Suits research exploring:• Changing behaviours within health contexts to address patient and carer practices• Changing behaviours regarding environmental concerns• Barriers and enablers to behaviour/ practice/ implementation• Intervention planning and implementation• Post-evaluation• Promoting physical activity
As discussed in Chapter 3, qualitative research is not an absolute science. While not all research may need a framework or theory (particularly descriptive studies, outlined in Chapter 5), the use of a framework or theory can help to position the research questions, research processes and conclusions and implications within the relevant research paradigm. Theories and frameworks also help to bring to focus areas of the research problem that may not have been considered.
Qualitative Research – a practical guide for health and social care researchers and practitioners Copyright © 2023 by Tess Tsindos is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.
Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.
Published on 8 July 2022 by Sarah Vinz . Revised on 10 October 2022.
Your theoretical framework defines the key concepts in your research, suggests relationships between them, and discusses relevant theories based on your literature review .
A strong theoretical framework gives your research direction, allowing you to convincingly interpret, explain, and generalise from your findings.
Be assured that you'll submit flawless writing. Upload your document to correct all your mistakes.
Sample problem statement and research questions, sample theoretical framework, your theoretical framework, frequently asked questions about sample theoretical frameworks.
Your theoretical framework is based on:
To investigate this problem, you have zeroed in on the following problem statement, objective, and research questions:
The concepts of ‘customer loyalty’ and ‘customer satisfaction’ are clearly central to this study, along with their relationship to the likelihood that a customer will return. Your theoretical framework should define these concepts and discuss theories about the relationship between these variables.
Some sub-questions could include:
As the concepts of ‘loyalty’ and ‘customer satisfaction’ play a major role in the investigation and will later be measured, they are essential concepts to define within your theoretical framework .
Below is a simplified example showing how you can describe and compare theories. In this example, we focus on the concept of customer satisfaction introduced above.
Customer satisfaction
Thomassen (2003, p. 69) defines customer satisfaction as ‘the perception of the customer as a result of consciously or unconsciously comparing their experiences with their expectations’. Kotler and Keller (2008, p. 80) build on this definition, stating that customer satisfaction is determined by ‘the degree to which someone is happy or disappointed with the observed performance of a product in relation to his or her expectations’.
Performance that is below expectations leads to a dissatisfied customer, while performance that satisfies expectations produces satisfied customers (Kotler & Keller, 2003, p. 80).
The definition of Zeithaml and Bitner (2003, p. 86) is slightly different from that of Thomassen. They posit that ‘satisfaction is the consumer fulfillment response. It is a judgement that a product or service feature, or the product of service itself, provides a pleasurable level of consumption-related fulfillment.’ Zeithaml and Bitner’s emphasis is thus on obtaining a certain satisfaction in relation to purchasing.
Thomassen’s definition is the most relevant to the aims of this study, given the emphasis it places on unconscious perception. Although Zeithaml and Bitner, like Thomassen, say that customer satisfaction is a reaction to the experience gained, there is no distinction between conscious and unconscious comparisons in their definition.
The boutique claims in its mission statement that it wants to sell not only a product, but also a feeling. As a result, unconscious comparison will play an important role in the satisfaction of its customers. Thomassen’s definition is therefore more relevant.
Thomassen’s Customer Satisfaction Model
According to Thomassen, both the so-called ‘value proposition’ and other influences have an impact on final customer satisfaction. In his satisfaction model (Fig. 1), Thomassen shows that word-of-mouth, personal needs, past experiences, and marketing and public relations determine customers’ needs and expectations.
These factors are compared to their experiences, with the interplay between expectations and experiences determining a customer’s satisfaction level. Thomassen’s model is important for this study as it allows us to determine both the extent to which the boutique’s customers are satisfied, as well as where improvements can be made.
Figure 1 Customer satisfaction creation
Of course, you could analyse the concepts more thoroughly and compare additional definitions to each other. You could also discuss the theories and ideas of key authors in greater detail and provide several models to illustrate different concepts.
A theoretical framework can sometimes be integrated into a literature review chapter , but it can also be included as its own chapter or section in your dissertation . As a rule of thumb, if your research involves dealing with a lot of complex theories, it’s a good idea to include a separate theoretical framework chapter.
While a theoretical framework describes the theoretical underpinnings of your work based on existing research, a conceptual framework allows you to draw your own conclusions, mapping out the variables you may use in your study and the interplay between them.
A literature review and a theoretical framework are not the same thing and cannot be used interchangeably. While a theoretical framework describes the theoretical underpinnings of your work, a literature review critically evaluates existing research relating to your topic. You’ll likely need both in your dissertation .
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.
Vinz, S. (2022, October 10). Example Theoretical Framework of a Dissertation or Thesis. Scribbr. Retrieved 18 June 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/example-theoretical-framework/
Sarah's academic background includes a Master of Arts in English, a Master of International Affairs degree, and a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science. She loves the challenge of finding the perfect formulation or wording and derives much satisfaction from helping students take their academic writing up a notch.
What is a theoretical framework | a step-by-step guide, dissertation & thesis outline | example & free templates, what is a research methodology | steps & tips.
https://doi.org/10.1136/ebnurs-2019-103077
Request permissions.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Often the most difficult part of a research study is preparing the proposal based around a theoretical or philosophical framework. Graduate students ‘…express confusion, a lack of knowledge, and frustration with the challenge of choosing a theoretical framework and understanding how to apply it’. 1 However, the importance in understanding and applying a theoretical framework in research cannot be overestimated.
The choice of a theoretical framework for a research study is often a reflection of the researcher’s ontological (nature of being) and epistemological (theory of knowledge) perspective. We will not delve into these concepts, or personal philosophy in this article. Rather we will focus on how a theoretical framework can be integrated into research.
The theoretical framework is a blueprint for your research project 1 and serves several purposes. It informs the problem you have identified, the purpose and significance of your research demonstrating how your research fits with what is already known (relationship to existing theory and research). This provides a basis for your research questions, the literature review and the methodology and analysis that you choose. 1 Evidence of your chosen theoretical framework should be visible in every aspect of your research and should demonstrate the contribution of this research to knowledge. 2
A theory is an explanation of a concept or an abstract idea of a phenomenon. An example of a theory is Bandura’s middle range theory of self-efficacy, 3 or the level of confidence one has in achieving a goal. Self-efficacy determines the coping behaviours that a person will exhibit when facing obstacles. Those who have high self-efficacy are likely to apply adequate effort leading to successful outcomes, while those with low self-efficacy are more likely to give up earlier and ultimately fail. Any research that is exploring concepts related to self-efficacy or the ability to manage difficult life situations might apply Bandura’s theoretical framework to their study.
Example 1: the big five theoretical framework.
The first example includes research which integrates the ‘Big Five’, a theoretical framework that includes concepts related to teamwork. These include team leadership, mutual performance monitoring, backup behaviour, adaptability and team orientation. 4 In order to conduct research incorporating a theoretical framework, the concepts need to be defined according to a frame of reference. This provides a means to understand the theoretical framework as it relates to a specific context and provides a mechanism for measurement of the concepts.
In this example, the concepts of the Big Five were given a conceptual definition, that provided a broad meaning and then an operational definition, which was more concrete. 4 From here, a survey was developed that reflected the operational definitions related to teamwork in nursing: the Nursing Teamwork Survey (NTS). 5 In this case, the concepts used in the theoretical framework, the Big Five, were the used to develop a survey specific to teamwork in nursing.
The NTS was used in research of nurses at one hospital in northeastern Ontario. Survey questions were grouped into subscales for analysis, that reflected the concepts of the Big Five. 6 For example, one finding of this study was that the nurses from the surgical unit rated the items in the subscale of ’team leadership' (one of the concepts in the Big Five) significantly lower than in the other units. The researchers looked back to the definition of this concept in the Big Five in their interpretation of the findings. Since the definition included a person(s) who has the leadership skills to facilitate teamwork among the nurses on the unit, the conclusion in this study was that the surgical unit lacked a mentor, or facilitator for teamwork. In this way, the theory of teamwork was presented through a set of concepts in a theoretical framework. The Theoretical Framework (TF)was the foundation for development of a survey related to a specific context, used to measure each of the concepts within the TF. Then, the analysis and results circled back to the concepts within the TF and provided a guide for the discussion and conclusions arising from the research.
In another study which explored adherence to intravenous chemotherapy in African-American and Caucasian Women with early stage breast cancer, an adapted version of the Health Decisions Model (HDM) was used as the theoretical basis for the study. 7 The HDM, a revised version of the Health Belief Model, incorporates some aspects of the Health Belief Model and factors relating to patient preferences. 8 The HDM consists of six interrelated constituents that might predict how well a person adheres to a health decision. These include sociodemographic, social interaction, experience, knowledge, general and specific health beliefs and patient preferences, and are clearly defined. The HDM model was used to explore factors which might influence adherence to chemotherapy in women with breast cancer. Sociodemographic, social interaction, knowledge, personal experience and specific health beliefs were used as predictors of adherence to chemotherapy.
The findings were reported using the theoretical framework to discuss results. The study found that delay to treatment, health insurance, depression and symptom severity were predictors to starting chemotherapy which could potentially be adapted with clinical interventions. The findings from the study contribute to the existing body of literature related to cancer nursing.
In this final example, research was conducted to determine the nursing processes that were associated with unexpected intensive care unit admissions. 9 The framework was the Nursing Role Effectiveness Model. In this theoretical framework, the concepts within Donabedian’s Quality Framework of Structure, Process and Outcome were each defined according to nursing practice. 10 11 Processes defined in the Nursing Role Effectiveness Model were used to identify the nursing process variables that were measured in the study.
A theoretical framework should be logically presented and represent the concepts, variables and relationships related to your research study, in order to clearly identify what will be examined, described or measured. It involves reading the literature and identifying a research question(s) while clearly defining and identifying the existing relationship between concepts and theories (related to your research questions[s] in the literature). You must then identify what you will examine or explore in relation to the concepts of the theoretical framework. Once you present your findings using the theoretical framework you will be able to articulate how your study relates to and may potentially advance your chosen theory and add to knowledge.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Patient and public involvement Not required.
What is it.
How to make a theoretical framework.
Some additional helpful resources in constructing a theoretical framework for study:.
The term conceptual framework and theoretical framework are often and erroneously used interchangeably (Grant & Osanloo, 2014). A theoretical framework provides the theoretical assumptions for the larger context of a study, and is the foundation or ‘lens’ by which a study is developed. This framework helps to ground the research focus understudy within theoretical underpinnings and to frame the inquiry for data analysis and interpretation. The application of theory in traditional theoretical research is to understand, explain, and predict phenomena (Swanson, 2013).
Casanave, C.P.,& Li,Y.(2015). Novices’ struggles with conceptual and theoretical framing in writing dissertations and papers for publication. Publications,3 (2),104-119.doi:10.3390/publications3020104
Grant, C., & Osanloo, A. (2014). Understanding, Selecting, and Integrating a Theoretical Framework in Dissertation Research: Creating the Blueprint for Your “House. ” Administrative Issues Journal: Connecting Education, Practice, and Research, 4(2), 12–26
Swanson, R. (2013). Theory building in applied disciplines . San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
212k Accesses
26 Citations
39 Altmetric
Explore all metrics
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Other than the poor or non-existent validity and/or reliability of data collection measures, the lack of a theoretical framework is the most frequently cited reason for our editorial decision not to publish a manuscript in the Journal of Science Teacher Education . A poor or missing theoretical framework is similarly a critical problem for manuscripts submitted to other journals for which Norman or Judith have either served as Editor or been on the Editorial Board. Often the problem is that an author fails to justify his/her research effort with a theoretical framework. However, there is another level to the problem. Many individuals have a rather narrow conception of what constitutes a theoretical framework or that it is somehow distinct from a conceptual framework. The distinction on lack thereof is a story for another day. The following story may remind you of an experience you or one of your classmates have had.
Doctoral students live in fear of hearing these now famous words from their thesis advisor: “This sounds like a promising study, but what is your theoretical framework?” These words instantly send the harried doctoral student to the library (giving away our ages) in search of a theory to support the proposed research and to satisfy his/her advisor. The search is often unsuccessful because of the student’s misconception of what constitutes a “theoretical framework.” The framework may actually be a theory, but not necessarily. This is especially true for theory driven research (typically quantitative) that is attempting to test the validity of existing theory. However, this narrow definition of a theoretical framework is commonly not aligned with qualitative research paradigms that are attempting to develop theory, for example, grounded theory, or research falling into the categories of description and interpretation research (Peshkin, 1993 ). Additionally, a large proportion of doctoral theses do not fit the narrow definition described. The argument here is not that various research paradigms have no overarching philosophies or theories about knowing. Clearly quantitative research paradigms are couched in a realist perspective and qualitative research paradigms are couched in an idealist perspective (Bogdan & Biklen, 1982 ). The discussion here is focused on theoretical frameworks at a much more specific and localized perspective with respect to the justification and conceptualization of a single research investigation. So, what is a theoretical framework?
It is, perhaps, easier to understand the nature and function of a theoretical framework if it is viewed as the answer to two basic questions:
What is the problem or question?
Why is your approach to solving the problem or answering the question feasible?
Indeed, the answers to these questions are the substance and culmination of Chapters I and II of the proposal and completed dissertation, or the initial sections preceding the Methods section of a research article. The answers to these questions can come from only one source, a thorough review of the literature (i.e., a review that includes both the theoretical and empirical literature as well as apparent gaps in the literature). Perhaps, a hypothetical situation can best illustrate the development and role of the theoretical framework in the formalization of a dissertation topic or research investigation. Let us continue with the doctoral student example, keeping in mind that a parallel situation also presents itself to any researcher planning research that he/she intends to publish.
As an interested reader of educational literature, a doctoral student becomes intrigued by the importance of questioning in the secondary classroom. The student immediately begins a manual and computer search of the literature on questioning in the classroom. The student notices that the research findings on the effectiveness of questioning strategies are rather equivocal. In particular, much of the research focuses on the cognitive levels of the questions asked by the teacher and how these questions influence student achievement. It appears that the research findings exhibit no clear pattern. That is, in some studies, frequent questioning at higher cognitive levels has led to more achievement than frequent questioning at the lower cognitive levels. However, an equal number of investigations have shown no differences between the achievement of students who are exposed to questions at distinctly different cognitive levels, but rather the simple frequency of questions.
The doctoral student becomes intrigued by these equivocal findings and begins to speculate about some possible explanations. In a blinding flash of insight, the student remembers hearing somewhere that an eccentric Frenchman named Piaget said something about students being categorized into levels of cognitive development. Could it be that a student’s cognitive level has something to do with how much and what he/she learns? The student heads back to the library and methodically searches through the literature on cognitive development and its relationship to achievement.
At this point, the doctoral student has become quite familiar with two distinct lines of educational research. The research on the effectiveness of questioning has established that there is a problem. That is, does the cognitive level of questioning have any effect on student achievement? In effect, this answers the first question identified previously with respect to identification of a theoretical framework. The research on the cognitive development of students has provided an intriguing perspective. That is, could it be possible that students of different cognitive levels are affected differently by questions at different cognitive levels? If so, an answer to the problem concerning the effectiveness questioning may be at hand. This latter question, in effect, has addressed the second question previously posed about the identification of a theoretical framework. At this point, the student has narrowed his/her interests as a result of reviewing the literature. Note that the doctoral student is now ready to write down a specific research question and that this is only possible after having conducted a thorough review of the literature.
The student writes down the following research hypotheses:
Both high and low cognitive level pupils will benefit from both high and low cognitive levels of questions as opposed to no questions at all.
Pupils categorized at high cognitive levels will benefit more from high cognitive level questions than from low level questions.
Pupils categorized at lower cognitive levels will benefit more from low cognitive level questions than from high level questions.
These research questions still need to be transformed into testable statistical hypotheses, but they are ready to be presented to the dissertation advisor. The advisor looks at the questions and says: “This looks like a promising study, but what is your theoretical framework?” There is no need, however for a sprint to the library. The doctoral student has a theoretical framework. The literature on questioning has established that there is a problem and the literature on cognitive development has provided the rationale for performing the specific investigation that is being proposed. ALL IS WELL!
If some of the initial research completed by Norman concerning what classroom variables contributed to students’ understandings of nature of science (Lederman, 1986a , 1986b ; Lederman & Druger, 1985 ) had to align with the overly restricted definition of a theoretical framework, which necessitates the presence of theory, it never would have been published. In these initial studies, various classroom variables were identified that were related to students’ improved understandings of nature of science. The studies were descriptive and correlational and were not driven by any theory about how students learn nature of science. Indeed, the design of the studies was derived from the fact that there were no existing theories, general or specific, to explain how students might learn nature of science more effectively. Similarly, the seminal study of effective teaching, the Beginning Teacher Evaluation Study (Tikunoff, Berliner, & Rist, 1975 ), was an ethnographic study that was not guided by the findings of previous research on effective teaching. Rather, their inductive study simply compared 40 teachers “known” to be effective and ineffective of mathematics and reading to derive differences in classroom practice. Their study had no theoretical framework if one were to use the restrictive conception that a theory needed to provide a guiding framework for the investigation. There are plenty of other examples that have guided lines of research that could be provided, but there is no need to beat a dead horse by detailing more examples. The simple, but important, point is that research following qualitative research paradigms or traditions (Jacob, 1987 ; Smith, 1987 ) are particularly vulnerable to how ‘theoretical framework’ is defined. Indeed, it could be argued that the necessity of a theory is a remnant from the times in which qualitative research was not as well accepted as it is today. In general, any research design that is inductive in nature and attempts to develop theory would be at a loss. We certainly would not want to eliminate multiple traditions of research from the Journal of Science Teacher Education .
Harry Wolcott’s discussion about validity in qualitative research (Wolcott, 1990 ) is quite explicit about the lack of theory or necessity of theory in driving qualitative ethnography. Interestingly, he even rejects the idea of validity as being a necessary criterion in qualitative research. Additionally, Bogdan and Biklen ( 1982 ) emphasize the importance of qualitative researchers “bracketing” (i.e., masking or trying to forget) their a priori theories so that it does not influence the collection of data or any meanings assigned to data during an investigation. Similar discussions about how qualitative research differs from quantitative research with respect to the necessity of theory guiding the research have been advanced by many others (e.g., Becker, 1970 ; Bogdan & Biklen, 1982 ; Erickson, 1986 ; Krathwohl, 2009 ; Rist, 1977 ; among others). Perhaps, Peshkin ( 1993 , p. 23) put it best when he expressed his concern that “Research that is not theory driven, hypothesis testing, or generalization producing may be dismissed as deficient or worse.” Again, the key point is that qualitative research is as valuable and can contribute as much to our knowledge of teaching and learning as quantitative research.
There is little doubt that qualitative researchers often invoke theory when analyzing the data they have collected or try to place their findings within the context of the existing literature. And, as stated at the beginning of this editorial, different research paradigms have large overarching theories about how one comes to know about the world. However, this is not the same thing has using a theory as a framework for the design of an investigation from the stating of research questions to developing a design to answer the research questions.
It is quite possible that you may be thinking that this editorial about the meaning of a theoretical framework is too theoretical. Trust us in believing that there is a very practical reason for us addressing this issue. At the beginning of the editorial we talked about the lack of a theoretical framework being the second most common reason for manuscripts being rejected for publication in the Journal of Science Teacher Education . Additionally, we mentioned that this is a common reason for manuscripts being rejected by other prominent journals in science education, and education in general. Consequently, it is of critical importance that we, as a community, are clear about the meaning of a theoretical framework and its use. It is especially important that our authors, reviewers, associate editors, and we as Editors of the journal are clear on this matter. Let us not fail to mention that most of us are advising Ph.D. students in the conceptualization of their dissertations. This issue is not new. In 1992, the editorial board of the Journal of Research in Science Teaching was considering the claim, by some, that qualitative research was not being evaluated fairly for publication relative to quantitative research. In their analysis of the relative success of publication for quantitative and qualitative research, Wandersee and Demastes ( 1992 , p. 1005) noted that reviewers often noted, “The manuscript had a weak theoretical basis” when reviewing qualitative research.
Theoretical frameworks are critically important to all of our work, quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods. All research articles should have a valid theoretical framework to justify the importance and significance of the work. However, we should not live in fear, as the doctoral student, of not having a theoretical framework, when we actually have such, because an Editor, reviewer, or Major Professor is using any unduly restrictive and outdated meaning for what constitutes a theoretical framework.
Becker, H. (1970). Sociological work: Methods and substance . New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
Google Scholar
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1982). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods . Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 119–161). New York: Macmillan.
Jacob, E. (1987). Qualitative research traditions: A review. Review of Educational Research, 57 , 1–50.
Article Google Scholar
Krathwohl, D. R. (2009). Methods of educational and social science research . Logrove, IL: Waveland Press.
Lederman, N. G. (1986a). Relating teaching behavior and classroom climate to changes in students’ conceptions of the nature of science. Science Education, 70 (1), 3–19.
Lederman, N. G. (1986b). Students’ and teachers’ understanding of the nature of science: A reassessment. School Science and Mathematics, 86 , 91–99.
Lederman, N. G., & Druger, M. (1985). Classroom factors related to changes in students’ conceptions of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22 , 649–662.
Peshkin, A. (1993). The goodness of qualitative research. Educational Researcher, 22 (2), 24–30.
Rist, R. (1977). On the relations among educational research paradigms: From disdain to détente. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 8 , 42–49.
Smith, M. L. (1987). Publishing qualitative research. American Educational Research Journal, 24 (2), 173–183.
Tikunoff, W. J., Berliner, D. C., & Rist, R. C. (1975). Special study A: An enthnographic study of forty classrooms of the beginning teacher evaluation study known sample . Sacramento, CA: California Commission for Teacher Preparation and Licensing.
Wandersee, J. H., & Demastes, S. (1992). An analysis of the relative success of qualitative and quantitative manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Research in Science Teaching . Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29 , 1005–1010.
Wolcott, H. F. (1990). On seeking, and rejecting, validity in qualitative research. In E. W. Eisner & A. Peshkin (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry in education (pp. 121–152). New York: Teachers College Press.
Download references
Authors and affiliations.
Chicago, IL, USA
Norman G. Lederman & Judith S. Lederman
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Correspondence to Norman G. Lederman .
Lederman, N.G., Lederman, J.S. What Is A Theoretical Framework? A Practical Answer. J Sci Teacher Educ 26 , 593–597 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-015-9443-2
Download citation
Published : 30 November 2015
Issue Date : November 2015
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-015-9443-2
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
Revisiting conceptual frameworks, differences between conceptual and theoretical frameworks, examples of theoretical and conceptual frameworks, developing frameworks for your study.
Theoretical and conceptual frameworks are both essential components of research, guiding and structuring the research. Although they are closely related, the conceptual and theoretical framework in any research project serve distinct purposes and have different characteristics. In this section, we provide an overview of the key differences between theoretical and conceptual frameworks.
Theoretical and conceptual frameworks are foundational components of any research study. They each play a crucial role in guiding and structuring the research, from the formation of research questions to the interpretation of results .
While both the theoretical and conceptual framework provides a structure for a study, they serve different functions and can impact the research in distinct ways depending on how they are combined. These differences might seem subtle, but they can significantly impact your research design and outcomes, which is why it is important to think through each one of them.
The theoretical framework describes the broader lens through which the researcher views the topic and guides their overall understanding and approach. It connects the theoretical perspective to the data collection and data analysis strategy and offers a structure for organizing and interpreting the collected data.
On the other hand, the conceptual framework describes in detail and connects specific concepts and variables to illustrate potential relationships between them. It serves as a guide for assessing which aspects of the data are relevant and specifying how the research question is being answered. While the theoretical framework outlines how more abstract-level theories shape the study, the conceptual framework operationalizes the empirical observations that can be connected to theory and broader understanding.
Understanding these differences is crucial when designing and conducting your research study. In this chapter, we will look deeper at the distinctions between these types of frameworks, and how they interplay in qualitative research . We aim to provide you with a solid understanding of both, allowing you to effectively utilize them in your own research.
Theoretical frameworks play a central role in research, serving as the bedrock of any investigation. This section offers a refresher on the essential elements and functions of theoretical frameworks in research.
A theoretical framework refers to existing theory, concepts, and definitions that you use to collect relevant data and offer meaningful empirical findings. Providing an overall orientation or lens, it guides your understanding of the research problem and directs your approach to data collection and analysis .
Your chosen theoretical framework directly influences your research questions and methodological choices . It contains specific theories or sets of assumptions drawn from relevant disciplines—such as sociology, psychology, or economics—that you apply to understand your research topic. These existing models and concepts are tools to help you organize and make sense of your data.
The theoretical framework also plays a key role in crafting your research questions and objectives. By determining the theories that are relevant to your research, the theoretical framework shapes the nature and direction of your study. It's essential to note, however, that the theoretical framework's role in qualitative research is not to predict outcomes. Instead, it offers a broader structure to understand and interpret your data, enabling you to situate your findings within the broader academic discourse in a way that makes your research findings meaningful to you and your research audience.
Conceptual frameworks , though related to theoretical frameworks , serve distinct functions within research. This section reexamines the characteristics and functions of conceptual frameworks to provide a better understanding of their roles in qualitative research .
A conceptual framework, in essence, is a system of concepts, assumptions, and beliefs that supports and informs your research. It outlines the specific variables or concepts you'll examine in your study and proposes relationships between them. It's more detailed and specific than a theoretical framework, acting as a contextualized guide for the collection and interpretation of empirical data.
The main role of a conceptual framework is to illustrate the presumed relationships between the variables or concepts you're investigating. These variables or concepts, which you derive from your theoretical framework, are integral to your research questions , objectives, and hypotheses . The conceptual framework shows how you theorize these concepts are related, providing a visual or narrative model of your research.
A study's own conceptual framework plays a vital role in guiding the data collection process and the subsequent analysis . The conceptual framework specifies which data you need to collect and provides a structure for interpreting and making sense of the collected data. For instance, if your conceptual framework identifies a particular variable as impacting another, your data collection and analysis will be geared towards investigating this relationship.
Turn your data into insights easily and efficiently with our intuitive software. Download a free trial of ATLAS.ti.
Though interconnected, theoretical and conceptual frameworks have distinct roles in research and contribute differently to the research. This section will contrast the two in terms of scope, purpose, their role in the research process, and their relationship to the data analysis strategy and research question .
Theoretical and conceptual frameworks differ fundamentally in their scope. Theoretical frameworks provide a broad and general view of the research problem, rooted in established theories. They explain phenomena by applying a particular theoretical lens. Conceptual frameworks, on the other hand, offer a more focused view of the specific research problem. They explicitly outline the concrete concepts and variables involved in the study and the relationships between them.
While both frameworks guide the research process, they do so in different ways. Theoretical frameworks guide the overall approach to understanding the research problem by indicating the broader conversation the researcher is contributing to and shaping the research questions.
Conceptual frameworks provide a map for the study, guiding the data collection and interpretation process, including what variables or concepts to explore and how to analyze them.
The two types of frameworks relate differently to the research question and design. The theoretical framework often inspires the research question based on previous theories' predictions or understanding about the phenomena under investigation. A conceptual framework then emerges from the research question, providing a contextualized structure for what exactly the research will explore.
Theoretical and conceptual frameworks also play distinct roles in data analysis. Theoretical frameworks provide the lens for interpreting the data, informing what kinds of themes and patterns might be relevant. Conceptual frameworks, however, present the variables concepts and variables and the relationships among them that will be analyzed. Conceptual frameworks may illustrate concepts and relationships based on previous theory, but they can also include novel concepts or relationships that stem from the particular context being studied.
Finally, the two types of frameworks relate differently to the research question and design. The theoretical framework basically differs from the conceptual framework in that it often inspires the research question based on the theories' predictions about the phenomena under investigation. A conceptual framework, on the other hand, emerges from the research question, providing a structure for investigating it.
Using case studies , we can effectively demonstrate the differences between theoretical and conceptual frameworks. Let’s take a look at some real-world examples that highlight the unique role and function of each framework within a research context.
Consider a study exploring the impact of classroom environments on student learning outcomes. The theoretical framework might be grounded in Piaget's theory of cognitive development, which offers a broad lens for understanding how students learn and process information.
Within this theoretical framework, the researcher formulates the conceptual framework. The conceptual framework identifies specific variables to study such as classroom layout, teacher-student ratio, availability of learning materials, and student performance as the dependent variable. It then outlines the expected relationships between these variables, such as proposing that a lower teacher-student ratio and well-equipped classrooms positively impact student performance.
Another study might aim to understand the factors influencing the job satisfaction of employees in a corporate setting. The theoretical framework could be based on Maslow's hierarchy of needs, interpreting job satisfaction in terms of fulfilling employees' physiological, safety, social, esteem, and self-actualization needs.
From this theoretical perspective, the researcher constructs the conceptual framework, identifying specific variables such as salary (physiological needs), job security (safety needs), teamwork (social needs), recognition (esteem needs), and career development opportunities (self-actualization needs). The conceptual framework proposes relationships among these variables and job satisfaction, such as higher salaries and more recognition being related to higher job satisfaction.
After understanding the unique roles and functions of these types of frameworks, you might ask: How do I develop them for my study? It's essential to remember that it's not a question of choosing one over the other, as both frameworks can and often do coexist within the same research project.
The choice of a theoretical and a conceptual framework often depends on the nature of your research question . If your research question is more exploratory and requires a broad understanding of the problem, a theoretical framework can provide a useful lens for interpretation. However, your conceptual framework may end up looking rather different to previous theory as you collect data and discover new concepts or relationships.
Consider the nature of your research problem as well. If you are studying a well-researched problem and there are established theories about it, using a theoretical framework to interpret your findings in light of these theories might be beneficial. But if your study explores a novel problem or aims to understand specific processes or relationships, developing a conceptual framework that maps these specific elements could prove more effective.
Your research methodology could also inform your choice. If your study is more interpretive and aims to understand people's experiences and perceptions, a theoretical framework can outline broader concepts that are relevant to approaching your study. Your conceptual framework can then shed light on the specific concepts that emerged in your data. By carefully thinking through your theoretical and conceptual frameworks, you can effectively utilize both types of frameworks in your research, ensuring a solid foundation for your study.
Use our software for every stage of your research project. Trya free trial of ATLAS.ti today.
Discover the world's research
The Plagiarism Checker Online For Your Academic Work
Start Plagiarism Check
Editing & Proofreading for Your Research Paper
Get it proofread now
Online Printing & Binding with Free Express Delivery
Configure binding now
Plagiarism Check within 10min
Printing & Binding with 3D Live Preview
How do you like this article cancel reply.
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
An example of a theoretical framework anchors a research paper to a specific theory. Researchers use theoretical frameworks in various fields to provide a premise for the ideas proposed in a research publication. It typically entails the key concepts, theories, and ideas that shape the methodology and research question. This article delves into an example of a theoretical framework, exploring how it functions as an integral component of research design, leading to the conclusion.
Inhaltsverzeichnis
An example of a theoretical framework is a structure that defines the main ideas in a thesis or dissertation . It limits the breadth of the study by narrowing the focus to key variables and their relationship. Theoretical frameworks also give a researcher the specific structure that guides the collection and interpretation of the relevant data in a research proposal .
The example of a theoretical framework is based on:
Find an example of a research question and problem statement below:
An insurance company is having a hard time cross-selling its products. The sales department has realized that most of the customers hold just one policy, although the company offers over ten unique policies. The company would like to have its customers purchase more than one policy since it is clear most customers are purchasing other policies from other companies.
The sales and marketing department wants to increase product awareness. They have concluded that more product awareness will improve the uptake of other products by the existing customers.
To analyze this problem, you have formulated a problem statement, objective, and a research question as follows:
In this study, the concept of “product awareness” is the main focus, alongside the chances that it will improve sales across other products. The example of a theoretical framework should analyze this concept and propose theories that discuss the relationship between the two variables.
In the following example, we define the concept of product awareness mentioned above.
Explains product awareness as the degree to which customers are familiar with a company's product. She further emphasizes that product awareness is an important step in selling a new product and informing customers about other products or services sold by a company. | |
States that product awareness is the lever that associates a particular product with a company. She associates product awareness with visual cues that identify a product in the marketplace without a product name. | |
Offers a more detailed definition of product awareness, identifying prior knowledge of a product as a strong sales driver. He states that the first step in any purchase is knowing that the product exists in a company's product line. He continues to identify the impact of targeted marketing to ensure the right products are marketed to the right potential customers. |
Spacey’s description is more compatible with the study as it highlights the importance of conscious marketing strategies to improve product awareness. Although Kopp and Marrs clearly define product awareness, they don’t propose an actionable step in analyzing product awareness.
The insurance company wants to maximize product awareness as part of its long-term strategy. As a result, targeted marketing will ensure the products are divided and advertised to the most potential buyers.
Spacey’s Product Awareness Work Plan
According to Spacey, the more aware your target customer base is of your range of products, the easier it is to sell more products to an individual customer. Spacey explains that product awareness simplifies promoting your products through different mediums, introducing new products, building a strong reputation, and retaining customers.
An example of a theoretical framework is based on the problem statemen t, research questions , and review of literature sources . These essential elements guide data collection , analysis, and generalization of the findings.
A research question is a component of an example of a theoretical framework in research. It is the specific question that forms the basis of the solution proposed by a researcher at the end of a study.
You need an example of a theoretical framework when undertaking a study with several existing theories. The theoretical framework assists you in reviewing your sources and creating the most relevant research questions.
Begin by identifying your main concepts and variables. Evaluate and summarize probable theories and show how your findings correspond to the identified theories.
We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential, while others help us to improve this website and your experience.
Individual Privacy Preferences
Cookie Details Privacy Policy Imprint
Here you will find an overview of all cookies used. You can give your consent to whole categories or display further information and select certain cookies.
Accept all Save
Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the proper function of the website.
Show Cookie Information Hide Cookie Information
Name | |
---|---|
Anbieter | Eigentümer dieser Website, |
Zweck | Speichert die Einstellungen der Besucher, die in der Cookie Box von Borlabs Cookie ausgewählt wurden. |
Cookie Name | borlabs-cookie |
Cookie Laufzeit | 1 Jahr |
Name | |
---|---|
Anbieter | Bachelorprint |
Zweck | Erkennt das Herkunftsland und leitet zur entsprechenden Sprachversion um. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Host(s) | ip-api.com |
Cookie Name | georedirect |
Cookie Laufzeit | 1 Jahr |
Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us to understand how our visitors use our website.
Akzeptieren | |
---|---|
Name | |
Anbieter | Google Ireland Limited, Gordon House, Barrow Street, Dublin 4, Ireland |
Zweck | Cookie von Google zur Steuerung der erweiterten Script- und Ereignisbehandlung. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Cookie Name | _ga,_gat,_gid |
Cookie Laufzeit | 2 Jahre |
Content from video platforms and social media platforms is blocked by default. If External Media cookies are accepted, access to those contents no longer requires manual consent.
Akzeptieren | |
---|---|
Name | |
Anbieter | Meta Platforms Ireland Limited, 4 Grand Canal Square, Dublin 2, Ireland |
Zweck | Wird verwendet, um Facebook-Inhalte zu entsperren. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Host(s) | .facebook.com |
Akzeptieren | |
---|---|
Name | |
Anbieter | Google Ireland Limited, Gordon House, Barrow Street, Dublin 4, Ireland |
Zweck | Wird zum Entsperren von Google Maps-Inhalten verwendet. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Host(s) | .google.com |
Cookie Name | NID |
Cookie Laufzeit | 6 Monate |
Akzeptieren | |
---|---|
Name | |
Anbieter | Meta Platforms Ireland Limited, 4 Grand Canal Square, Dublin 2, Ireland |
Zweck | Wird verwendet, um Instagram-Inhalte zu entsperren. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Host(s) | .instagram.com |
Cookie Name | pigeon_state |
Cookie Laufzeit | Sitzung |
Akzeptieren | |
---|---|
Name | |
Anbieter | Openstreetmap Foundation, St John’s Innovation Centre, Cowley Road, Cambridge CB4 0WS, United Kingdom |
Zweck | Wird verwendet, um OpenStreetMap-Inhalte zu entsperren. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Host(s) | .openstreetmap.org |
Cookie Name | _osm_location, _osm_session, _osm_totp_token, _osm_welcome, _pk_id., _pk_ref., _pk_ses., qos_token |
Cookie Laufzeit | 1-10 Jahre |
Akzeptieren | |
---|---|
Name | |
Anbieter | Twitter International Company, One Cumberland Place, Fenian Street, Dublin 2, D02 AX07, Ireland |
Zweck | Wird verwendet, um Twitter-Inhalte zu entsperren. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Host(s) | .twimg.com, .twitter.com |
Cookie Name | __widgetsettings, local_storage_support_test |
Cookie Laufzeit | Unbegrenzt |
Akzeptieren | |
---|---|
Name | |
Anbieter | Vimeo Inc., 555 West 18th Street, New York, New York 10011, USA |
Zweck | Wird verwendet, um Vimeo-Inhalte zu entsperren. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Host(s) | player.vimeo.com |
Cookie Name | vuid |
Cookie Laufzeit | 2 Jahre |
Akzeptieren | |
---|---|
Name | |
Anbieter | Google Ireland Limited, Gordon House, Barrow Street, Dublin 4, Ireland |
Zweck | Wird verwendet, um YouTube-Inhalte zu entsperren. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Host(s) | google.com |
Cookie Name | NID |
Cookie Laufzeit | 6 Monate |
Privacy Policy Imprint
Ai generator.
A Conceptual Framework is a structured approach that guides research by outlining key concepts, variables, and their relationships. It integrates relevant Theoretical Frameworks , which are established theories used to support the study’s foundation. Through Conceptual Analogy , complex ideas are simplified and made relatable. In a Thesis Paper , the conceptual framework clarifies the research direction and underpins the study’s methodology.
A Conceptual Framework is a system of concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs, and theories that supports and informs research. In a dissertation , it helps structure and guide the study, while in a business model , it outlines the components and relationships essential for business success.
Theoretical framework.
This type of framework draws on existing theories and models to frame a study’s methodology, design, and analysis. It helps researchers link their findings to broader theoretical systems.
This involves visual representations of concepts and their relationships within a topic. Concept maps are used to organize and structure knowledge and can be a helpful tool in educational and learning environments.
Often used in project management, this framework helps in planning and implementing projects by setting objectives, identifying resources, and outlining activities and timelines. It helps stakeholders understand the project’s structure and goals.
This framework is used to systematically analyze qualitative data by identifying patterns, themes, and relationships. It is crucial in research areas like sociology, anthropology, and psychology.
1. clarifies research focus.
A conceptual framework helps to define the scope and focus of a study. It identifies key variables and their relationships, guiding the research process and ensuring that the study remains focused on relevant questions.
By visually and theoretically mapping out the connections between concepts, a conceptual framework aids in understanding complex issues. It simplifies intricate relationships, making it easier for researchers, stakeholders, and readers to grasp the study’s core ideas.
The framework informs the research design and methodology. It helps in selecting appropriate research methods, data collection techniques, and analytical strategies, ensuring that the research approach aligns with the study’s objectives.
A conceptual framework provides a structured basis for theory development. It integrates existing theories and empirical findings, allowing researchers to build on previous knowledge and contribute to the advancement of their field.
For dissertations, business models, or any research project, a conceptual framework serves as a communication tool. It clearly presents the study’s foundation, assumptions, and hypotheses, making it easier to explain and justify the research to peers, advisors, and stakeholders.
The framework helps identify gaps in the current literature and areas needing further exploration. This can guide future research and help prioritize areas for investigation, ensuring that the study adds value to the existing body of knowledge.
1. identify the research problem.
Start by clearly defining the research problem or question. Understand what you aim to explore, explain, or predict. This step sets the foundation for your entire framework.
Review existing literature related to your research problem. Identify key theories, concepts, and empirical findings that are relevant to your study. This helps you understand the current state of knowledge and identify gaps.
From the literature review, identify the key variables that are central to your research problem. These could be dependent, independent, or intervening variables. Clearly define each variable and its role in your study.
Based on the identified variables, develop hypotheses or research questions that your study will address. These should specify the expected relationships between the variables.
Visually represent the relationships between the variables in the form of diagrams or models. This helps in understanding and communicating the framework more effectively. Use arrows to show causal relationships and interactions between variables.
Incorporate relevant theoretical frameworks that support your conceptual model. Theoretical frameworks provide a foundation for your hypotheses and help explain why and how the variables are related.
Review and refine your conceptual framework to ensure clarity and coherence. Ensure that all components are logically connected and that the framework addresses the research problem comprehensively.
Seek feedback from peers, advisors, or experts in the field to validate your conceptual framework. Make necessary adjustments based on their suggestions to strengthen your model.
Use the conceptual framework to guide your research design and methodology. It should inform your data collection, analysis, and interpretation processes, ensuring alignment with your research objectives.
Clearly document your conceptual framework in your research proposal, thesis, or dissertation. Present it using diagrams and detailed explanations to ensure that readers understand its components and significance.
Impact of Integrated Marketing on Consumer Behavior:
Advertising and Marketing Business Plan :
Interaction Model of Communication :
Photo Essay:
Aspect | Theoretical Framework | Conceptual Framework |
---|---|---|
Structure of theories explaining phenomena | System of concepts and theories supporting research | |
Support study with existing theories, develop hypotheses | Define problem, identify variables, illustrate relationships | |
Theories, models, constructs | Key variables, concepts, relationships | |
Theory of Planned Behavior, Elaboration Likelihood Model | Marketing channels, consumer attitudes, brand loyalty |
A conceptual framework organizes key concepts and relationships, guiding research by defining variables and their interactions.
It clarifies research focus, guides methodology, and enhances understanding by mapping out complex relationships between variables.
Identify the research problem, conduct a literature review, select key variables, establish relationships, and create visual diagrams.
Theoretical frameworks use established theories to explain phenomena; conceptual frameworks map out key concepts and their relationships.
Yes, it can be refined as new insights and data are gathered, ensuring it remains relevant and accurate.
Key components include variables, concepts, assumptions, and the relationships between them.
It helps identify and define key variables, facilitating the development of clear, testable hypotheses.
Yes, it outlines the relationships between business components, aiding in strategy development and decision-making.
It is documented with visual diagrams and detailed explanations, ensuring clarity and coherence in the study.
A literature review identifies relevant theories, concepts, and gaps, providing a foundation for the framework.
Text prompt
10 Examples of Public speaking
20 Examples of Gas lighting
You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.
All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .
Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.
Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.
Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.
Original Submission Date Received: .
Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.
Please let us know what you think of our products and services.
Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.
The dynamic relationships between educational expectations and science learning performance among students in secondary school and their later completion of a stem degree.
2. theoretical framework of the study, 2.1. the direct model from educational expectations of students to their science learning performance and stem achievement, 2.2. the inverse model from science learning performance of students to their educational expectations and stem achievement, 2.3. the present study, 3.1. sample and data, 3.2. measures, 3.3. modeling techniques, 5. discussion, 6. conclusions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.
Grade 8 | 0.868 *** | 0.010 | 0.843 to 0.888 |
Grade 9 | 0.866 *** | 0.012 | 0.842 to 0.890 |
Grade 10 | 0.888 *** | 0.013 | 0.863 to 0.914 |
Grade 11 | 0.902 *** | 0.016 | 0.870 to 0.923 |
Grade 12 | 0.862 *** | 0.020 | 0.824 to 0.901 |
Grade 8 | 0.713 *** | 0.018 | 0.678 to 0.748 |
Grade 9 | 0.729 *** | 0.020 | 0.689 to 0.768 |
Grade 10 | 0.727 *** | 0.025 | 0.678 to 0.775 |
Grade 11 | 0.760 *** | 0.027 | 0.708 to 0.812 |
Grade 12 | 0.823 *** | 0.030 | 0.764 to 0.883 |
Slope Factor Loadings | |||
Grade 8 | -- | -- | -- |
Grade 9 | 0.152 *** | 0.005 | 0.143 to 0.161 |
Grade 10 | 0.311 *** | 0.009 | 0.293 to 0.329 |
Grade 11 | 0.474 *** | 0.014 | 0.447 to 0.501 |
Grade 12 | 0.604 *** | 0.018 | 0.569 to 0.640 |
Grade 8 | -- | -- | -- |
Grade 9 | 0.177 *** | 0.007 | 0.163 to 0.191 |
Grade 10 | 0.353 *** | 0.016 | 0.322 to 0.384 |
Grade 11 | 0.554 *** | 0.023 | 0.509 to 0.599 |
Grade 12 | 0.800 *** | 0.038 | 0.729 to 0.871 |
Intercept -> Slope | −0.258 *** | 0.035 | −0.322 to −0.194 |
Intercept -> Slope | −0.452 *** | 0.057 | −0.564 to −0.341 |
Intercept -> Intercept | 0.622 *** | 0.024 | 0.575 to 0.670 |
Intercept -> Slope | 0.045 | 0.047 | −0.047 to 0.138 |
Slope -> Slope | 0.215 *** | 0.028 | 0.159 to 0.270 |
Intercept -> STEM Degree | 0.145 *** | 0.022 | 0.102 to 0.188 |
Slope -> STEM Degree | 0.083 *** | 0.018 | 0.048 to 0.118 |
Intercept -> STEM Degree | 0.244 *** | 0.034 | 0.177 to 0.311 |
Slope -> STEM Degree | 0.152 *** | 0.034 | 0.104 to 0.200 |
Male Gender -> Inp | −0.024 | 0.140 | −0.067 to 0.020 |
Male Gender -> Slp | 0.018 | 0.021 | −0.023 to 0.060 |
Male Gender -> Inp | 0.080 ** | 0.024 | 0.025 to 0.126 |
Male Gender -> Slp | 0.031 | 0.024 | −0.015 to 0.077 |
Male Gender -> STEM Degree | 0.077 * | 0.024 | −0.029 to −0.125 |
Two-parent Family -> Inp | 0.023 | 0.018 | −0.103 to 0.059 |
Two-parent Family -> Slp | 0.054 ** | 0.020 | 0.003 to 0.104 |
Two-parent Family -> Inp | 0.053 * | 0.021 | 0.012 to 0.094 |
Two-parent Family -> Slp | 0.012 | 0.026 | −0.064 to 0.039 |
Two-parent Family -> STEM Degree | 0.032 * | 0.016 | 0.001 to 0.064 |
Hispanic -> Inp | −0.204 *** | 0.036 | −0.255 to −0.133 |
Hispanic -> Slp | −0.095 | 0.051 | −0.196 to 0.005 |
Hispanic -> Inp | −0.113 *** | 0.032 | −0.176 to −0.049 |
Hispanic -> Slp | −0.041 | 0.036 | −0.112 to 0.029 |
Hispanic -> STEM Degree | −0.031 | 0.028 | −0.087 to 0.025 |
American African -> Inp | −0.164 *** | 0.042 | −0.247 to −0.081 |
American African -> Slp | −0.157 * | 0.072 | −0.298 to 0.016 |
American African -> Inp | −161 *** | 0.041 | −0.241 to −0.081 |
American African -> Slp | −0.021 | 0.036 | −0.083 to 0.057 |
American African -> STEM Degree | −0.054 | 0.034 | 0.121to 0.013 |
White -> Inp | −0.165 ** | 0.049 | −0.261 to −0.068 |
White -> Slp | −0.111 | 0.073 | −0.253 to 0.032 |
White -> Inp | −0.109 ** | 0.042 | −0.190 to −0.027 |
White -> Slp | 0.032 | 0.045 | −0.121 to 0.057 |
White -> STEM Degree | −0.016 | 0.043 | −0.069 to 0.101 |
Native -> Inp | −0.084 ** | 0.026 | −0.135 to −0.032 |
Native -> Slp | −0.059 * | 0.045 | −0.157 to −0.001 |
Native -> Inp | −0.075 ** | 0.023 | −0.121 to −0.029 |
Native -> Slp | 0.037 | 0.021 | −0.004 to 0.078 |
Native -> STEM Degree | −0.011 | 0.020 | −0.050 to 0.028 |
Grade 8 | 0.731 *** | 0.018 | 0.696 to 0.767 |
Grade 9 | 0.753 *** | 0.018 | 0.717 to 0.790 |
Grade 10 | 0.745 *** | 0.025 | 0.697 to 0.793 |
Grade 11 | 0.762 *** | 0.025 | 0.714 to 0.810 |
Grade 12 | 0.836 *** | 0.032 | 0.722 to 0.899 |
Grade 8 | 0.877 *** | 0.011 | 0.856 to 0.899 |
Grade 9 | 0.896 *** | 0.012 | 0.872 to 0.920 |
Grade 10 | 0.905 *** | 0.016 | 0.875 to 0.936 |
Grade 11 | 0.916 *** | 0.016 | 0.884 to 0.948 |
Grade 12 | 0.878 *** | 0.020 | 0.839 to 0.918 |
Grade 8 | -- | -- | -- |
Grade 9 | 0.181 *** | 0.008 | 0.164 to 0.197 |
Grade 10 | 0.357 *** | 0.018 | 0.321 to 0.393 |
Grade 11 | 0.548 *** | 0.025 | 0.499 to 0.597 |
Grade 12 | 0.801 *** | 0.039 | 0.724 to 0.878 |
Grade 8 | -- | -- | -- |
Grade 9 | 0.159 *** | 0.007 | 0.144 to 0.173 |
Grade 10 | 0.321 *** | 0.015 | 0.291 to 0.251 |
Grade 11 | 0.487 *** | 0.022 | 0.443 to 530 |
Grade 12 | 0.622 *** | 0.027 | 0.549 to 0.676 |
Intercept -> Slope | −0.455 *** | 0.038 | −0.529 to −0.381 |
Intercept -> Slope | −0.463 *** | 0.050 | −0.562 to −0.364 |
Intercept -> Intercept | 0.610 *** | 0.027 | 0.557 to 0.663 |
Intercept -> Slope | 0.367 *** | 0.051 | 0.267 to 0.467 |
Slope -> Slope | 0.148 ** | 0.048 | 0.055 to 0.241 |
Intercept -> STEM Degree | 0.267 *** | 0.036 | 0.196 to 0.338 |
Slope -> STEM Degree | 0.161 *** | 0.023 | 0.096 to 0.226 |
Intercept -> STEM Degree | 0.129 *** | 0.023 | 0.085 to 0.174 |
Slope -> STEM Degree | 0.074 ** | 0.023 | 0.029 to 0.120 |
Male Gender -> Intercept | 0.071 | 0.040 | −0.007 to 0.149 |
Male Gender -> Slope | 0.024 | 0.028 | −0.032 to 0.079 |
Male Gender -> Intercept | −0.095 ** | 0.030 | −0.154 to −0.036 |
Male Gender -> Slope | −0.036 | 0.031 | −0.096 to 0.024 |
Male Gender -> STEM Degree | 0.086 * | 0.033 | 0.017 to 0.154 |
Two-parent Family -> Intercept | 0.047 | 0.031 | −0.013 to 0.107 |
Two-parent Family -> Slope | 0.018 | 0.030 | −0.042 to 0.077 |
Two-parent Family -> Intercept | −0.005 | 0.024 | −0.053 to 0.043 |
Two-parent Family -> Slope | 0.095 ** | 0.035 | 0.027 to 0.164 |
Two-parent Family -> STEM Degree | 0.012 | 0.021 | −0.029 to 0.054 |
Hispanic -> Intercept | −0.283 *** | 0.044 | −0.368 to −0.197 |
Hispanic -> Slope | −0.040 | 0.042 | −0.121 to 0.042 |
Hispanic -> Intercept | −0.020 | 0.041 | −0.101 to 0.060 |
Hispanic -> Slope | −0.028 | 0.053 | −0.131 to 0.075 |
Hispanic -> STEM Degree | 0.005 | 0.045 | −0.084 to 0.094 |
American African -> Intercept | −0.332 *** | 0.053 | −0.332 to 0.053 |
American African -> Slope | −0.025 | 0.052 | −0.129 to 0.074 |
American African -> Intercept | −0.010 | 0.055 | −0.097 to 0.118 |
American African -> Slope | −0.034 | 0.074 | −0.228 to 0.060 |
American African -> STEM Degree | −0.011 | 0.056 | −0.122 to 0.099 |
White -> Intercept | −0.255 *** | 0.048 | −0.350 to −0.160 |
White -> Slope | −0.049 | 0.060 | −0.168 to 0.069 |
White -> Intercept | −0.025 | 0.067 | −0.155 to 0.106 |
White -> Slope | −0.055 | 0.072 | −0.197 to 0.086 |
White -> STEM Degree | 0.072 | 0.071 | −0.067 to 0.211 |
Native -> Intercept | −0.091 * | 0.037 | −0.163 to −0.019 |
Native -> Slope | 0.017 | 0.030 | −0.041 to 0.075 |
Native -> Intercept | 0.004 | 0.027 | −0.050 to 0.058 |
Native -> Slope | 0.017 | 0.033 | −0.081 to 0.047 |
Native -> STEM Degree | 0.008 | 0.033 | −0.056 to 0.071 |
Click here to enlarge figure
1. | Gender | Mean/Frequency | SD/% |
Female | 1495 | 48% | |
Male | 1621 | 52% | |
2. | Family composition | ||
Two-biological-parent | 2715 | 87.1% | |
Other | 401 | 12.9% | |
3. | Ethnicity | ||
White | 2169 | 69.6% | |
African American | 504 | 16.2% | |
Hispanic | 284 | 9.1% | |
Asian | 112 | 3.6% | |
Native American | 47 | 1.5% | |
4. | Educational Expectations | ||
Grade 8 | 4.005 | 1.846 | |
Grade 9 | 3.886 | 1.458 | |
Grade 10 | 3.717 | 1.419 | |
Grade 11 | 3.692 | 1.397 | |
Grade 12 | 3.731 | 1.380 | |
5. | Science Learning Performance | ||
Grade 8 | 5.997 | 1.734 | |
Grade 9 | 5.843 | 1.773 | |
Grade 10 | 5.629 | 1.801 | |
Grade 11 | 5.672 | 1.690 | |
Grade 12 | 5.840 | 1.515 | |
6. | STEM Degree | ||
Yes | 239 | 7.7% | |
No | 2877 | 92.3% |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Grade 8 EdExp | -- | ||||||||||
2 | Grade 9 EdExp | 0.731 | -- | |||||||||
3 | Grade 10 EdExp | 0.689 | 0.792 | --- | ||||||||
4 | Grade 11 EdExp | 0.640 | 0.723 | 0.803 | -- | |||||||
5 | Grade 12 EdExp | 0.595 | 0.680 | 0.747 | 0.824 | -- | ||||||
6 | Grade 8 ScPef | 0.351 | 0.344 | 0.377 | 0.370 | 0.355 | -- | |||||
7 | Grade 9 ScPef | 0.341 | 0.370 | 0.384 | 0.379 | 0.364 | 0.461 | -- | ||||
8 | Grade 10 ScPef | 0.310 | 0.359 | 0.394 | 0.394 | 0.372 | 0.402 | 0.614 | -- | |||
9 | Grade 11 ScPef | 0.268 | 0.286 | 0.337 | 0.346 | 0.345 | 0.343 | 0.466 | 0.592 | -- | ||
10 | Grade 12 ScPef | 0.223 | 0.243 | 0.286 | 0.295 | 0.291 | 0.311 | 0.409 | 0.501 | 0.587 | -- | |
11 | STEM Degree | 0.202 | 0.204 | 0.228 | 0.242 | 0.243 | 0.184 | 0.208 | 0.214 | 0.215 | 0.234 | -- |
Inp | |||
Grade 8 | 0.868 *** | 0.009 | 0.850 to 0.883 |
Grade 9 | 0.866 *** | 0.011 | 0.864 to 0.906 |
Grade 10 | 0.888 *** | 0.011 | 0.886 to 0.931 |
Grade 11 | 0.901 *** | 0.015 | 0.884 to 0.942 |
Grade 12 | 0.862 *** | 0.019 | 0.838 to 0.911 |
Inp | |||
Grade 8 | 0.714 *** | 0.018 | 0.674 to 0.745 |
Grade 9 | 0.728 *** | 0.020 | 0.687 to 0.765 |
Grade 10 | 0.727 *** | 0.025 | 0.662 to 0.774 |
Grade 11 | 0.761 *** | 0.026 | 0.705 to 0.809 |
Grade 12 | 0.824 *** | 0.030 | 0.760 to 0.878 |
Slp | |||
Grade 8 | -- | -- | -- |
Grade 9 | 0.151 *** | 0.004 | 0.143 to 0.160 |
Grade 10 | 0.310 *** | 0.009 | 0.293 to 0.329 |
Grade 11 | 0.473 *** | 0.014 | 0.443 to 0.496 |
Grade 12 | 0.603 *** | 0.018 | 0.565 to 0.634 |
Slp | |||
Grade 8 | -- | -- | -- |
Grade 9 | 0.177 *** | 0.008 | 0.162 to 0.192 |
Grade 10 | 0.354 *** | 0.017 | 0.322 to 0.387 |
Grade 11 | 0.556 *** | 0.024 | 0.508 to 0.602 |
Grade 12 | 0.803 *** | 0.037 | 0.727 to 0.872 |
Within-Domain Effects | |||
Inp -> Slp | −0.247 *** | 0.034 | −0.335 to −0.200 |
Inp -> Slp | −0.451 *** | 0.058 | −0.563 to −0.337 |
Cross-Domain Effects | |||
Inp -> Inpt | 0.633 *** | 0.025 | 0.563 to 0.661 |
Inp -> Slp | 0.044 | 0.047 | −0.046 to 0.137 |
Slp -> Slp | 0.216 *** | 0.028 | 0.163 to 0.274 |
Inp | |||
Grade 8 | 0.715 *** | 0.016 | 0.683 to 0.746 |
Grade 9 | 0.727 *** | 0.019 | 0.690 to 0.764 |
Grade 10 | 0.726 *** | 0.023 | 0.680 to 0.772 |
Grade 11 | 0.759 *** | 0.026 | 0.708 to 0.809 |
Grade 12 | 0.823 *** | 0.030 | 0.764 to 0.881 |
Inp | ϒ | SE | 95% CI |
Grade 8 | 0.871 *** | 0.009 | 0.853 to 0.888 |
Grade 9 | 0.891 *** | 0.011 | 0.870 to 0.911 |
Grade 10 | 0.913 *** | 0.012 | 0.891 to 0.936 |
Grade 11 | 0.918 *** | 0.015 | 0.889 to 0.947 |
Grade 12 | 0.879 *** | 0.019 | 0.842 to 0.916 |
Slp | |||
Grade 8 | -- | -- | -- |
Grade 9 | 0.175 *** | 0.007 | 0.162 to 0.188 |
Grade 10 | 0.349 *** | 0.014 | 0.320 to 0.377 |
Grade 11 | 0.547 *** | 0.020 | 0.506 to 0.587 |
Grade 12 | 0.790 *** | 0.034 | 0.724 to 0.857 |
Slp | |||
Grade 8 | -- | -- | -- |
Grade 9 | 0.159 *** | 0.004 | 0.150 to 0.167 |
Grade 10 | 0.326 *** | 0.009 | 0.308 to 0.344 |
Grade 11 | 0.491 *** | 0.013 | 0.466 to 517 |
Grade 12 | 0.627 *** | 0.017 | 0.592 to 0.660 |
Within-Domain Effects | |||
Inp -> Slp | −0.445 *** | 0.036 | −0.515 to −0.375 |
Inp -> Slp | −0.463 *** | 0.041 | −0.544 to −0.382 |
Cross-Domain Effects | |||
Inp -> Inp | 0.589 *** | 0.021 | 0.549 to 0.629 |
Inp -> Slp | 0.370 *** | 0.043 | 0.286 to 0.454 |
Slp -> Slp | 0.162 ** | 0.038 | 0.087 to 0.238 |
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
Yeung, J.W.K. The Dynamic Relationships between Educational Expectations and Science Learning Performance among Students in Secondary School and Their Later Completion of a STEM Degree. Behav. Sci. 2024 , 14 , 506. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14060506
Yeung JWK. The Dynamic Relationships between Educational Expectations and Science Learning Performance among Students in Secondary School and Their Later Completion of a STEM Degree. Behavioral Sciences . 2024; 14(6):506. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14060506
Yeung, Jerf W. K. 2024. "The Dynamic Relationships between Educational Expectations and Science Learning Performance among Students in Secondary School and Their Later Completion of a STEM Degree" Behavioral Sciences 14, no. 6: 506. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14060506
Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.
Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals
COMMENTS
A theoretical framework is a set of concepts, theories, and assumptions that guide a research process. Learn the definition, importance, types, and steps of writing a theoretical framework with examples from different fields.
Learn how to define key concepts, propose relations between them, and discuss theories and models from the literature in your theoretical framework. See a sample problem statement, research questions, and theoretical framework based on customer satisfaction.
Learn what a theoretical framework is, why it is important for research, and how to write one. See examples of different types of theoretical frameworks and their components.
A theoretical framework is a theory that can be applied to interpret and understand data in your research study. A useful working definition comes from Connaway and Radford (2021): "…a theoretical framework utilizes theory/theories and their constituent elements as the presumed 'working model' that drives the investigation and analysis ...
A theoretical framework is a review of existing theories that supports your research topic and arguments. Learn how to identify key concepts, evaluate and explain relevant theories, and show how your research fits into existing research.
A theoretical framework is a review of existing theories that supports your research and justifies your approach. Learn how to identify your key concepts, evaluate and explain relevant theories, and show how your research fits into existing research.
Learn the difference between theoretical and conceptual frameworks in academic research, and see examples of each. A theoretical framework is a set of existing theories that provide a foundation of knowledge, while a conceptual framework is a visual representation of the expected relationships between concepts.
how to accomplish working with a theoretical framework. Concurrently, incorporating a theoretical framework into research studies is a task that some may continue to struggle with post-graduation. Silver and Herbst (as cited in Lester, 2005) have acknowledged that journal submissions are often rejected for being atheoretical, or having no theory.
The theoretical framework is the structure that can hold or support a theory of a research study. The theoretical framework encompasses not just the theory, but the narrative explanation about how the researcher engages in using the theory and its underlying assumptions to investigate the research problem. ... For example, if you are a ...
Theoretical framework. The theoretical perspective provides the broader lens or orientation through which the researcher views the research topic and guides their overall understanding and approach. The theoretical framework, on the other hand, is a more specific and focused framework that connects the theoretical perspective to the data analysis strategy through pre-established theory.
A complete theoretical framework consists of a network of theories, existing theories, and concepts that collectively shape the direction of a research study. The theoretical framework is the fundamental principle that will be explored, strengthens the research's credibility by aligning it with established knowledge, specifies the variables ...
The term conceptual framework and theoretical framework are often and erroneously used interchangeably (Grant & Osanloo, 2014). A theoretical framework provides the theoretical assumptions for the larger context of a study, and is the foundation or 'lens' by which a study is developed. This framework helps to ground the research focus ...
Using a theoretical framework for your dissertation can help you to better analyze past events by providing a particular set of questions to ask, and a particular perspective to use when examining your topic. Traditionally, Ph.D. and Applied Degree research must include relevant theoretical framework (s) to frame, or inform, every aspect of the ...
A study by Jensen and Lawson (2011) provides an example of how a theoretical framework connects different parts of the study. They compared undergraduate biology students in heterogeneous and homogeneous groups over the course of a semester. ... It takes time to understand the relevant research, identify a theoretical framework that provides ...
What is a Framework? A framework is a set of broad concepts or principles used to guide research. As described by Varpio and colleagues 1, a framework is a logically developed and connected set of concepts and premises - developed from one or more theories - that a researcher uses as a scaffold for their study.The researcher must define any concepts and theories that will provide the ...
Example Theoretical Framework of a Dissertation or Thesis. Published on 8 July 2022 by Sarah Vinz . Revised on 10 October 2022. Your theoretical framework defines the key concepts in your research, suggests relationships between them, and discusses relevant theories based on your literature review. A strong theoretical framework gives your ...
Example 3: the nursing role effectiveness model. In this final example, research was conducted to determine the nursing processes that were associated with unexpected intensive care unit admissions.9 The framework was the Nursing Role Effectiveness Model. In this theoretical framework, the concepts within Donabedian's Quality Framework of Structure, Process and Outcome were each defined ...
The term conceptual framework and theoretical framework are often and erroneously used interchangeably (Grant & Osanloo, 2014). A theoretical framework provides the theoretical assumptions for the larger context of a study, and is the foundation or 'lens' by which a study is developed. This framework helps to ground the research focus ...
Exercise 3.2. Researchers have used a number of different metaphors to describe theoretical frameworks. Maxwell (2005) referred to a theoretical framework as a "coat closet" that provides "places to 'hang' data, showing their relationship to other data," although he cautioned that "a theory that neatly organizes some data will leave other data disheveled and lying on the floor ...
The framework may actually be a theory, but not necessarily. This is especially true for theory driven research (typically quantitative) that is attempting to test the validity of existing theory. However, this narrow definition of a theoretical framework is commonly not aligned with qualitative research paradigms that are attempting to develop ...
Theoretical and conceptual frameworks differ fundamentally in their scope. Theoretical frameworks provide a broad and general view of the research problem, rooted in established theories. They explain phenomena by applying a particular theoretical lens. Conceptual frameworks, on the other hand, offer a more focused view of the specific research ...
conceptual and theoretical frameworks. As conceptual defines the key co ncepts, variables, and. relationships in a research study as a roadmap that outlines the researcher's understanding of how ...
The example of a theoretical framework is based on: The problem statement - involves contextualizing the research problem. The researcher describes the specific issue that the study seeks to address and justifies the study's relevance and primary objectives. The research questions - are focused on a specific issue, and they should be ...
A Conceptual Framework is a structured approach that guides research by outlining key concepts, variables, and their relationships. It integrates relevant Theoretical Frameworks, which are established theories used to support the study's foundation.Through Conceptual Analogy, complex ideas are simplified and made relatable.In a Thesis Paper, the conceptual framework clarifies the research ...
The educational expectations of students for themselves have been commonly corroborated to directly predict their higher academic performance. Nevertheless, some recent research has reported that the academic performance of students may also contribute to their better development of educational expectations. Moreover, more advanced but limited research has argued that both the educational ...