes as unexpected, spontaneous, meaningful and relevant communication from a person who is assumed to have permanently lost the capacity for coherent interactions, either verbally or through gestures and actions. A study surveyed family caregivers of people living with dementia and asked them about witnessing lucid episodes. 

"We have found in our research and stories from caregivers that these kinds of episodes change how they interact with and support their loved ones — usually for the better," says lead author  Joan Griffin, Ph.D. "These episodes can serve as reminders that caregiving is challenging, but we can always try to care with a little more humanity and grace."

Untangling the threads of early-onset dementia

Changes in personality, behavior and language are hallmarks of  frontotemporal dementia (FTD) , the most common form of dementia in patients under the age of 65. New research provides insight into the role a specific gene and the protein it produces play in the development and progression of FTD, which is associated with degeneration of the frontal and temporal lobes of the brain. The researchers think the key may lie in the formation of fibrils, or tiny fiber-like structures produced by part of this protein, that sometimes get tangled up in the brain.

"We also think that these fibrils could one day serve as biomarkers to help clinicians determine FTD prognosis or severity, " says Jordan Marks, an M.D.–Ph.D. student with the  Mayo Clinic Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences .

Mayo Clinic researchers' new tool links Alzheimer's disease types to rate of cognitive decline

Through a new corticolimbic index tool that identifies changes in specific areas of the brain, Mayo Clinic researchers discovered a series of brain changes characterized by unique clinical features and immune cell behaviors for Alzheimer's disease , a leading cause of dementia .

"By combining our expertise in the fields of neuropathology, biostatistics, neuroscience, neuroimaging and neurology to address Alzheimer's disease from all angles, we've made significant strides in understanding how it affects the brain," says  Melissa E. Murray, Ph.D. , a translational neuropathologist at Mayo Clinic. "The corticolimbic index is a score that could encourage a paradigm shift toward understanding the individuality of this complex disease and broaden our perspective. This study marks a significant step toward personalized care, offering hope for more effective future therapies."

New research platform assesses brain cancer mutations during surgery

Brain cancer is difficult to treat when it starts growing, and a prevalent type, known as a glioma , has a poor five-year survival rate. Mayo Clinic researchers report on a new surgical platform used during surgery that informs critical decision-making about tumor treatment within minutes. Time is of the utmost importance when dealing with aggressive malignant tumors.

The researchers say that, in addition to enabling real-time diagnosis, the platform allows surgeons to determine a patient's prognosis and perform tumor resection to improve patient outcomes.

“We will be able to bring the fight against cancer to the operating room, before chemotherapy and radiation treatments begin, and before the disease has progressed and invaded further," says the study's senior author, Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa, M.D.

• Comprehensive testing leads to targeted treatment for rare autoimmune encephalitis antibody Mayo Clinic Minute: Types of brain tumors and treatments

Related Articles

• - Google Chrome

Intended for healthcare professionals

• Access provided by Google Indexer
• 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
• News & Views
• Tobacco funded...

Tobacco funded research: how even journals with bans find it hard to stem the tide of publications

Linked editorial.

Protecting BMJ journals’ content from tobacco industry influence

• Related content
• Peer review
• Irene van den Berg , investigative journalist 1 ,
• Mathilde de Jeu , investigative journalist 1 ,
• Hristio Boytchev , investigative reporter 2
• 1 The Investigative Desk
• hboytchev{at}bmj.com

Tobacco companies are investing billions in pharmaceutical and medical products. These ties complicate the ongoing efforts of researchers, scientific organisations, and journals to distance themselves from the industry, find Irene van den Berg , Mathilde de Jeu , and Hristio Boytchev

Research funded by the tobacco industry is still appearing in highly cited medical journals, despite attempts by some to cut ties altogether, an investigation by The Investigative Desk and The BMJ has found.

Although the tobacco industry has a long history of subverting science, most of the leading medical journals don’t have policies that ban research wholly or partly funded by the industry. Even when publishers, authors, and universities are willing to restrict ties to the industry, evidence indicates that they struggle to identify funding sources, because tobacco companies have funded front groups and have diversified into pharmaceutical and health technology.

“It is awkward to suddenly find yourself affiliated with a company whose sole purpose is to sell cigarettes,” says Wytse van den Bosch, a physician and researcher into pulmonary diseases at the Erasmus MC Sophia Children’s Hospital in the Netherlands. He had a research grant from the drug company Vectura when it was bought by the tobacco giant Philip Morris International in 2021. Nevertheless, his study was still published in a journal with a policy to reject research with connections to the tobacco industry.

Big tobacco’s involvement in therapeutic fields has led to calls for journals to institute bans on research funded not only by tobacco companies but also by their subsidiaries. Nicholas Hopkinson, professor of respiratory medicine at Imperial College London, says that, given the industry’s “longstanding history of dishonesty,” it is “very straightforward” that researchers should cut ties to companies after they are acquired by big tobacco, as otherwise they would be “working with the tobacco industry” and contributing to its profits.

“The point is to bring the tobacco industry to an end,” as its products “are lethal when used as intended,” he says.

Hidden in plain sight

In recent years the “big four” global tobacco companies (according to sales 1 )—Philip Morris International (PMI)/Altria, British American Tobacco (BAT), Imperial Brands, and Japan Tobacco International (JTI)—have invested billions in companies that produce medicines or other medical products. These investments include treatments for conditions caused or aggravated by smoking. For example, Vectura, a subsidiary of PMI since 2021, produces an inhaler used by patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma. And JTI’s pharmaceutical branch produces treatments for lung cancer, skin conditions such as psoriasis and atopic dermatitis, and heart disease.

The Investigative Desk and The BMJ searched PubMed and found hundreds of relationships between big tobacco’s medical and pharmaceutical subsidiaries and medical research.

In 876 studies on PubMed going back to 1996 the declarations of conflicts of interest reveal a relationship between at least one of the researchers and a medical company with financial ties to the tobacco industry. Many of these studies appeared in journals that lack policies on collaboration with tobacco companies. However, at least 13 journals with a tobacco policy in place also published studies (27 in total) that can be linked to companies with tobacco industry investments.

The Investigative Desk and The BMJ checked the tobacco policies of 40 top medical journals as ranked by their Clarivate impact factor score: the top 10 general medical journals and the top 10 in each of three therapeutic areas especially affected by smoking (oncology, cardiac and cardiovascular, and respiratory medicine). Of these 40 journals, only eight (20%) had policies prohibiting studies wholly or partly funded by the tobacco industry. Those that did were mainly journals dealing with lung diseases. Six of the 10 journals in the field of respiratory medicine have a tobacco policy. But of the top 10 journals in oncology only one did, and in cardiology none had one. Among the top 10 leading general medical journals only The BMJ had such a policy.

The Investigative Desk and The BMJ invited comment from all these journals or their publishers. Many of the journals that lacked a specific tobacco policy referred to their standard transparency policies regarding funding and conflicts of interest. “All financial and material support for the research and the work should be clearly and completely identified in an acknowledgement section of the manuscript,” said a JAMA spokesperson.

Some pointed out the nefarious history of the tobacco industry. The Lancet Group, calling attention to the tobacco industry’s “damaging history of distorting research and evidence to further commercial interests,” says that it is “very unlikely to publish tobacco industry funded research unless it provides a clear benefit to public and human health and only then following robust editorial and external peer review.”

Since 2013 the BMJ titles The BMJ , Heart , Thorax , and BMJ Open have had a policy not to consider tobacco funded research. BMJ’s Tobacco Control already had such a policy, as did PLoS Medicine , PLoS One , PLoS Biology , the Journal of Health Psychology , and journals published by the American Thoracic Society.

This hasn’t prevented studies funded by tobacco industry subsidiaries from being published in other BMJ journals that don’t have such a policy. 2 3 4 5

BMJ has this week updated its tobacco policy. In addition to excluding research funded by the tobacco industry, BMJ journals will also exclude work where authors have personal financial ties to the tobacco industry.

“Creating a stronger firewall between the tobacco industry and BMJ content will provide space for editors to curate and publish content that is more independent and trusted, and contributes to a healthier world,” explain the editors. 6

Head of research integrity Helen Macdonald acknowledges the challenges involved in upholding such policies: “The policy is challenging to implement for journals that rely in large part on the accuracy of authors’ declarations. It is further complicated by how the tobacco industry is defined, which also evolves, as recent moves to take over pharmaceutical companies have shown. The nature and timescale of potential authors’ personal interests are also relevant. In making decisions in complex cases BMJ puts patients and the public at the heart of the matter.”

Even among the journals that have a policy, enforcement can be difficult when it involves subsidiaries or organisations associated with the tobacco companies. Last year BMJ Open retracted a paper after it became clear that ECLAT SRL (the listed funder) was receiving sponsorship from the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World, a group supported and fully funded by PMI. 7

“Your gut feeling tells you: just quit”

European Respiratory Society journals are bound by a policy that states they will not publish work by authors who have worked for, consulted for, or had any connections to the tobacco industry or received any benefits from it since 1 January 2000. 8 Nevertheless, the society published research by the Dutch researcher van den Bosch in January 2024. 9 When Vectura, the company funding his research into the role of small airways in asthma, was taken over by PMI in 2021 he had to read about it in the media rather than through any personal communication.

The acquisition posed a dilemma: should he accept money from what was now a subsidiary of the tobacco industry or quit his research, sacrificing years of effort?

“Your gut feeling tells you: just quit. As a pulmonologist I would never get involved with a tobacco company,” says van den Bosch.

He discussed the situation with colleagues, supervisors, and medical ethicists at the Erasmus MC. “From a research perspective, we assessed whether stopping the research would be more harmful for the patient than continuing.” The researchers decided to continue the study but to publish a scientific article on the “unfortunate course of events” afterwards in BMJ Open Respiratory Research as a warning to other researchers. 10

Still, publishing van den Bosch’s research was not in breach of its policy, says the European Respiratory Society. “The research grant from Vectura was initiated in 2018. Therefore, this would not be a breach of the ERS publications and ERS conflict of interest policy relating to tobacco,” says Elin Reeves, the society’s director of publications.

Pushing for stricter policies

Other journals push for more far reaching policies on tobacco industry funding. Responding to an inquiry by The BMJ and the Investigative Desk, Filippo Crea, editor in chief of the European Heart Journal , said that his journal has “not published manuscripts sponsored by tobacco industry in the past few years” and that at present it didn’t have a defined policy but that it “will implement a policy which forbids acceptance of manuscripts sponsored by tobacco industry soon.”

The Swiss scientific publisher Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute has also included a strong statement in its tobacco code: “MDPI does not publish studies funded partially or fully by the tobacco industry.” 11 However, analysis by the Investigative Desk and The BMJ shows that 12 journals published by the MDPI include studies with a financial link to the tobacco industry. For example, in a 2024 publication on tetrahydrocannabinol in the Journal of Clinical Medicine two of the seven researchers were employees of the PMI subsidiary Vectura, according to their declarations of interests. 12 And five of the authors are paid scientific advisers or consultants.

In 2021 the MDPI journal Vaccines published a research study authored by employees of the BAT subsidiary Kentucky BioProcessing. 13 For Vaccines ’ editor in chief, Ralph Tripp, of the Department of Infectious Diseases at the University of Georgia’s College of Veterinary Medicine, this was not a reason to reject the research. “We were then (and still are) in a SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, thus there was a responsibility to evaluate stable, effective, easy-to-manufacture vaccines needed to stop the covid-19 pandemic. The manuscript in question was reviewed and subsequently accepted based on its scientific merits only. The publication did not promote anything.”

Scientists who received research grants, speaker fees, or lecture fees from JTI’s pharma division Torii Pharmaceuticals saw their studies published in various journals published by MDPI, such as Pathogens , 14 the International Journal of Molecular Sciences , 15 16 Current Issues in Molecular Biology , 17 and the Journal of Clinical Medicine . 18 19

The scientific publisher has always relied on scientists themselves to disclose any ties to the tobacco industry, says Ana Stankovic, research integrity and publication ethics specialist at MDPI. Stankovic adds, “As such, we expect all our authors to fully adhere to all our publication ethics policies and to notify us on submission of any potential conflict of interest, which includes providing detailed information on funders.” As the reaction of Vaccines ’ Tripp shows, this expectation is not always met.

MDPI will investigate all 24 cases brought to light by the Investigative Desk and The BMJ , Stankovic says.

Effects of industry links on researchers

The tobacco industry’s medical investments can have important consequences for scientists, as van den Bosch experienced. He is concerned that PMI’s acquisition of Vectura, also flagged by respiratory medicine societies as a problem, 10 can be another way to infiltrate science and deceive the public. “I would never wilfully enter into a collaboration with anything tobacco related,” he says.

His decision to continue the investigation after PMI’s takeover of Vectura put him in an awkward position, because his name has now become associated with the tobacco industry. “If you want to go to a conference, present an abstract, or submit a paper, the first thing they ask is: do you have any connections with a tobacco manufacturer? I have to say: yes.

“I am at the start of my career, I want to become a paediatrician, and I would very much like to stay active in research. My name is now associated with Vectura, and Vectura with PMI. So I am now affiliated with the tobacco industry myself.”

In other cases the industry’s investment provides an incentive for a scientist to break off relations. Liam Heaney, professor of respiratory medicine at Queen’s University Belfast, told the Investigative Desk and The BMJ in an email that he no longer wants to work with Vectura after it became a subsidiary of PMI.

Ensuring survival

With its pharmaceutical investments the tobacco industry targets many conditions caused or aggravated by smoking. 20 Vectura produces inhalers used by patients with COPD or asthma, and Fertin Pharma, a Danish subsidiary of PMI, produces nicotine gums. JTI’s pharma branch produces drugs for lung cancer, heart disease, and skin conditions, such as psoriasis and atopic dermatitis, known to be adversely affected by smoking. Imperial Brands is investing in medicinal cannabis for people living with severe chronic pain conditions and cancer. The tobacco industry’s “health drive” is taking place through dozens of companies and billions in investment, even though the sums are small when compared with its revenue from cigarettes.

Ruth Malone, professor of social behavioural sciences at the University of California and former editor in chief of BMJ’s Tobacco Control , said that institutions, professionals, and scientific journals should refuse any involvement with the tobacco industry. “Anyone who understands the history, extent, and nature of the epidemic and the tobacco industry’s strategic efforts to divide the public health community knows that industry money should be rejected,” she says.

Funding might go towards work that is only tangentially related to tobacco or to “distracting research” aimed at drawing attention away from studies the industry does not like, or a study may be designed in a way that obscures evidence that is unfavourable to the industry.

“People may not realise how their work will be deployed to advance industry strategic goals,” Malone says. The industry uses science by “stoking division around the endlessly proliferating array of new tobacco and nicotine products and their potential to be less harmful to users.”

“Tobacco companies use sponsored research conducted by their contractors in regulatory applications, public relations announcements, and even in their marketing,” says Robert Jackler, Sewall professor emeritus at the Stanford University School of Medicine. This research is intended to sow doubt, he adds.

“The tobacco industry also works through private research companies that produce ‘research’ which faithfully adheres to the business interests of the sponsoring company,” Jackler says. By transforming themselves into “quasi-pharmaceutical companies,” tobacco companies seek to burnish their tarnished image and forestall adverse regulatory attention, he adds.

Leslie London, chair of public health medicine at the University of Cape Town, says that accepting the tobacco industry’s funding for research on products aiming to ameliorate the consequences of using tobacco “is surely the most insurmountable conflict of interest imaginable.”

Medical research could even help the tobacco companies in their development of products for smoking. Studies of asthma inhalers can, for instance, be valuable for the production of cigarettes and vapes, says paediatrician Harm Tiddens, emeritus professor of paediatric pulmonology at Erasmus MC and Wytse van den Bosch’s PhD supervisor. “It is very difficult to get medications that you inhale precisely to the right place in the lungs,” says Tiddens. “That was what Wytse’s research was about. This could be interesting for a tobacco manufacturer who wants to know how to absorb nicotine as quickly as possible through the lungs.”

“The tobacco industry has a long history of strategic rebranding, and this is nothing new,” Malone says of the industry’s “beyond nicotine” 21 strategy of diversification. Caution regarding the industry should therefore be extended to its medical subsidiaries. “Once the tobacco companies get out of the business of killing people, we can talk about publishing work funded by their other drug companies,” she says.

“I see no immediate problem”—Maastricht University, the industry, and WHO

Alexander Sack, professor of brain stimulation and applied cognitive neuroscience at Maastricht University in the Netherlands, is a scientific adviser for PlatoScience, producer of technological tools for mental health illnesses such as depression. British American Tobacco owns 20% to 24.99% of the Danish company through its corporate venture capital arm BTomorrow Ventures (BTV). Sack has also published together with PlatoScience employees. 22 23

“As long as British American Tobacco does not interfere with my scientific work, I see no immediate problem,” he says. “I just don’t know anything about the size of investment, reason for investment, overall investor or funding structure, etc,” Sack says of BAT’s involvement. “BTV invested in PlatoScience before my time,” he says, “for the purpose of consumer cognitive sensations.”

In 2021 PlatoScience decided on a “radical change in the company’s focus,” in a direction not favourable to BTV, but “BTV stayed onboard as a minority shareholder,” Sack said. “I have always considered them a bit of a ‘leftover’ from the company’s previous time as a consumer goods company,” he added.

To receive a grant from the World Health Organization, Sack’s employer, Maastricht University, signed a statement that there was no collaboration between the university and the tobacco industry. Pamela Habibović, rector magnificus of the university, says that Sack’s collaboration with PlatoScience “is not a collaboration with the tobacco industry.” She adds, “The studies were not related to the tobacco industry in the broadest sense of the word. Also, PlatoScience is not a tobacco industry company.”

Maastricht University has no policy on staff engagement with tobacco companies, it says. “This does not alter the fact that permission must be requested for each external activity, which is evaluated on a case-by-case basis,” says Habibović. “It is conceivable that permission will not be granted for an external activity at PMI or BAT,” she says, adding, “It is not possible to check in public records whether a company from the tobacco industry is a shareholder of a company that we work with; after all, this is not public information.” However, the Investigative Desk was able to find such information easily online by checking annual reports, press releases, and company databases.

A BAT spokesperson said, “While BTV does have a minority investment in PlatoScience, neither BTV nor BAT is commercially or scientifically collaborating with PlatoScience and [they] have not had a working relationship with the individual in question.

“BTV invests in consumer brands, digital transformation, new technologies, and future sciences but not medical investments. When BTV invested in PlatoScience, the company’s focus was on cognitive improvement, not medical applications.”

The WHO Foundation didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Journal tobacco policies

• Download figure
• Open in new tab
• Download powerpoint

Tobacco investments and publications. An interactive version of this graphic is available at: https://bit.ly/4aDNwFH

Competing interests: The Investigative Desk is a group of investigative journalists funded through donations, grants, scholarships, and fees. Sponsors do not play a role in or have substantive influence on the research or publications. The Investigative Desk is collaborating with the Tobacco Control Research Group (TRCG) of the University of Bath on tax avoidance research. The University of Bath has also provided some financial support for that research. As the TRCG reports on its web pages, this research group receives funding from a variety of sources, including the National Institute for Health Research and Bloomberg Philanthropies. The collaboration with TRCG did not concern the present investigation.

This feature has been funded by the BMJ Investigations Unit. For details see bmj.com/investigations . This article was a collaboration with John Hansen of the Danish newspaper Politiken and was made possible with the support of Journalismfund Europe. A Dutch version of the investigation is published on Follow the Money.

Commissioning and peer review: Commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

• ↵ Who is “Big Tobacco”? STOP. https://exposetobacco.org/news/who-is-big-tobacco
• D’Haens GR ,
• Strutner S ,
• van Vollenhoven RF ,
• Smolen JS ,
• Behrens F ,
• SPIRIT H2H study group
• Macdonald H ,
• ↵ Retraction: International randomised controlled trial evaluating metabolic syndrome in type 2 diabetic cigarette smokers following switching to combustion-free nicotine delivery systems: the DIASMOKE protocol . BMJ Open 2023 ; 13 . pmid: 37339831 OpenUrl FREE Full Text
• ↵ Publication ethics and malpractice statement. European Respiratory Society. 2021. https://www.ersjournals.com/about-us/publication-ethics-and-malpractice-statement
• van den Bosch WB ,
• Andrinopoulou ER ,
• Tiddens H ,
• van de Vathorst S
• ↵ MDPI. Research and Publication Ethics. https://www.mdpi.com/ethics#_bookmark17
• Pressman P ,
• Simpson CA ,
• McCormick AA ,
• Nakagome K ,
• Batinic A ,
• Sutlovic D ,
• Maruyama H ,
• Taguchi A ,
• Locatelli F ,
• Akizawa T ,
• Van den Berg I ,
• Ganho-Ávila A ,
• Leunissen I ,
• Schuhmann T ,

TechRepublic

8 Best Data Science Tools and Software

Apache Spark and Hadoop, Microsoft Power BI, Jupyter Notebook and Alteryx are among the top data science tools for finding business insights. Compare their features, pros and cons.

EU’s AI Act: Europe’s New Rules for Artificial Intelligence

Europe's AI legislation, adopted March 13, attempts to strike a tricky balance between promoting innovation and protecting citizens' rights.

10 Best Predictive Analytics Tools and Software for 2024

Tableau, TIBCO Data Science, IBM and Sisense are among the best software for predictive analytics. Explore their features, pricing, pros and cons to find the best option for your organization.

Tableau Review: Features, Pricing, Pros and Cons

Tableau has three pricing tiers that cater to all kinds of data teams, with capabilities like accelerators and real-time analytics. And if Tableau doesn’t meet your needs, it has a few alternatives worth noting.

Top 6 Enterprise Data Storage Solutions for 2024

Amazon, IDrive, IBM, Google, NetApp and Wasabi offer some of the top enterprise data storage solutions. Explore their features and benefits, and find the right solution for your organization's needs.

Latest Articles

Cisco Talos: LilacSquid Threat Actor Targets Multiple Sectors Worldwide With PurpleInk Malware

Find out how the cyberespionage threat actor LilacSquid operates, and then learn how to protect your business from this security risk.

IBM’s Think 2024 News That Should Help Skills & Productivity Issues in Australia

TechRepublic interviewed IBM’s managing director for Australia about how announcements from the recent Think event could impact the tech industry in particular.

Cisco Live 2024: New Unified Observability Experience Packages Cisco & Splunk Insight Tools

The observability suite is the first major overhaul for Splunk products since the Cisco acquisition. Plus, Mistral AI makes a deal with Cisco’s incubator.

Top Tech Conferences & Events to Add to Your Calendar in 2024

A great way to stay current with the latest technology trends and innovations is by attending conferences. Read and bookmark our 2024 tech events guide.

Intel Lunar Lake NPU Brings 48 TOPS of AI Acceleration

Competition for AI speed heats up. Plus, the first of the two new Xeon 6 processors is now available, and Gaudi 3 deals have been cinched with manufacturers.

Cisco Live 2024: Cisco Unveils AI Deployment Solution With NVIDIA

A $1 billion commitment will send Cisco money to Cohere, Mistral AI and Scale AI.

The 5 Best Udemy Courses That Are Worth Taking in 2024

Udemy is an online platform for learning at your own pace. Boost your career with our picks for the best Udemy courses for learning tech skills online in 2024.

What Is Data Quality? Definition and Best Practices

Data quality refers to the degree to which data is accurate, complete, reliable and relevant for its intended use.

TechRepublic Premium Editorial Calendar: Policies, Checklists, Hiring Kits and Glossaries for Download

TechRepublic Premium content helps you solve your toughest IT issues and jump-start your career or next project.

What is the EU’s AI Office? New Body Formed to Oversee the Rollout of General Purpose Models and AI Act

The AI Office will be responsible for enforcing the rules of the AI Act, ensuring its implementation across Member States, funding AI and robotics innovation and more.

What is Data Science? Benefits, Techniques and Use Cases

Data science involves extracting valuable insights from complex datasets. While this process can be technically challenging and time-consuming, it can lead to better business decision-making.

Gartner’s 7 Predictions for the Future of Australian & Global Cloud Computing

An explosion in AI computing, a big shift in workloads to the cloud, and difficulties in gaining value from hybrid cloud strategies are among the trends Australian cloud professionals will see to 2028.

OpenAI Adds PwC as Its First Resale Partner for the ChatGPT Enterprise Tier

PwC employees have 100,000 ChatGPT Enterprise seats. Plus, OpenAI forms a new safety and security committee in their quest for more powerful AI, and seals media deals.

What Is Contact Management? Importance, Benefits and Tools

Contact management ensures accurate, organized and accessible information for effective communication and relationship building.

How to Use Tableau: A Step-by-Step Tutorial for Beginners

Learn how to use Tableau with this guide. From creating visualizations to analyzing data, this guide will help you master the essentials of Tableau.

Create a TechRepublic Account

Get the web's best business technology news, tutorials, reviews, trends, and analysis—in your inbox. Let's start with the basics.

* - indicates required fields

Sign in to TechRepublic

Lost your password? Request a new password

Reset Password

Please enter your email adress. You will receive an email message with instructions on how to reset your password.

Check your email for a password reset link. If you didn't receive an email don't forgot to check your spam folder, otherwise contact support .

Welcome. Tell us a little bit about you.

This will help us provide you with customized content.

Want to receive more TechRepublic news?

You're all set.

Thanks for signing up! Keep an eye out for a confirmation email from our team. To ensure any newsletters you subscribed to hit your inbox, make sure to add [email protected] to your contacts list.