descriptive design in quantitative research with author

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

Knowledge Base

Methodology

Descriptive Research | Definition, Types, Methods & Examples

Descriptive Research | Definition, Types, Methods & Examples

Published on May 15, 2019 by Shona McCombes . Revised on June 22, 2023.

Descriptive research aims to accurately and systematically describe a population, situation or phenomenon. It can answer what , where , when and how questions , but not why questions.

A descriptive research design can use a wide variety of research methods to investigate one or more variables . Unlike in experimental research , the researcher does not control or manipulate any of the variables, but only observes and measures them.

When to use a descriptive research design, descriptive research methods, other interesting articles.

Descriptive research is an appropriate choice when the research aim is to identify characteristics, frequencies, trends, and categories.

It is useful when not much is known yet about the topic or problem. Before you can research why something happens, you need to understand how, when and where it happens.

Descriptive research question examples

How has the Amsterdam housing market changed over the past 20 years?
Do customers of company X prefer product X or product Y?
What are the main genetic, behavioural and morphological differences between European wildcats and domestic cats?
What are the most popular online news sources among under-18s?
How prevalent is disease A in population B?

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

Academic style
Vague sentences
Style consistency

See an example

descriptive design in quantitative research with author

Descriptive research is usually defined as a type of quantitative research , though qualitative research can also be used for descriptive purposes. The research design should be carefully developed to ensure that the results are valid and reliable .

Survey research allows you to gather large volumes of data that can be analyzed for frequencies, averages and patterns. Common uses of surveys include:

Describing the demographics of a country or region
Gauging public opinion on political and social topics
Evaluating satisfaction with a company’s products or an organization’s services

Observations

Observations allow you to gather data on behaviours and phenomena without having to rely on the honesty and accuracy of respondents. This method is often used by psychological, social and market researchers to understand how people act in real-life situations.

Observation of physical entities and phenomena is also an important part of research in the natural sciences. Before you can develop testable hypotheses , models or theories, it’s necessary to observe and systematically describe the subject under investigation.

Case studies

A case study can be used to describe the characteristics of a specific subject (such as a person, group, event or organization). Instead of gathering a large volume of data to identify patterns across time or location, case studies gather detailed data to identify the characteristics of a narrowly defined subject.

Rather than aiming to describe generalizable facts, case studies often focus on unusual or interesting cases that challenge assumptions, add complexity, or reveal something new about a research problem .

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

Normal distribution
Degrees of freedom
Null hypothesis
Discourse analysis
Control groups
Mixed methods research
Non-probability sampling
Quantitative research
Ecological validity

Research bias

Rosenthal effect
Implicit bias
Cognitive bias
Selection bias
Negativity bias
Status quo bias

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2023, June 22). Descriptive Research | Definition, Types, Methods & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved September 13, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/descriptive-research/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is quantitative research | definition, uses & methods, correlational research | when & how to use, descriptive statistics | definitions, types, examples, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Home » Descriptive Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Descriptive Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Table of Contents

Descriptive Research Design

Definition:

Descriptive research design is a type of research methodology that aims to describe or document the characteristics, behaviors, attitudes, opinions, or perceptions of a group or population being studied.

Descriptive research design does not attempt to establish cause-and-effect relationships between variables or make predictions about future outcomes. Instead, it focuses on providing a detailed and accurate representation of the data collected, which can be useful for generating hypotheses, exploring trends, and identifying patterns in the data.

Types of Descriptive Research Design

Types of Descriptive Research Design are as follows:

Cross-sectional Study

This involves collecting data at a single point in time from a sample or population to describe their characteristics or behaviors. For example, a researcher may conduct a cross-sectional study to investigate the prevalence of certain health conditions among a population, or to describe the attitudes and beliefs of a particular group.

Longitudinal Study

This involves collecting data over an extended period of time, often through repeated observations or surveys of the same group or population. Longitudinal studies can be used to track changes in attitudes, behaviors, or outcomes over time, or to investigate the effects of interventions or treatments.

This involves an in-depth examination of a single individual, group, or situation to gain a detailed understanding of its characteristics or dynamics. Case studies are often used in psychology, sociology, and business to explore complex phenomena or to generate hypotheses for further research.

Survey Research

This involves collecting data from a sample or population through standardized questionnaires or interviews. Surveys can be used to describe attitudes, opinions, behaviors, or demographic characteristics of a group, and can be conducted in person, by phone, or online.

Observational Research

This involves observing and documenting the behavior or interactions of individuals or groups in a natural or controlled setting. Observational studies can be used to describe social, cultural, or environmental phenomena, or to investigate the effects of interventions or treatments.

Correlational Research

This involves examining the relationships between two or more variables to describe their patterns or associations. Correlational studies can be used to identify potential causal relationships or to explore the strength and direction of relationships between variables.

Data Analysis Methods

Descriptive research design data analysis methods depend on the type of data collected and the research question being addressed. Here are some common methods of data analysis for descriptive research:

Descriptive Statistics

This method involves analyzing data to summarize and describe the key features of a sample or population. Descriptive statistics can include measures of central tendency (e.g., mean, median, mode) and measures of variability (e.g., range, standard deviation).

Cross-tabulation

This method involves analyzing data by creating a table that shows the frequency of two or more variables together. Cross-tabulation can help identify patterns or relationships between variables.

Content Analysis

This method involves analyzing qualitative data (e.g., text, images, audio) to identify themes, patterns, or trends. Content analysis can be used to describe the characteristics of a sample or population, or to identify factors that influence attitudes or behaviors.

Qualitative Coding

This method involves analyzing qualitative data by assigning codes to segments of data based on their meaning or content. Qualitative coding can be used to identify common themes, patterns, or categories within the data.

Visualization

This method involves creating graphs or charts to represent data visually. Visualization can help identify patterns or relationships between variables and make it easier to communicate findings to others.

Comparative Analysis

This method involves comparing data across different groups or time periods to identify similarities and differences. Comparative analysis can help describe changes in attitudes or behaviors over time or differences between subgroups within a population.

Applications of Descriptive Research Design

Descriptive research design has numerous applications in various fields. Some of the common applications of descriptive research design are:

Market research: Descriptive research design is widely used in market research to understand consumer preferences, behavior, and attitudes. This helps companies to develop new products and services, improve marketing strategies, and increase customer satisfaction.
Health research: Descriptive research design is used in health research to describe the prevalence and distribution of a disease or health condition in a population. This helps healthcare providers to develop prevention and treatment strategies.
Educational research: Descriptive research design is used in educational research to describe the performance of students, schools, or educational programs. This helps educators to improve teaching methods and develop effective educational programs.
Social science research: Descriptive research design is used in social science research to describe social phenomena such as cultural norms, values, and beliefs. This helps researchers to understand social behavior and develop effective policies.
Public opinion research: Descriptive research design is used in public opinion research to understand the opinions and attitudes of the general public on various issues. This helps policymakers to develop effective policies that are aligned with public opinion.
Environmental research: Descriptive research design is used in environmental research to describe the environmental conditions of a particular region or ecosystem. This helps policymakers and environmentalists to develop effective conservation and preservation strategies.

Descriptive Research Design Examples

Here are some real-time examples of descriptive research designs:

A restaurant chain wants to understand the demographics and attitudes of its customers. They conduct a survey asking customers about their age, gender, income, frequency of visits, favorite menu items, and overall satisfaction. The survey data is analyzed using descriptive statistics and cross-tabulation to describe the characteristics of their customer base.
A medical researcher wants to describe the prevalence and risk factors of a particular disease in a population. They conduct a cross-sectional study in which they collect data from a sample of individuals using a standardized questionnaire. The data is analyzed using descriptive statistics and cross-tabulation to identify patterns in the prevalence and risk factors of the disease.
An education researcher wants to describe the learning outcomes of students in a particular school district. They collect test scores from a representative sample of students in the district and use descriptive statistics to calculate the mean, median, and standard deviation of the scores. They also create visualizations such as histograms and box plots to show the distribution of scores.
A marketing team wants to understand the attitudes and behaviors of consumers towards a new product. They conduct a series of focus groups and use qualitative coding to identify common themes and patterns in the data. They also create visualizations such as word clouds to show the most frequently mentioned topics.
An environmental scientist wants to describe the biodiversity of a particular ecosystem. They conduct an observational study in which they collect data on the species and abundance of plants and animals in the ecosystem. The data is analyzed using descriptive statistics to describe the diversity and richness of the ecosystem.

How to Conduct Descriptive Research Design

To conduct a descriptive research design, you can follow these general steps:

Define your research question: Clearly define the research question or problem that you want to address. Your research question should be specific and focused to guide your data collection and analysis.
Choose your research method: Select the most appropriate research method for your research question. As discussed earlier, common research methods for descriptive research include surveys, case studies, observational studies, cross-sectional studies, and longitudinal studies.
Design your study: Plan the details of your study, including the sampling strategy, data collection methods, and data analysis plan. Determine the sample size and sampling method, decide on the data collection tools (such as questionnaires, interviews, or observations), and outline your data analysis plan.
Collect data: Collect data from your sample or population using the data collection tools you have chosen. Ensure that you follow ethical guidelines for research and obtain informed consent from participants.
Analyze data: Use appropriate statistical or qualitative analysis methods to analyze your data. As discussed earlier, common data analysis methods for descriptive research include descriptive statistics, cross-tabulation, content analysis, qualitative coding, visualization, and comparative analysis.
I nterpret results: Interpret your findings in light of your research question and objectives. Identify patterns, trends, and relationships in the data, and describe the characteristics of your sample or population.
Draw conclusions and report results: Draw conclusions based on your analysis and interpretation of the data. Report your results in a clear and concise manner, using appropriate tables, graphs, or figures to present your findings. Ensure that your report follows accepted research standards and guidelines.

When to Use Descriptive Research Design

Descriptive research design is used in situations where the researcher wants to describe a population or phenomenon in detail. It is used to gather information about the current status or condition of a group or phenomenon without making any causal inferences. Descriptive research design is useful in the following situations:

Exploratory research: Descriptive research design is often used in exploratory research to gain an initial understanding of a phenomenon or population.
Identifying trends: Descriptive research design can be used to identify trends or patterns in a population, such as changes in consumer behavior or attitudes over time.
Market research: Descriptive research design is commonly used in market research to understand consumer preferences, behavior, and attitudes.
Health research: Descriptive research design is useful in health research to describe the prevalence and distribution of a disease or health condition in a population.
Social science research: Descriptive research design is used in social science research to describe social phenomena such as cultural norms, values, and beliefs.
Educational research: Descriptive research design is used in educational research to describe the performance of students, schools, or educational programs.

Purpose of Descriptive Research Design

The main purpose of descriptive research design is to describe and measure the characteristics of a population or phenomenon in a systematic and objective manner. It involves collecting data that describe the current status or condition of the population or phenomenon of interest, without manipulating or altering any variables.

The purpose of descriptive research design can be summarized as follows:

To provide an accurate description of a population or phenomenon: Descriptive research design aims to provide a comprehensive and accurate description of a population or phenomenon of interest. This can help researchers to develop a better understanding of the characteristics of the population or phenomenon.
To identify trends and patterns: Descriptive research design can help researchers to identify trends and patterns in the data, such as changes in behavior or attitudes over time. This can be useful for making predictions and developing strategies.
To generate hypotheses: Descriptive research design can be used to generate hypotheses or research questions that can be tested in future studies. For example, if a descriptive study finds a correlation between two variables, this could lead to the development of a hypothesis about the causal relationship between the variables.
To establish a baseline: Descriptive research design can establish a baseline or starting point for future research. This can be useful for comparing data from different time periods or populations.

Characteristics of Descriptive Research Design

Descriptive research design has several key characteristics that distinguish it from other research designs. Some of the main characteristics of descriptive research design are:

Objective : Descriptive research design is objective in nature, which means that it focuses on collecting factual and accurate data without any personal bias. The researcher aims to report the data objectively without any personal interpretation.
Non-experimental: Descriptive research design is non-experimental, which means that the researcher does not manipulate any variables. The researcher simply observes and records the behavior or characteristics of the population or phenomenon of interest.
Quantitative : Descriptive research design is quantitative in nature, which means that it involves collecting numerical data that can be analyzed using statistical techniques. This helps to provide a more precise and accurate description of the population or phenomenon.
Cross-sectional: Descriptive research design is often cross-sectional, which means that the data is collected at a single point in time. This can be useful for understanding the current state of the population or phenomenon, but it may not provide information about changes over time.
Large sample size: Descriptive research design typically involves a large sample size, which helps to ensure that the data is representative of the population of interest. A large sample size also helps to increase the reliability and validity of the data.
Systematic and structured: Descriptive research design involves a systematic and structured approach to data collection, which helps to ensure that the data is accurate and reliable. This involves using standardized procedures for data collection, such as surveys, questionnaires, or observation checklists.

Advantages of Descriptive Research Design

Descriptive research design has several advantages that make it a popular choice for researchers. Some of the main advantages of descriptive research design are:

Provides an accurate description: Descriptive research design is focused on accurately describing the characteristics of a population or phenomenon. This can help researchers to develop a better understanding of the subject of interest.
Easy to conduct: Descriptive research design is relatively easy to conduct and requires minimal resources compared to other research designs. It can be conducted quickly and efficiently, and data can be collected through surveys, questionnaires, or observations.
Useful for generating hypotheses: Descriptive research design can be used to generate hypotheses or research questions that can be tested in future studies. For example, if a descriptive study finds a correlation between two variables, this could lead to the development of a hypothesis about the causal relationship between the variables.
Large sample size : Descriptive research design typically involves a large sample size, which helps to ensure that the data is representative of the population of interest. A large sample size also helps to increase the reliability and validity of the data.
Can be used to monitor changes : Descriptive research design can be used to monitor changes over time in a population or phenomenon. This can be useful for identifying trends and patterns, and for making predictions about future behavior or attitudes.
Can be used in a variety of fields : Descriptive research design can be used in a variety of fields, including social sciences, healthcare, business, and education.

Limitation of Descriptive Research Design

Descriptive research design also has some limitations that researchers should consider before using this design. Some of the main limitations of descriptive research design are:

Cannot establish cause and effect: Descriptive research design cannot establish cause and effect relationships between variables. It only provides a description of the characteristics of the population or phenomenon of interest.
Limited generalizability: The results of a descriptive study may not be generalizable to other populations or situations. This is because descriptive research design often involves a specific sample or situation, which may not be representative of the broader population.
Potential for bias: Descriptive research design can be subject to bias, particularly if the researcher is not objective in their data collection or interpretation. This can lead to inaccurate or incomplete descriptions of the population or phenomenon of interest.
Limited depth: Descriptive research design may provide a superficial description of the population or phenomenon of interest. It does not delve into the underlying causes or mechanisms behind the observed behavior or characteristics.
Limited utility for theory development: Descriptive research design may not be useful for developing theories about the relationship between variables. It only provides a description of the variables themselves.
Relies on self-report data: Descriptive research design often relies on self-report data, such as surveys or questionnaires. This type of data may be subject to biases, such as social desirability bias or recall bias.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

Phenomenology – Methods, Examples and Guide

Mixed Methods Research – Types & Analysis

Questionnaire – Definition, Types, and Examples

Survey Research – Types, Methods, Examples

Explanatory Research – Types, Methods, Guide

Qualitative Research Methods

An official website of the United States government

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

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

Publications
Account settings

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

Advanced Search
Journal List
Perspect Clin Res
v.10(1); Jan-Mar 2019

Study designs: Part 2 – Descriptive studies

Rakesh aggarwal.

Department of Gastroenterology, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India

Priya Ranganathan

1 Department of Anaesthesiology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

One of the first steps in planning a research study is the choice of study design. The available study designs are divided broadly into two types – observational and interventional. Of the various observational study designs, the descriptive design is the simplest. It allows the researcher to study and describe the distribution of one or more variables, without regard to any causal or other hypotheses. This article discusses the subtypes of descriptive study design, and their strengths and limitations.

INTRODUCTION

In our previous article in this series,[ 1 ] we introduced the concept of “study designs”– as “the set of methods and procedures used to collect and analyze data on variables specified in a particular research question.” Study designs are primarily of two types – observational and interventional, with the former being loosely divided into “descriptive” and “analytical.” In this article, we discuss the descriptive study designs.

WHAT IS A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY?

A descriptive study is one that is designed to describe the distribution of one or more variables, without regard to any causal or other hypothesis.

TYPES OF DESCRIPTIVE STUDIES

Descriptive studies can be of several types, namely, case reports, case series, cross-sectional studies, and ecological studies. In the first three of these, data are collected on individuals, whereas the last one uses aggregated data for groups.

Case reports and case series

A case report refers to the description of a patient with an unusual disease or with simultaneous occurrence of more than one condition. A case series is similar, except that it is an aggregation of multiple (often only a few) similar cases. Many case reports and case series are anecdotal and of limited value. However, some of these bring to the fore a hitherto unrecognized disease and play an important role in advancing medical science. For instance, HIV/AIDS was first recognized through a case report of disseminated Kaposi's sarcoma in a young homosexual man,[ 2 ] and a case series of such men with Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia.[ 3 ]

In other cases, description of a chance observation may open an entirely new line of investigation. Some examples include: fatal disseminated Bacillus Calmette–Guérin infection in a baby born to a mother taking infliximab for Crohn's disease suggesting that adminstration of infliximab may bring about reactivation of tuberculosis,[ 4 ] progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy following natalizumab treatment – describing a new adverse effect of drugs that target cell adhesion molecule α4-integrin,[ 5 ] and demonstration of a tumor caused by invasive transformed cancer cells from a colonizing tapeworm in an HIV-infected person.[ 6 ]

Cross-sectional studies

Studies with a cross-sectional study design involve the collection of information on the presence or level of one or more variables of interest (health-related characteristic), whether exposure (e.g., a risk factor) or outcome (e.g., a disease) as they exist in a defined population at one particular time. If these data are analyzed only to determine the distribution of one or more variables, these are “descriptive.” However, often, in a cross-sectional study, the investigator also assesses the relationship between the presence of an exposure and that of an outcome. Such cross-sectional studies are referred to as “analytical” and will be discussed in the next article in this series.

Cross-sectional studies can be thought of as providing a “snapshot” of the frequency and characteristics of a disease in a population at a particular point in time. These are very good for measuring the prevalence of a disease or of a risk factor in a population. Thus, these are very helpful in assessing the disease burden and healthcare needs.

Let us look at a study that was aimed to assess the prevalence of myopia among Indian children.[ 7 ] In this study, trained health workers visited schools in Delhi and tested visual acuity in all children studying in classes 1–9. Of the 9884 children screened, 1297 (13.1%) had myopia (defined as spherical refractive error of −0.50 diopters (D) or worse in either or both eyes), and the mean myopic error was −1.86 ± 1.4 D. Furthermore, overall, 322 (3.3%), 247 (2.5%) and 3 children had mild, moderate, and severe visual impairment, respectively. These parts of the study looked at the prevalence and degree of myopia or of visual impairment, and did not assess the relationship of one variable with another or test a causative hypothesis – these qualify as a descriptive cross-sectional study. These data would be helpful to a health planner to assess the need for a school eye health program, and to know the proportion of children in her jurisdiction who would need corrective glasses.

The authors did, subsequently in the paper, look at the relationship of myopia (an outcome) with children's age, gender, socioeconomic status, type of school, mother's education, etc. (each of which qualifies as an exposure). Those parts of the paper look at the relationship between different variables and thus qualify as having “analytical” cross-sectional design.

Sometimes, cross-sectional studies are repeated after a time interval in the same population (using the same subjects as were included in the initial study, or a fresh sample) to identify temporal trends in the occurrence of one or more variables, and to determine the incidence of a disease (i.e., number of new cases) or its natural history. Indeed, the investigators in the myopia study above visited the same children and reassessed them a year later. This separate follow-up study[ 8 ] showed that “new” myopia had developed in 3.4% of children (incidence rate), with a mean change of −1.09 ± 0.55 D. Among those with myopia at the time of the initial survey, 49.2% showed progression of myopia with a mean change of −0.27 ± 0.42 D.

Cross-sectional studies are usually simple to do and inexpensive. Furthermore, these usually do not pose much of a challenge from an ethics viewpoint.

However, this design does carry a risk of bias, i.e., the results of the study may not represent the true situation in the population. This could arise from either selection bias or measurement bias. The former relates to differences between the population and the sample studied. The myopia study included only those children who attended school, and the prevalence of myopia could have been different in those did not attend school (e.g., those with severe myopia may not be able to see the blackboard and hence may have been more likely to drop out of school). The measurement bias in this study would relate to the accuracy of measurement and the cutoff used. If the investigators had used a cutoff of −0.25 D (instead of −0.50 D) to define myopia, the prevalence would have been higher. Furthermore, if the measurements were not done accurately, some cases with myopia could have been missed, or vice versa, affecting the study results.

Ecological studies

Ecological (also sometimes called as correlational) study design involves looking for association between an exposure and an outcome across populations rather than in individuals. For instance, a study in the United States found a relation between household firearm ownership in various states and the firearm death rates during the period 2007–2010.[ 9 ] Thus, in this study, the unit of assessment was a state and not an individual.

These studies are convenient to do since the data have often already been collected and are available from a reliable source. This design is particularly useful when the differences in exposure between individuals within a group are much smaller than the differences in exposure between groups. For instance, the intake of particular food items is likely to vary less between people in a particular group but can vary widely across groups, for example, people living in different countries.

However, the ecological study design has some important limitations.First, an association between exposure and outcome at the group level may not be true at the individual level (a phenomenon also referred to as “ecological fallacy”).[ 10 ] Second, the association may be related to a third factor which in turn is related to both the exposure and the outcome, the so-called “confounding”. For instance, an ecological association between higher income level and greater cardiovascular mortality across countries may be related to a higher prevalence of obesity. Third, migration of people between regions with different exposure levels may also introduce an error. A fourth consideration may be the use of differing definitions for exposure, outcome or both in different populations.

Descriptive studies, irrespective of the subtype, are often very easy to conduct. For case reports, case series, and ecological studies, the data are already available. For cross-sectional studies, these can be easily collected (usually in one encounter). Thus, these study designs are often inexpensive, quick and do not need too much effort. Furthermore, these studies often do not face serious ethics scrutiny, except if the information sought to be collected is of confidential nature (e.g., sexual practices, substance use, etc.).

Descriptive studies are useful for estimating the burden of disease (e.g., prevalence or incidence) in a population. This information is useful for resource planning. For instance, information on prevalence of cataract in a city may help the government decide on the appropriate number of ophthalmologic facilities. Data from descriptive studies done in different populations or done at different times in the same population may help identify geographic variation and temporal change in the frequency of disease. This may help generate hypotheses regarding the cause of the disease, which can then be verified using another, more complex design.

DISADVANTAGES

As with other study designs, descriptive studies have their own pitfalls. Case reports and case-series refer to a solitary patient or to only a few cases, who may represent a chance occurrence. Hence, conclusions based on these run the risk of being non-representative, and hence unreliable. In cross-sectional studies, the validity of results is highly dependent on whether the study sample is well representative of the population proposed to be studied, and whether all the individual measurements were made using an accurate and identical tool, or not. If the information on a variable cannot be obtained accurately, for instance in a study where the participants are asked about socially unacceptable (e.g., promiscuity) or illegal (e.g., substance use) behavior, the results are unlikely to be reliable.

Financial support and sponsorship

Conflicts of interest.

There are no conflicts of interest.

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

Knowledge Base
Methodology
Descriptive Research Design | Definition, Methods & Examples

Descriptive Research Design | Definition, Methods & Examples

Published on 5 May 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 10 October 2022.

Descriptive research aims to accurately and systematically describe a population, situation or phenomenon. It can answer what , where , when , and how questions , but not why questions.

When to use a descriptive research design, descriptive research methods.

Descriptive research is an appropriate choice when the research aim is to identify characteristics, frequencies, trends, and categories.

It is useful when not much is known yet about the topic or problem. Before you can research why something happens, you need to understand how, when, and where it happens.

How has the London housing market changed over the past 20 years?
Do customers of company X prefer product Y or product Z?
What are the main genetic, behavioural, and morphological differences between European wildcats and domestic cats?
What are the most popular online news sources among under-18s?
How prevalent is disease A in population B?

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Survey research allows you to gather large volumes of data that can be analysed for frequencies, averages, and patterns. Common uses of surveys include:

Describing the demographics of a country or region
Gauging public opinion on political and social topics
Evaluating satisfaction with a company’s products or an organisation’s services

Observations

Observations allow you to gather data on behaviours and phenomena without having to rely on the honesty and accuracy of respondents. This method is often used by psychological, social, and market researchers to understand how people act in real-life situations.

Observation of physical entities and phenomena is also an important part of research in the natural sciences. Before you can develop testable hypotheses , models, or theories, it’s necessary to observe and systematically describe the subject under investigation.

Case studies

A case study can be used to describe the characteristics of a specific subject (such as a person, group, event, or organisation). Instead of gathering a large volume of data to identify patterns across time or location, case studies gather detailed data to identify the characteristics of a narrowly defined subject.

Rather than aiming to describe generalisable facts, case studies often focus on unusual or interesting cases that challenge assumptions, add complexity, or reveal something new about a research problem .

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. (2022, October 10). Descriptive Research Design | Definition, Methods & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 9 September 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/descriptive-research-design/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, a quick guide to experimental design | 5 steps & examples, correlational research | guide, design & examples, qualitative vs quantitative research | examples & methods.

Subscribe to journal Subscribe
Get new issue alerts Get alerts

Secondary Logo

Journal logo.

Colleague's E-mail is Invalid

Your message has been successfully sent to your colleague.

Save my selection

Understanding Descriptive Research Designs and Methods

Siedlecki, Sandra L. PhD, RN, APRN-CNS, FAAN

Author Affiliation: Senior Nurse Scientist and Clinical Nurse Specialist, Office of Nursing Research & Innovation, Nursing Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Ohio.

The author reports no conflicts of interest.

Correspondence: Sandra L. Siedlecki, PhD, RN, APRN-CNS, 3271 Stillwater Dr, Medina, OH 44256 ( [email protected] ).

Full Text Access for Subscribers:

Individual subscribers.

Institutional Users

Not a subscriber.

You can read the full text of this article if you:

+ Favorites
View in Gallery

Readers Of this Article Also Read

Quasi-experimental research designs, correlation designs and analyses: what the clinical nurse specialist needs to..., conducting interviews for qualitative research studies, reporting outcomes: the time is now, maternity deserts: an ethical crisis looming.

Instant insights, infinite possibilities

What is descriptive research?

Last updated

5 February 2023

Reviewed by

Cathy Heath

Short on time? Get an AI generated summary of this article instead

Descriptive research is a common investigatory model used by researchers in various fields, including social sciences, linguistics, and academia.

Read on to understand the characteristics of descriptive research and explore its underlying techniques, processes, and procedures.

Analyze your descriptive research

Dovetail streamlines analysis to help you uncover and share actionable insights

Descriptive research is an exploratory research method. It enables researchers to precisely and methodically describe a population, circumstance, or phenomenon.

As the name suggests, descriptive research describes the characteristics of the group, situation, or phenomenon being studied without manipulating variables or testing hypotheses . This can be reported using surveys , observational studies, and case studies. You can use both quantitative and qualitative methods to compile the data.

Besides making observations and then comparing and analyzing them, descriptive studies often develop knowledge concepts and provide solutions to critical issues. It always aims to answer how the event occurred, when it occurred, where it occurred, and what the problem or phenomenon is.

Characteristics of descriptive research

The following are some of the characteristics of descriptive research:

Quantitativeness

Descriptive research can be quantitative as it gathers quantifiable data to statistically analyze a population sample. These numbers can show patterns, connections, and trends over time and can be discovered using surveys, polls, and experiments.

Qualitativeness

Descriptive research can also be qualitative. It gives meaning and context to the numbers supplied by quantitative descriptive research .

Researchers can use tools like interviews, focus groups, and ethnographic studies to illustrate why things are what they are and help characterize the research problem. This is because it’s more explanatory than exploratory or experimental research.

Uncontrolled variables

Descriptive research differs from experimental research in that researchers cannot manipulate the variables. They are recognized, scrutinized, and quantified instead. This is one of its most prominent features.

Cross-sectional studies

Descriptive research is a cross-sectional study because it examines several areas of the same group. It involves obtaining data on multiple variables at the personal level during a certain period. It’s helpful when trying to understand a larger community’s habits or preferences.

Carried out in a natural environment

Descriptive studies are usually carried out in the participants’ everyday environment, which allows researchers to avoid influencing responders by collecting data in a natural setting. You can use online surveys or survey questions to collect data or observe.

Basis for further research

You can further dissect descriptive research’s outcomes and use them for different types of investigation. The outcomes also serve as a foundation for subsequent investigations and can guide future studies. For example, you can use the data obtained in descriptive research to help determine future research designs.

Descriptive research methods

There are three basic approaches for gathering data in descriptive research: observational, case study, and survey.

You can use surveys to gather data in descriptive research. This involves gathering information from many people using a questionnaire and interview .

Surveys remain the dominant research tool for descriptive research design. Researchers can conduct various investigations and collect multiple types of data (quantitative and qualitative) using surveys with diverse designs.

You can conduct surveys over the phone, online, or in person. Your survey might be a brief interview or conversation with a set of prepared questions intended to obtain quick information from the primary source.

Observation

This descriptive research method involves observing and gathering data on a population or phenomena without manipulating variables. It is employed in psychology, market research , and other social science studies to track and understand human behavior.

Observation is an essential component of descriptive research. It entails gathering data and analyzing it to see whether there is a relationship between the two variables in the study. This strategy usually allows for both qualitative and quantitative data analysis.

Case studies

A case study can outline a specific topic’s traits. The topic might be a person, group, event, or organization.

It involves using a subset of a larger group as a sample to characterize the features of that larger group.

You can generalize knowledge gained from studying a case study to benefit a broader audience.

This approach entails carefully examining a particular group, person, or event over time. You can learn something new about the study topic by using a small group to better understand the dynamics of the entire group.

Types of descriptive research

There are several types of descriptive study. The most well-known include cross-sectional studies, census surveys, sample surveys, case reports, and comparison studies.

Case reports and case series

In the healthcare and medical fields, a case report is used to explain a patient’s circumstances when suffering from an uncommon illness or displaying certain symptoms. Case reports and case series are both collections of related cases. They have aided the advancement of medical knowledge on countless occasions.

The normative component is an addition to the descriptive survey. In the descriptive–normative survey, you compare the study’s results to the norm.

Descriptive survey

This descriptive type of research employs surveys to collect information on various topics. This data aims to determine the degree to which certain conditions may be attained.

You can extrapolate or generalize the information you obtain from sample surveys to the larger group being researched.

Correlative survey

Correlative surveys help establish if there is a positive, negative, or neutral connection between two variables.

Performing census surveys involves gathering relevant data on several aspects of a given population. These units include individuals, families, organizations, objects, characteristics, and properties.

During descriptive research, you gather different degrees of interest over time from a specific population. Cross-sectional studies provide a glimpse of a phenomenon’s prevalence and features in a population. There are no ethical challenges with them and they are quite simple and inexpensive to carry out.

Comparative studies

These surveys compare the two subjects’ conditions or characteristics. The subjects may include research variables, organizations, plans, and people.

Comparison points, assumption of similarities, and criteria of comparison are three important variables that affect how well and accurately comparative studies are conducted.

For instance, descriptive research can help determine how many CEOs hold a bachelor’s degree and what proportion of low-income households receive government help.

Pros and cons

The primary advantage of descriptive research designs is that researchers can create a reliable and beneficial database for additional study. To conduct any inquiry, you need access to reliable information sources that can give you a firm understanding of a situation.

Quantitative studies are time- and resource-intensive, so knowing the hypotheses viable for testing is crucial. The basic overview of descriptive research provides helpful hints as to which variables are worth quantitatively examining. This is why it’s employed as a precursor to quantitative research designs.

Some experts view this research as untrustworthy and unscientific. However, there is no way to assess the findings because you don’t manipulate any variables statistically.

Cause-and-effect correlations also can’t be established through descriptive investigations. Additionally, observational study findings cannot be replicated, which prevents a review of the findings and their replication.

The absence of statistical and in-depth analysis and the rather superficial character of the investigative procedure are drawbacks of this research approach.

Descriptive research examples and applications

Several descriptive research examples are emphasized based on their types, purposes, and applications. Research questions often begin with “What is …” These studies help find solutions to practical issues in social science, physical science, and education.

Here are some examples and applications of descriptive research:

Determining consumer perception and behavior

Organizations use descriptive research designs to determine how various demographic groups react to a certain product or service.

For example, a business looking to sell to its target market should research the market’s behavior first. When researching human behavior in response to a cause or event, the researcher pays attention to the traits, actions, and responses before drawing a conclusion.

Scientific classification

Scientific descriptive research enables the classification of organisms and their traits and constituents.

Measuring data trends

A descriptive study design’s statistical capabilities allow researchers to track data trends over time. It’s frequently used to determine the study target’s current circumstances and underlying patterns.

Conduct comparison

Organizations can use a descriptive research approach to learn how various demographics react to a certain product or service. For example, you can study how the target market responds to a competitor’s product and use that information to infer their behavior.

Bottom line

A descriptive research design is suitable for exploring certain topics and serving as a prelude to larger quantitative investigations. It provides a comprehensive understanding of the “what” of the group or thing you’re investigating.

This research type acts as the cornerstone of other research methodologies . It is distinctive because it can use quantitative and qualitative research approaches at the same time.

What is descriptive research design?

Descriptive research design aims to systematically obtain information to describe a phenomenon, situation, or population. More specifically, it helps answer the what, when, where, and how questions regarding the research problem rather than the why.

How does descriptive research compare to qualitative research?

Despite certain parallels, descriptive research concentrates on describing phenomena, while qualitative research aims to understand people better.

How do you analyze descriptive research data?

Data analysis involves using various methodologies, enabling the researcher to evaluate and provide results regarding validity and reliability.

Should you be using a customer insights hub?

Do you want to discover previous research faster?

Do you share your research findings with others?

Do you analyze research data?

Start for free today, add your research, and get to key insights faster

Editor’s picks

Last updated: 18 April 2023

Last updated: 27 February 2023

Last updated: 22 August 2024

Last updated: 5 February 2023

Last updated: 16 August 2024

Last updated: 9 March 2023

Last updated: 30 April 2024

Last updated: 12 December 2023

Last updated: 11 March 2024

Last updated: 4 July 2024

Last updated: 6 March 2024

Last updated: 5 March 2024

Last updated: 13 May 2024

Latest articles

Related topics, .css-je19u9{-webkit-align-items:flex-end;-webkit-box-align:flex-end;-ms-flex-align:flex-end;align-items:flex-end;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:row;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;-webkit-box-flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-box-pack:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;justify-content:center;row-gap:0;text-align:center;max-width:671px;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}}@media (max-width: 799px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}} decide what to .css-1kiodld{max-height:56px;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-1kiodld{display:none;}} build next, decide what to build next, log in or sign up.

Get started for free

An official website of the United States government

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

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

Publications
Account settings
My Bibliography
Collections
Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

Create a new collection
Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

Search in PubMed
Search in NLM Catalog
Add to Search

Understanding Descriptive Research Designs and Methods

Affiliation.

1 Author Affiliation: Senior Nurse Scientist and Clinical Nurse Specialist, Office of Nursing Research & Innovation, Nursing Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Ohio.
PMID: 31789957
DOI: 10.1097/NUR.0000000000000493

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

Ovid Technologies, Inc.
Wolters Kluwer

Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

Search this journal
Search all journals
View access options
View profile
Create profile

Add email alerts

You are adding the following journal to your email alerts

	New content
Journal of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology Nursing

Research Design: Descriptive Research

Cite article, share options, information, rights and permissions, metrics and citations.

Get full access to this article

View all access and purchase options for this article.

Download to reference manager

If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice

Share this article

Share with email, share on social media, share access to this article.

Sharing links are not relevant where the article is open access and not available if you do not have a subscription.

For more information view the Sage Journals article sharing page.

Information

Published in.

Rights and permissions

Affiliations, journals metrics.

This article was published in Journal of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology Nursing .

Article usage *

Total views and downloads: 11160

* Article usage tracking started in December 2016

Articles citing this one

Receive email alerts when this article is cited

Web of Science: 0

Crossref: 52

Physical features of unplanned settlements in Herat City, Afghanistan Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Implementation of the strengths model of case management for people wi... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
ÖĞRETMEN ALGILARINA GÖRE LİSELERDE LİDERLİK KAPASİTESİ, OKUL GELİŞTİRM... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Comparative analysis of Rights of Nature (RoN) case studies worldwide:... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Desvendando a Influência da Lei de Responsabilidade Fiscal nos Estados... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
The psychometric properties of the ADHD rating scale—5 for children an... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Opening a new horizon in digitalization for e-learning in Malaysia: Em... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Opening a new horizon in green HRM practices with big data analytics a... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Investigation of research support services (RSS) in academic libraries... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Was 2021–2022 an Annus Horribilis for teacher educators? Reflections o... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Examining underutilized jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus) seeds as ... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
PERSPECTIVES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SDGS AS AN INNOVATIVE STRAT... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Implementation of a strengths-based approach in a traumatic brain inju... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Teaching inside a digital classroom: A quantitative analysis of attitu... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
A Survey Study on the Use of Music for Self-care during Menopause Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Family–work conflict and work-from-home productivity: do work engageme... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Groundnut market participation in Zimbabwe: A case of Makoni District Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Confrontation and Avoidance of Uncivil Behaviors in the Workplace: Emp... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
YAŞLANMA ÇALIŞMALARINDA YÖNTEMSEL SORUNLAR: TEMEL KAVRAMLAR VE ÖRNEKLE... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Insights into the Political Economy of Protection: The Case of Interna... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Exploration of a Strengths-Based Rehabilitation Perspective with Adult... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Teachers’ Mindsets in Foreign Language Classrooms Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Who Does What? Analysing Gender Division of Labour in Cocoa Households... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
“There Was Something Missing”: Using the Critical Response Protocol as... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
An Investigation into The Online Assessment and The Autonomy of Non-En... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
An examination of patterns of caregiver responsiveness and toddler com... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Challenges of COVID-19 Lockdown on Indian Universities Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Palliative Care Support for Cancer Patients: Short Commentary Article Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Impact of Employee Engagement on Company Performance: The Four-Box Bus... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
The silence of black female voices in the course of learning english l... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Wellbeing of Palliative Care Workers During Covid-19 Pandemic: Implica... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Characterizing Undergraduate Students’ Systems-Thinking Skills through... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Corporate bankruptcy: Evidence from the plastics and packaging industr... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Effects of Academic Integrity of Faculty Members on Students’ Ethical ... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Lean Adoption for Trade Contractors: Benefits, Barriers, and Path Forw... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Methodology and Methods Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
The Role of an Agile and Lean Project Management Toolkit for Assisting... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Yönetim Felsefesi Bağlamında Doğu ve Batı İttihad Eder mi? Gazali ve M... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
A Study on the Causes and Effects of Stressful Situations in Tourism f... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Artificial Intelligence (Ai) In The Food And Beverage Industry: Improv... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Characteristics of Technology Adoption by Older Adults with Visual Dis... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Ağ teknolojileri ile ilgili makalelerin bibliyografik yöntemle incelen... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
What do participants perceive as the attributes of a good adventure sp... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
An implementation of project‐based learning in an EFL context: Japanes... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Factors influencing teachers’ professional learning: A study of Turkis... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Cost-Effective Solutions in Cloud Computing Security Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
An analysis of the perceptions of the role of social media marketing i... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Ambient intelligence: Placement of Kinect sensors in the home of older... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
A Descriptive Study of Crowdfunding Projects Related Coronavirus Pande... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Information and Communications Technology and Education Customized for... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Role of consumer vanity and the mediating effect of brand consciousnes... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Reframing the role, identity and standards for practice for registered... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
Quantitative Methods in Pharmacy Practice Research Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
The research evidence published in high impact nursing journals betwee... Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar

Figures and tables

Figures & media, view options, access options.

If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:

I am signed in as:

I can access personal subscriptions, purchases, paired institutional access and free tools such as favourite journals, email alerts and saved searches.

Access personal subscriptions, purchases, paired institutional or society access and free tools such as email alerts and saved searches.

loading institutional access options

Click the button below for the full-text content

APHON members can access this journal content using society membership credentials.

Alternatively, view purchase options below:

Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.

Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.

View options

You currently have no access to this content. Visit the access options page to authenticate.

Also from Sage

CQ Library Elevating debate opens in new tab
Sage Data Uncovering insight opens in new tab
Sage Business Cases Shaping futures opens in new tab
Sage Campus Unleashing potential opens in new tab
Sage Knowledge Multimedia learning resources opens in new tab
Sage Research Methods Supercharging research opens in new tab
Sage Video Streaming knowledge opens in new tab
Technology from Sage Library digital services opens in new tab

Descriptive Research Designs: Types, Examples & Methods

One of the components of research is getting enough information about the research problem—the what, how, when and where answers, which is why descriptive research is an important type of research. It is very useful when conducting research whose aim is to identify characteristics, frequencies, trends, correlations, and categories.

This research method takes a problem with little to no relevant information and gives it a befitting description using qualitative and quantitative research method s. Descriptive research aims to accurately describe a research problem.

In the subsequent sections, we will be explaining what descriptive research means, its types, examples, and data collection methods.

What is Descriptive Research?

Descriptive research is a type of research that describes a population, situation, or phenomenon that is being studied. It focuses on answering the how, what, when, and where questions If a research problem, rather than the why.

This is mainly because it is important to have a proper understanding of what a research problem is about before investigating why it exists in the first place.

For example, an investor considering an investment in the ever-changing Amsterdam housing market needs to understand what the current state of the market is, how it changes (increasing or decreasing), and when it changes (time of the year) before asking for the why. This is where descriptive research comes in.

What Are The Types of Descriptive Research?

Descriptive research is classified into different types according to the kind of approach that is used in conducting descriptive research. The different types of descriptive research are highlighted below:

Descriptive-survey

Descriptive survey research uses surveys to gather data about varying subjects. This data aims to know the extent to which different conditions can be obtained among these subjects.

For example, a researcher wants to determine the qualification of employed professionals in Maryland. He uses a survey as his research instrument , and each item on the survey related to qualifications is subjected to a Yes/No answer.

This way, the researcher can describe the qualifications possessed by the employed demographics of this community.

Descriptive-normative survey

This is an extension of the descriptive survey, with the addition being the normative element. In the descriptive-normative survey, the results of the study should be compared with the norm.

For example, an organization that wishes to test the skills of its employees by a team may have them take a skills test. The skills tests are the evaluation tool in this case, and the result of this test is compared with the norm of each role.

If the score of the team is one standard deviation above the mean, it is very satisfactory, if within the mean, satisfactory, and one standard deviation below the mean is unsatisfactory.

Descriptive-status

This is a quantitative description technique that seeks to answer questions about real-life situations. For example, a researcher researching the income of the employees in a company, and the relationship with their performance.

A survey will be carried out to gather enough data about the income of the employees, then their performance will be evaluated and compared to their income. This will help determine whether a higher income means better performance and low income means lower performance or vice versa.

Descriptive-analysis

The descriptive-analysis method of research describes a subject by further analyzing it, which in this case involves dividing it into 2 parts. For example, the HR personnel of a company that wishes to analyze the job role of each employee of the company may divide the employees into the people that work at the Headquarters in the US and those that work from Oslo, Norway office.

A questionnaire is devised to analyze the job role of employees with similar salaries and who work in similar positions.

Descriptive classification

This method is employed in biological sciences for the classification of plants and animals. A researcher who wishes to classify the sea animals into different species will collect samples from various search stations, then classify them accordingly.

Descriptive-comparative

In descriptive-comparative research, the researcher considers 2 variables that are not manipulated, and establish a formal procedure to conclude that one is better than the other. For example, an examination body wants to determine the better method of conducting tests between paper-based and computer-based tests.

A random sample of potential participants of the test may be asked to use the 2 different methods, and factors like failure rates, time factors, and others will be evaluated to arrive at the best method.

Correlative Survey

Correlative surveys are used to determine whether the relationship between 2 variables is positive, negative, or neutral. That is, if 2 variables say X and Y are directly proportional, inversely proportional or are not related to each other.

Examples of Descriptive Research

There are different examples of descriptive research, that may be highlighted from its types, uses, and applications. However, we will be restricting ourselves to only 3 distinct examples in this article.

Comparing Student Performance:

An academic institution may wish 2 compare the performance of its junior high school students in English language and Mathematics. This may be used to classify students based on 2 major groups, with one group going ahead to study while courses, while the other study courses in the Arts & Humanities field.

Students who are more proficient in mathematics will be encouraged to go into STEM and vice versa. Institutions may also use this data to identify students’ weak points and work on ways to assist them.

Scientific Classification

During the major scientific classification of plants, animals, and periodic table elements, the characteristics and components of each subject are evaluated and used to determine how they are classified.

For example, living things may be classified into kingdom Plantae or kingdom animal is depending on their nature. Further classification may group animals into mammals, pieces, vertebrae, invertebrae, etc.

All these classifications are made a result of descriptive research which describes what they are.

Human Behavior

When studying human behaviour based on a factor or event, the researcher observes the characteristics, behaviour, and reaction, then use it to conclude. A company willing to sell to its target market needs to first study the behaviour of the market.

This may be done by observing how its target reacts to a competitor’s product, then use it to determine their behaviour.

What are the Characteristics of Descriptive Research?

The characteristics of descriptive research can be highlighted from its definition, applications, data collection methods, and examples. Some characteristics of descriptive research are:

Quantitativeness

Descriptive research uses a quantitative research method by collecting quantifiable information to be used for statistical analysis of the population sample. This is very common when dealing with research in the physical sciences.

Qualitativeness

It can also be carried out using the qualitative research method, to properly describe the research problem. This is because descriptive research is more explanatory than exploratory or experimental.

Uncontrolled variables

In descriptive research, researchers cannot control the variables like they do in experimental research.

The basis for further research

The results of descriptive research can be further analyzed and used in other research methods. It can also inform the next line of research, including the research method that should be used.

This is because it provides basic information about the research problem, which may give birth to other questions like why a particular thing is the way it is.

Why Use Descriptive Research Design?

Descriptive research can be used to investigate the background of a research problem and get the required information needed to carry out further research. It is used in multiple ways by different organizations, and especially when getting the required information about their target audience.

Define subject characteristics :

It is used to determine the characteristics of the subjects, including their traits, behaviour, opinion, etc. This information may be gathered with the use of surveys, which are shared with the respondents who in this case, are the research subjects.

For example, a survey evaluating the number of hours millennials in a community spends on the internet weekly, will help a service provider make informed business decisions regarding the market potential of the community.

Measure Data Trends

It helps to measure the changes in data over some time through statistical methods. Consider the case of individuals who want to invest in stock markets, so they evaluate the changes in prices of the available stocks to make a decision investment decision.

Brokerage companies are however the ones who carry out the descriptive research process, while individuals can view the data trends and make decisions.

Descriptive research is also used to compare how different demographics respond to certain variables. For example, an organization may study how people with different income levels react to the launch of a new Apple phone.

This kind of research may take a survey that will help determine which group of individuals are purchasing the new Apple phone. Do the low-income earners also purchase the phone, or only the high-income earners do?

Further research using another technique will explain why low-income earners are purchasing the phone even though they can barely afford it. This will help inform strategies that will lure other low-income earners and increase company sales.

Validate existing conditions

When you are not sure about the validity of an existing condition, you can use descriptive research to ascertain the underlying patterns of the research object. This is because descriptive research methods make an in-depth analysis of each variable before making conclusions.

Conducted Overtime

Descriptive research is conducted over some time to ascertain the changes observed at each point in time. The higher the number of times it is conducted, the more authentic the conclusion will be.

What are the Disadvantages of Descriptive Research?

Response and Non-response Bias

Respondents may either decide not to respond to questions or give incorrect responses if they feel the questions are too confidential. When researchers use observational methods, respondents may also decide to behave in a particular manner because they feel they are being watched.

The researcher may decide to influence the result of the research due to personal opinion or bias towards a particular subject. For example, a stockbroker who also has a business of his own may try to lure investors into investing in his own company by manipulating results.
A case-study or sample taken from a large population is not representative of the whole population.
Limited scope:The scope of descriptive research is limited to the what of research, with no information on why thereby limiting the scope of the research.

What are the Data Collection Methods in Descriptive Research?

There are 3 main data collection methods in descriptive research, namely; observational method, case study method, and survey research.

1. Observational Method

The observational method allows researchers to collect data based on their view of the behaviour and characteristics of the respondent, with the respondents themselves not directly having an input. It is often used in market research, psychology, and some other social science research to understand human behaviour.

It is also an important aspect of physical scientific research, with it being one of the most effective methods of conducting descriptive research . This process can be said to be either quantitative or qualitative.

Quantitative observation involved the objective collection of numerical data , whose results can be analyzed using numerical and statistical methods.

Qualitative observation, on the other hand, involves the monitoring of characteristics and not the measurement of numbers. The researcher makes his observation from a distance, records it, and is used to inform conclusions.

2. Case Study Method

A case study is a sample group (an individual, a group of people, organizations, events, etc.) whose characteristics are used to describe the characteristics of a larger group in which the case study is a subgroup. The information gathered from investigating a case study may be generalized to serve the larger group.

This generalization, may, however, be risky because case studies are not sufficient to make accurate predictions about larger groups. Case studies are a poor case of generalization.

3. Survey Research

This is a very popular data collection method in research designs. In survey research, researchers create a survey or questionnaire and distribute it to respondents who give answers.

Generally, it is used to obtain quick information directly from the primary source and also conducting rigorous quantitative and qualitative research. In some cases, survey research uses a blend of both qualitative and quantitative strategies.

Survey research can be carried out both online and offline using the following methods

Online Surveys: This is a cheap method of carrying out surveys and getting enough responses. It can be carried out using Formplus, an online survey builder. Formplus has amazing tools and features that will help increase response rates.
Offline Surveys: This includes paper forms, mobile offline forms , and SMS-based forms.

What Are The Differences Between Descriptive and Correlational Research?

Before going into the differences between descriptive and correlation research, we need to have a proper understanding of what correlation research is about. Therefore, we will be giving a summary of the correlation research below.

Correlational research is a type of descriptive research, which is used to measure the relationship between 2 variables, with the researcher having no control over them. It aims to find whether there is; positive correlation (both variables change in the same direction), negative correlation (the variables change in the opposite direction), or zero correlation (there is no relationship between the variables).

Correlational research may be used in 2 situations;

(i) when trying to find out if there is a relationship between two variables, and

(ii) when a causal relationship is suspected between two variables, but it is impractical or unethical to conduct experimental research that manipulates one of the variables.

Below are some of the differences between correlational and descriptive research:

Definitions :

Descriptive research aims is a type of research that provides an in-depth understanding of the study population, while correlational research is the type of research that measures the relationship between 2 variables.

Characteristics :

Descriptive research provides descriptive data explaining what the research subject is about, while correlation research explores the relationship between data and not their description.

Predictions :

Predictions cannot be made in descriptive research while correlation research accommodates the possibility of making predictions.

Descriptive Research vs. Causal Research

Descriptive research and causal research are both research methodologies, however, one focuses on a subject’s behaviors while the latter focuses on a relationship’s cause-and-effect. To buttress the above point, descriptive research aims to describe and document the characteristics, behaviors, or phenomena of a particular or specific population or situation.

It focuses on providing an accurate and detailed account of an already existing state of affairs between variables. Descriptive research answers the questions of “what,” “where,” “when,” and “how” without attempting to establish any causal relationships or explain any underlying factors that might have caused the behavior.

Causal research, on the other hand, seeks to determine cause-and-effect relationships between variables. It aims to point out the factors that influence or cause a particular result or behavior. Causal research involves manipulating variables, controlling conditions or a subgroup, and observing the resulting effects. The primary objective of causal research is to establish a cause-effect relationship and provide insights into why certain phenomena happen the way they do.

Descriptive Research vs. Analytical Research

Descriptive research provides a detailed and comprehensive account of a specific situation or phenomenon. It focuses on describing and summarizing data without making inferences or attempting to explain underlying factors or the cause of the factor.

It is primarily concerned with providing an accurate and objective representation of the subject of research. While analytical research goes beyond the description of the phenomena and seeks to analyze and interpret data to discover if there are patterns, relationships, or any underlying factors.

It examines the data critically, applies statistical techniques or other analytical methods, and draws conclusions based on the discovery. Analytical research also aims to explore the relationships between variables and understand the underlying mechanisms or processes involved.

Descriptive Research vs. Exploratory Research

Descriptive research is a research method that focuses on providing a detailed and accurate account of a specific situation, group, or phenomenon. This type of research describes the characteristics, behaviors, or relationships within the given context without looking for an underlying cause.

Descriptive research typically involves collecting and analyzing quantitative or qualitative data to generate descriptive statistics or narratives. Exploratory research differs from descriptive research because it aims to explore and gain firsthand insights or knowledge into a relatively unexplored or poorly understood topic.

It focuses on generating ideas, hypotheses, or theories rather than providing definitive answers. Exploratory research is often conducted at the early stages of a research project to gather preliminary information and identify key variables or factors for further investigation. It involves open-ended interviews, observations, or small-scale surveys to gather qualitative data.

Read More – Exploratory Research: What are its Method & Examples?

Descriptive Research vs. Experimental Research

Descriptive research aims to describe and document the characteristics, behaviors, or phenomena of a particular population or situation. It focuses on providing an accurate and detailed account of the existing state of affairs.

Descriptive research typically involves collecting data through surveys, observations, or existing records and analyzing the data to generate descriptive statistics or narratives. It does not involve manipulating variables or establishing cause-and-effect relationships.

Experimental research, on the other hand, involves manipulating variables and controlling conditions to investigate cause-and-effect relationships. It aims to establish causal relationships by introducing an intervention or treatment and observing the resulting effects.

Experimental research typically involves randomly assigning participants to different groups, such as control and experimental groups, and measuring the outcomes. It allows researchers to control for confounding variables and draw causal conclusions.

Related – Experimental vs Non-Experimental Research: 15 Key Differences

Descriptive Research vs. Explanatory Research

Descriptive research focuses on providing a detailed and accurate account of a specific situation, group, or phenomenon. It aims to describe the characteristics, behaviors, or relationships within the given context.

Descriptive research is primarily concerned with providing an objective representation of the subject of study without explaining underlying causes or mechanisms. Explanatory research seeks to explain the relationships between variables and uncover the underlying causes or mechanisms.

It goes beyond description and aims to understand the reasons or factors that influence a particular outcome or behavior. Explanatory research involves analyzing data, conducting statistical analyses, and developing theories or models to explain the observed relationships.

Descriptive Research vs. Inferential Research

Descriptive research focuses on describing and summarizing data without making inferences or generalizations beyond the specific sample or population being studied. It aims to provide an accurate and objective representation of the subject of study.

Descriptive research typically involves analyzing data to generate descriptive statistics, such as means, frequencies, or percentages, to describe the characteristics or behaviors observed.

Inferential research, however, involves making inferences or generalizations about a larger population based on a smaller sample.

It aims to draw conclusions about the population characteristics or relationships by analyzing the sample data. Inferential research uses statistical techniques to estimate population parameters, test hypotheses, and determine the level of confidence or significance in the findings.

Related – Inferential Statistics: Definition, Types + Examples

Conclusion

The uniqueness of descriptive research partly lies in its ability to explore both quantitative and qualitative research methods. Therefore, when conducting descriptive research, researchers have the opportunity to use a wide variety of techniques that aids the research process.

Descriptive research explores research problems in-depth, beyond the surface level thereby giving a detailed description of the research subject. That way, it can aid further research in the field, including other research methods .

It is also very useful in solving real-life problems in various fields of social science, physical science, and education.

Connect to Formplus, Get Started Now - It's Free!

descriptive research
descriptive research method
example of descriptive research
types of descriptive research
busayo.longe

Type I vs Type II Errors: Causes, Examples & Prevention

This article will discuss the two different types of errors in hypothesis testing and how you can prevent them from occurring in your research

Cross-Sectional Studies: Types, Pros, Cons & Uses

In this article, we’ll look at what cross-sectional studies are, how it applies to your research and how to use Formplus to collect...

Extrapolation in Statistical Research: Definition, Examples, Types, Applications

In this article we’ll look at the different types and characteristics of extrapolation, plus how it contrasts to interpolation.

Acceptance Sampling: Meaning, Examples, When to Use

In this post, we will discuss extensively what acceptance sampling is and when it is applied.

Formplus - For Seamless Data Collection

Collect data the right way with a versatile data collection tool. try formplus and transform your work productivity today..

Demystifying the research process: understanding a descriptive comparative research design

Citation metadata, document controls, main content.

Demystifying the research process often involves understanding research terminology, the rationale for the selection of a research design, and the known benefits and consequences in the selection of a design. This commentary discusses the major aspects of a well-known and used quantitative research design in nursing research used by Tourigny, Clendinneng, Chartrand, and Gaboury (2011) to evaluate the utility of a virtual education tool for pediatric patients undergoing same-day surgery. The rationale for why this design was chosen by these nurse researchers and its advantages and disadvantages are discussed.

A research design is the overall plan for answering research questions and hypotheses. The design spells out strategies the researcher adopts to gather accurate, objective, and interpretable information (Polit & Beck, 2007). Tourigny et al. (2011) used a non-experimental, quantitative research design known as a descriptive, comparative design. It is also known as casual comparative research and pre-experimental research. The basic purpose of these designs is to determine the relationship among variables. The most important distinctions between these designs and experimental designs are no control (manipulation) of the independent variable (IV) and no random assignment of study subjects to the intervention or control group. These designs are frequently used in nursing research studies because nurse researchers are often faced with these specific limitations.

In summary, the known properties of descriptive, comparative research studies are 1) no manipulation of an independent variable, 2) no random assignment to groups, and 3) often inclusion of a control or comparison group. The paradigm for these studies is diagrammed in Figure 1.

In this diagram (see Figure 1), the researcher hypothesizes that "X" is related to and a determinant (cause) of "Y," but the presumed causes are not manipulated, and subjects are not randomly assigned to groups (LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 2010). Rather, a group of subjects who has experienced "X" in a natural situation is located, and a control group of subjects who has not experienced "X" is chosen. The behavior performance or condition of the two groups is compared to determine whether the exposure to "X" had an effect predicted by the hypothesis (LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 2010). Tourigny et al. (2011) hypothesized a determinant of study participants' level of knowledge about hospital equipment and procedures, and their emotional state would differ based upon whether or not they viewed the Surgery Virtual Tour presentation. In this study, the exposed group resulted from participants choosing to view the Surgery Virtual Tour. These researchers then compared this group with a group at the same institution who did not view the Surgery Virtual Tour presentation.

Tourigny et al. (2011) noted that the Surgery Virtual Tour was posted on the hospital's Web site and available to all children, adolescents, and parents being cared for at this institution. Thus, these researchers had no control over which study participants viewed or did not view the educational program. Prohibiting access of this educational program to some participants for the purposes of conducting this research study would have violated these children's, adolescents', and parents' ethical right to fair treatment. The right to fair treatment is based on the ethical principle of justice that each person should be treated fairly and should receive what he or she is due or owed (Burns & Grove, 2005).

An important criterion in determining a research design's rigor is its potential to generate findings that are interpretable. The term interpretable relates to the credibility and dependability of data generated by a study, and is based on the study's design to sufficiently test "cause and effect" relationships. The term "causality" implies that a systematic relationship exists between the independent variable (IV), which is the "cause" or intervention of the study design, and the dependent variable(s) (DV) or the outcome(s) of the study. In other words, confidence that the outcome of a research study is a consequence of the effects of the intervention must exist.

There are three criteria for causality: 1) the cause (the IV) must precede the effect (the DV) in time, such that the IV had to occur before the DV); 2) an empirical relationship exists between the IV and DV, meaning that a relationship that is measurable must exist between the presumed cause and effect; and 3) the relationship between the IV and DV cannot be explained by a third variable. Of these three criteria, researchers are most concerned about ensuring results of their study are due to the experimental treatment and not due to the characteristics of the subjects or other competing explanations for the results. Characteristics of the subjects or other competing explanations are known as internal validity threats.

There are several limitations in the design used by Tourigny et al. (2011) that threaten the confidence in their study's findings, specifically having no control over the internal validity and characteristics of the subjects influencing the outcome of the study. The internal validity threat due to characteristics of the subjects is known as selection bias and is always a threat if random assignment to groups does not occur. Researchers are cautioned to be aware that when intact groups are compared, differences existing between the two groups before the start of the experiment could have affected the outcome of the study. People "self-select" to a group based on personal characteristics and preferences, and these personal characteristics and preferences can influence the outcome of a study. Tourigny et al. (2011) addressed this potential threat operating in their study's findings by measuring selected differences in sociodemographic variables that could have accounted for dissimilarities between the groups. There were no significant differences in socio-demographic variables between participants who viewed or did not view the Virtual Tour, with the exception that families who took the Tour were more likely to have access to the Internet at home (Tourigny et al., 2011). These findings provide some evidence that these socio-demographic variables can be ruled out as internal validity threats operating in this study; however, it remains unknown if characteristics not measured by Tourigny and colleagues could be operating as threats to the study's interal validity. It is not feasible to measure an exhaustive list of socio-demographic characteristics that could pose every possible internal validity threat related to study participants' characteristics, but researchers carefully select known factors from previous studies and their clinical experiences as was done by Tourigny et al.

Another strategy used by Tourigny et al. (2011) to increase the internal validity of their study was to establish inclusion and exclusion criteria to determine the study's sample. Inclusion and exclusion criteria are guidelines or the standards determining who can or cannot be in the study. Population descriptors, also known as important characteristics of a population, are criteria that set the standards. These characteristics can also operate as internal validity threats in a study. In their study, Tourigny et al. identified the inclusion criteria for their study as only allowing children and adolescents 6 to 18 years of age, able to understand or read and write in English, be at a schoolage cognitive level, and who gave an assent or written consent to be in the study. They also excluded children with any developmental or physical state that could prevent them from completing the questionnaires. These criteria placed more control over potential internal validity threats operating in the study, but as a consequence of doing so, the external validity of the study's findings was decreased. External validity addresses the ability to generalize the findings of the study to other groups. The findings generated by Tourigny et al. are not generalizable to children younger than 6 years, who are unable to understand or read and write in English, are not at a school-age cognitive level, or have a developmental or physical impairment. Internal and external validity have an inverse relationship; the more internal validity control a study design employs, the more likely its external validity will be limited.

In summary, Tourigny and colleagues (2011) selected a feasible research design; its implementation protected research participants' ethical rights, tested the identified intervention, and generated interpretable findings. A researcher's choice in selecting a research design is dependent on many factors, and researchers usually make conscious decisions in their selection to augment some aspects of rigor in their study while foregoing others. Selection of a research design requires creativity to maximize interpretable findings within known limitations in conducting the investigation.

Burns, S., & Groves, S.K. (2004). Understanding nursing research (3rd ed.). Philadelphia: Saunders.

LoBiondo-Wood, G., & Haber, J. (2010). Nursing research: Methods and critical appraisal for evidence-based practice (7th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier.

Polit, D.F., & Beck, C.T. (2007). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (8th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Bridging the Gap: Overcome these 7 flaws in descriptive research design

Descriptive research design is a powerful tool used by scientists and researchers to gather information about a particular group or phenomenon. This type of research provides a detailed and accurate picture of the characteristics and behaviors of a particular population or subject. By observing and collecting data on a given topic, descriptive research helps researchers gain a deeper understanding of a specific issue and provides valuable insights that can inform future studies.

In this blog, we will explore the definition, characteristics, and common flaws in descriptive research design, and provide tips on how to avoid these pitfalls to produce high-quality results. Whether you are a seasoned researcher or a student just starting, understanding the fundamentals of descriptive research design is essential to conducting successful scientific studies.

Table of Contents

What Is Descriptive Research Design?

The descriptive research design involves observing and collecting data on a given topic without attempting to infer cause-and-effect relationships. The goal of descriptive research is to provide a comprehensive and accurate picture of the population or phenomenon being studied and to describe the relationships, patterns, and trends that exist within the data.

Descriptive research methods can include surveys, observational studies , and case studies, and the data collected can be qualitative or quantitative . The findings from descriptive research provide valuable insights and inform future research, but do not establish cause-and-effect relationships.

Importance of Descriptive Research in Scientific Studies

1. understanding of a population or phenomenon.

Descriptive research provides a comprehensive picture of the characteristics and behaviors of a particular population or phenomenon, allowing researchers to gain a deeper understanding of the topic.

2. Baseline Information

The information gathered through descriptive research can serve as a baseline for future research and provide a foundation for further studies.

3. Informative Data

Descriptive research can provide valuable information and insights into a particular topic, which can inform future research, policy decisions, and programs.

4. Sampling Validation

Descriptive research can be used to validate sampling methods and to help researchers determine the best approach for their study.

5. Cost Effective

Descriptive research is often less expensive and less time-consuming than other research methods , making it a cost-effective way to gather information about a particular population or phenomenon.

6. Easy to Replicate

Descriptive research is straightforward to replicate, making it a reliable way to gather and compare information from multiple sources.

Key Characteristics of Descriptive Research Design

The primary purpose of descriptive research is to describe the characteristics, behaviors, and attributes of a particular population or phenomenon.

2. Participants and Sampling

Descriptive research studies a particular population or sample that is representative of the larger population being studied. Furthermore, sampling methods can include convenience, stratified, or random sampling.

3. Data Collection Techniques

Descriptive research typically involves the collection of both qualitative and quantitative data through methods such as surveys, observational studies, case studies, or focus groups.

4. Data Analysis

Descriptive research data is analyzed to identify patterns, relationships, and trends within the data. Statistical techniques , such as frequency distributions and descriptive statistics, are commonly used to summarize and describe the data.

5. Focus on Description

Descriptive research is focused on describing and summarizing the characteristics of a particular population or phenomenon. It does not make causal inferences.

6. Non-Experimental

Descriptive research is non-experimental, meaning that the researcher does not manipulate variables or control conditions. The researcher simply observes and collects data on the population or phenomenon being studied.

When Can a Researcher Conduct Descriptive Research?

A researcher can conduct descriptive research in the following situations:

To better understand a particular population or phenomenon
To describe the relationships between variables
To describe patterns and trends
To validate sampling methods and determine the best approach for a study
To compare data from multiple sources.

Types of Descriptive Research Design

1. survey research.

Surveys are a type of descriptive research that involves collecting data through self-administered or interviewer-administered questionnaires. Additionally, they can be administered in-person, by mail, or online, and can collect both qualitative and quantitative data.

2. Observational Research

Observational research involves observing and collecting data on a particular population or phenomenon without manipulating variables or controlling conditions. It can be conducted in naturalistic settings or controlled laboratory settings.

3. Case Study Research

Case study research is a type of descriptive research that focuses on a single individual, group, or event. It involves collecting detailed information on the subject through a variety of methods, including interviews, observations, and examination of documents.

4. Focus Group Research

Focus group research involves bringing together a small group of people to discuss a particular topic or product. Furthermore, the group is usually moderated by a researcher and the discussion is recorded for later analysis.

5. Ethnographic Research

Ethnographic research involves conducting detailed observations of a particular culture or community. It is often used to gain a deep understanding of the beliefs, behaviors, and practices of a particular group.

Advantages of Descriptive Research Design

1. provides a comprehensive understanding.

Descriptive research provides a comprehensive picture of the characteristics, behaviors, and attributes of a particular population or phenomenon, which can be useful in informing future research and policy decisions.

2. Non-invasive

Descriptive research is non-invasive and does not manipulate variables or control conditions, making it a suitable method for sensitive or ethical concerns.

3. Flexibility

Descriptive research allows for a wide range of data collection methods , including surveys, observational studies, case studies, and focus groups, making it a flexible and versatile research method.

4. Cost-effective

Descriptive research is often less expensive and less time-consuming than other research methods. Moreover, it gives a cost-effective option to many researchers.

5. Easy to Replicate

Descriptive research is easy to replicate, making it a reliable way to gather and compare information from multiple sources.

6. Informs Future Research

The insights gained from a descriptive research can inform future research and inform policy decisions and programs.

Disadvantages of Descriptive Research Design

1. limited scope.

Descriptive research only provides a snapshot of the current situation and cannot establish cause-and-effect relationships.

2. Dependence on Existing Data

Descriptive research relies on existing data, which may not always be comprehensive or accurate.

3. Lack of Control

Researchers have no control over the variables in descriptive research, which can limit the conclusions that can be drawn.

The researcher’s own biases and preconceptions can influence the interpretation of the data.

5. Lack of Generalizability

Descriptive research findings may not be applicable to other populations or situations.

6. Lack of Depth

Descriptive research provides a surface-level understanding of a phenomenon, rather than a deep understanding.

7. Time-consuming

Descriptive research often requires a large amount of data collection and analysis, which can be time-consuming and resource-intensive.

7 Ways to Avoid Common Flaws While Designing Descriptive Research

1. Clearly define the research question

A clearly defined research question is the foundation of any research study, and it is important to ensure that the question is both specific and relevant to the topic being studied.

2. Choose the appropriate research design

Choosing the appropriate research design for a study is crucial to the success of the study. Moreover, researchers should choose a design that best fits the research question and the type of data needed to answer it.

3. Select a representative sample

Selecting a representative sample is important to ensure that the findings of the study are generalizable to the population being studied. Researchers should use a sampling method that provides a random and representative sample of the population.

4. Use valid and reliable data collection methods

Using valid and reliable data collection methods is important to ensure that the data collected is accurate and can be used to answer the research question. Researchers should choose methods that are appropriate for the study and that can be administered consistently and systematically.

5. Minimize bias

Bias can significantly impact the validity and reliability of research findings. Furthermore, it is important to minimize bias in all aspects of the study, from the selection of participants to the analysis of data.

6. Ensure adequate sample size

An adequate sample size is important to ensure that the results of the study are statistically significant and can be generalized to the population being studied.

7. Use appropriate data analysis techniques

The appropriate data analysis technique depends on the type of data collected and the research question being asked. Researchers should choose techniques that are appropriate for the data and the question being asked.

Have you worked on descriptive research designs? How was your experience creating a descriptive design? What challenges did you face? Do write to us or leave a comment below and share your insights on descriptive research designs!

extremely very educative

Indeed very educative and useful. Well explained. Thank you

Simple,easy to understand

Excellent and easy to understand queries and questions get answered easily. Its rather clear than any confusion. Thanks a million Shritika Sirisilla.

Easy to understand. Well written , educative and informative

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

Graphical Abstracts vs. Infographics: Best Practices for Visuals - Enago

Promoting Research

Graphical Abstracts Vs. Infographics: Best practices for using visual illustrations for increased research impact

Dr. Sarah Chen stared at her computer screen, her eyes staring at her recently published…

Publishing Research

10 Tips to Prevent Research Papers From Being Retracted

Research paper retractions represent a critical event in the scientific community. When a published article…

2024 Scholar Metrics: Unveiling research impact (2019-2023)

Industry News

Google Releases 2024 Scholar Metrics, Evaluates Impact of Scholarly Articles

Google has released its 2024 Scholar Metrics, assessing scholarly articles from 2019 to 2023. This…

What is Academic Integrity and How to Uphold it [FREE CHECKLIST]

Ensuring Academic Integrity and Transparency in Academic Research: A comprehensive checklist for researchers

Academic integrity is the foundation upon which the credibility and value of scientific findings are…

7 Step Guide for Optimizing Impactful Research Process

Reporting Research

How to Optimize Your Research Process: A step-by-step guide

For researchers across disciplines, the path to uncovering novel findings and insights is often filled…

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for…

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right…

Research Recommendations – Guiding policy-makers for evidence-based decision making

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

2000+ blog articles
50+ Webinars
10+ Expert podcasts
50+ Infographics
10+ Checklists
Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

AI in Academia
Career Corner
Diversity and Inclusion
Infographics
Expert Video Library
Other Resources
Enago Learn
Upcoming & On-Demand Webinars
Peer Review Week 2024
Open Access Week 2023
Conference Videos
Enago Report
Journal Finder
Enago Plagiarism & AI Grammar Check
Editing Services
Publication Support Services
Research Impact
Translation Services
Publication solutions
AI-Based Solutions
Thought Leadership
Call for Articles
Call for Speakers
Author Training
Edit Profile

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

Which among these features would you prefer the most in a peer review assistant?

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 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
Product Demos
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
Experience Management
Descriptive Research

Try Qualtrics for free

Descriptive research: what it is and how to use it.

8 min read Understanding the who, what and where of a situation or target group is an essential part of effective research and making informed business decisions.

For example you might want to understand what percentage of CEOs have a bachelor’s degree or higher. Or you might want to understand what percentage of low income families receive government support – or what kind of support they receive.

Descriptive research is what will be used in these types of studies.

In this guide we’ll look through the main issues relating to descriptive research to give you a better understanding of what it is, and how and why you can use it.

Free eBook: 2024 global market research trends report

What is descriptive research?

Descriptive research is a research method used to try and determine the characteristics of a population or particular phenomenon.

Using descriptive research you can identify patterns in the characteristics of a group to essentially establish everything you need to understand apart from why something has happened.

Market researchers use descriptive research for a range of commercial purposes to guide key decisions.

For example you could use descriptive research to understand fashion trends in a given city when planning your clothing collection for the year. Using descriptive research you can conduct in depth analysis on the demographic makeup of your target area and use the data analysis to establish buying patterns.

Conducting descriptive research wouldn’t, however, tell you why shoppers are buying a particular type of fashion item.

Descriptive research design

Descriptive research design uses a range of both qualitative research and quantitative data (although quantitative research is the primary research method) to gather information to make accurate predictions about a particular problem or hypothesis.

As a survey method, descriptive research designs will help researchers identify characteristics in their target market or particular population.

These characteristics in the population sample can be identified, observed and measured to guide decisions.

Descriptive research characteristics

While there are a number of descriptive research methods you can deploy for data collection, descriptive research does have a number of predictable characteristics.

Here are a few of the things to consider:

Measure data trends with statistical outcomes

Descriptive research is often popular for survey research because it generates answers in a statistical form, which makes it easy for researchers to carry out a simple statistical analysis to interpret what the data is saying.

Descriptive research design is ideal for further research

Because the data collection for descriptive research produces statistical outcomes, it can also be used as secondary data for another research study.

Plus, the data collected from descriptive research can be subjected to other types of data analysis .

Uncontrolled variables

A key component of the descriptive research method is that it uses random variables that are not controlled by the researchers. This is because descriptive research aims to understand the natural behavior of the research subject.

It’s carried out in a natural environment

Descriptive research is often carried out in a natural environment. This is because researchers aim to gather data in a natural setting to avoid swaying respondents.

Data can be gathered using survey questions or online surveys.

For example, if you want to understand the fashion trends we mentioned earlier, you would set up a study in which a researcher observes people in the respondent’s natural environment to understand their habits and preferences.

Descriptive research allows for cross sectional study

Because of the nature of descriptive research design and the randomness of the sample group being observed, descriptive research is ideal for cross sectional studies – essentially the demographics of the group can vary widely and your aim is to gain insights from within the group.

This can be highly beneficial when you’re looking to understand the behaviors or preferences of a wider population.

Descriptive research advantages

There are many advantages to using descriptive research, some of them include:

Cost effectiveness

Because the elements needed for descriptive research design are not specific or highly targeted (and occur within the respondent’s natural environment) this type of study is relatively cheap to carry out.

Multiple types of data can be collected

A big advantage of this research type, is that you can use it to collect both quantitative and qualitative data. This means you can use the stats gathered to easily identify underlying patterns in your respondents’ behavior.

Descriptive research disadvantages

Potential reliability issues.

When conducting descriptive research it’s important that the initial survey questions are properly formulated.

If not, it could make the answers unreliable and risk the credibility of your study.

Potential limitations

As we’ve mentioned, descriptive research design is ideal for understanding the what, who or where of a situation or phenomenon.

However, it can’t help you understand the cause or effect of the behavior. This means you’ll need to conduct further research to get a more complete picture of a situation.

Descriptive research methods

Because descriptive research methods include a range of quantitative and qualitative research, there are several research methods you can use.

Use case studies

Case studies in descriptive research involve conducting in-depth and detailed studies in which researchers get a specific person or case to answer questions.

Case studies shouldn’t be used to generate results, rather it should be used to build or establish hypothesis that you can expand into further market research .

For example you could gather detailed data about a specific business phenomenon, and then use this deeper understanding of that specific case.

Use observational methods

This type of study uses qualitative observations to understand human behavior within a particular group.

By understanding how the different demographics respond within your sample you can identify patterns and trends.

As an observational method, descriptive research will not tell you the cause of any particular behaviors, but that could be established with further research.

Use survey research

Surveys are one of the most cost effective ways to gather descriptive data.

An online survey or questionnaire can be used in descriptive studies to gather quantitative information about a particular problem.

Survey research is ideal if you’re using descriptive research as your primary research.

Descriptive research examples

Descriptive research is used for a number of commercial purposes or when organizations need to understand the behaviors or opinions of a population.

One of the biggest examples of descriptive research that is used in every democratic country, is during elections.

Using descriptive research, researchers will use surveys to understand who voters are more likely to choose out of the parties or candidates available.

Using the data provided, researchers can analyze the data to understand what the election result will be.

In a commercial setting, retailers often use descriptive research to figure out trends in shopping and buying decisions.

By gathering information on the habits of shoppers, retailers can get a better understanding of the purchases being made.

Another example that is widely used around the world, is the national census that takes place to understand the population.

The research will provide a more accurate picture of a population’s demographic makeup and help to understand changes over time in areas like population age, health and education level.

Where Qualtrics helps with descriptive research

Whatever type of research you want to carry out, there’s a survey type that will work.

Qualtrics can help you determine the appropriate method and ensure you design a study that will deliver the insights you need.

Our experts can help you with your market research needs , ensuring you get the most out of Qualtrics market research software to design, launch and analyze your data to guide better, more accurate decisions for your organization.

Related resources

Mixed methods research 17 min read, market intelligence 10 min read, marketing insights 11 min read, ethnographic research 11 min read, qualitative vs quantitative research 13 min read, qualitative research questions 11 min read, qualitative research design 12 min read, request demo.

Ready to learn more about Qualtrics?

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

What is Descriptive Research? Definition, Methods, Types and Examples

Descriptive research is a methodological approach that seeks to depict the characteristics of a phenomenon or subject under investigation. In scientific inquiry, it serves as a foundational tool for researchers aiming to observe, record, and analyze the intricate details of a particular topic. This method provides a rich and detailed account that aids in understanding, categorizing, and interpreting the subject matter.

Descriptive research design is widely employed across diverse fields, and its primary objective is to systematically observe and document all variables and conditions influencing the phenomenon.

After this descriptive research definition, let’s look at this example. Consider a researcher working on climate change adaptation, who wants to understand water management trends in an arid village in a specific study area. She must conduct a demographic survey of the region, gather population data, and then conduct descriptive research on this demographic segment. The study will then uncover details on “what are the water management practices and trends in village X.” Note, however, that it will not cover any investigative information about “why” the patterns exist.

Table of Contents

What is descriptive research?

If you’ve been wondering “What is descriptive research,” we’ve got you covered in this post! In a nutshell, descriptive research is an exploratory research method that helps a researcher describe a population, circumstance, or phenomenon. It can help answer what , where , when and how questions, but not why questions. In other words, it does not involve changing the study variables and does not seek to establish cause-and-effect relationships.

Importance of descriptive research

Now, let’s delve into the importance of descriptive research. This research method acts as the cornerstone for various academic and applied disciplines. Its primary significance lies in its ability to provide a comprehensive overview of a phenomenon, enabling researchers to gain a nuanced understanding of the variables at play. This method aids in forming hypotheses, generating insights, and laying the groundwork for further in-depth investigations. The following points further illustrate its importance:

Provides insights into a population or phenomenon: Descriptive research furnishes a comprehensive overview of the characteristics and behaviors of a specific population or phenomenon, thereby guiding and shaping the research project.

Offers baseline data: The data acquired through this type of research acts as a reference for subsequent investigations, laying the groundwork for further studies.

Allows validation of sampling methods: Descriptive research validates sampling methods, aiding in the selection of the most effective approach for the study.

Helps reduce time and costs: It is cost-effective and time-efficient, making this an economical means of gathering information about a specific population or phenomenon.

Ensures replicability: Descriptive research is easily replicable, ensuring a reliable way to collect and compare information from various sources.

When to use descriptive research design?

Determining when to use descriptive research depends on the nature of the research question. Before diving into the reasons behind an occurrence, understanding the how, when, and where aspects is essential. Descriptive research design is a suitable option when the research objective is to discern characteristics, frequencies, trends, and categories without manipulating variables. It is therefore often employed in the initial stages of a study before progressing to more complex research designs. To put it in another way, descriptive research precedes the hypotheses of explanatory research. It is particularly valuable when there is limited existing knowledge about the subject.

Some examples are as follows, highlighting that these questions would arise before a clear outline of the research plan is established:

In the last two decades, what changes have occurred in patterns of urban gardening in Mumbai?
What are the differences in climate change perceptions of farmers in coastal versus inland villages in the Philippines?

Characteristics of descriptive research

Coming to the characteristics of descriptive research, this approach is characterized by its focus on observing and documenting the features of a subject. Specific characteristics are as below.

Quantitative nature: Some descriptive research types involve quantitative research methods to gather quantifiable information for statistical analysis of the population sample.
Qualitative nature: Some descriptive research examples include those using the qualitative research method to describe or explain the research problem.
Observational nature: This approach is non-invasive and observational because the study variables remain untouched. Researchers merely observe and report, without introducing interventions that could impact the subject(s).
Cross-sectional nature: In descriptive research, different sections belonging to the same group are studied, providing a “snapshot” of sorts.
Springboard for further research: The data collected are further studied and analyzed using different research techniques. This approach helps guide the suitable research methods to be employed.

Types of descriptive research

There are various descriptive research types, each suited to different research objectives. Take a look at the different types below.

Surveys: This involves collecting data through questionnaires or interviews to gather qualitative and quantitative data.
Observational studies: This involves observing and collecting data on a particular population or phenomenon without influencing the study variables or manipulating the conditions. These may be further divided into cohort studies, case studies, and cross-sectional studies:
Cohort studies: Also known as longitudinal studies, these studies involve the collection of data over an extended period, allowing researchers to track changes and trends.
Case studies: These deal with a single individual, group, or event, which might be rare or unusual.
Cross-sectional studies : A researcher collects data at a single point in time, in order to obtain a snapshot of a specific moment.
Focus groups: In this approach, a small group of people are brought together to discuss a topic. The researcher moderates and records the group discussion. This can also be considered a “participatory” observational method.
Descriptive classification: Relevant to the biological sciences, this type of approach may be used to classify living organisms.

Descriptive research methods

Several descriptive research methods can be employed, and these are more or less similar to the types of approaches mentioned above.

Surveys: This method involves the collection of data through questionnaires or interviews. Surveys may be done online or offline, and the target subjects might be hyper-local, regional, or global.
Observational studies: These entail the direct observation of subjects in their natural environment. These include case studies, dealing with a single case or individual, as well as cross-sectional and longitudinal studies, for a glimpse into a population or changes in trends over time, respectively. Participatory observational studies such as focus group discussions may also fall under this method.

Researchers must carefully consider descriptive research methods, types, and examples to harness their full potential in contributing to scientific knowledge.

Examples of descriptive research

Now, let’s consider some descriptive research examples.

In social sciences, an example could be a study analyzing the demographics of a specific community to understand its socio-economic characteristics.
In business, a market research survey aiming to describe consumer preferences would be a descriptive study.
In ecology, a researcher might undertake a survey of all the types of monocots naturally occurring in a region and classify them up to species level.

These examples showcase the versatility of descriptive research across diverse fields.

Advantages of descriptive research

There are several advantages to this approach, which every researcher must be aware of. These are as follows:

Owing to the numerous descriptive research methods and types, primary data can be obtained in diverse ways and be used for developing a research hypothesis .
It is a versatile research method and allows flexibility.
Detailed and comprehensive information can be obtained because the data collected can be qualitative or quantitative.
It is carried out in the natural environment, which greatly minimizes certain types of bias and ethical concerns.
It is an inexpensive and efficient approach, even with large sample sizes

Disadvantages of descriptive research

On the other hand, this design has some drawbacks as well:

It is limited in its scope as it does not determine cause-and-effect relationships.
The approach does not generate new information and simply depends on existing data.
Study variables are not manipulated or controlled, and this limits the conclusions to be drawn.
Descriptive research findings may not be generalizable to other populations.
Finally, it offers a preliminary understanding rather than an in-depth understanding.

To reiterate, the advantages of descriptive research lie in its ability to provide a comprehensive overview, aid hypothesis generation, and serve as a preliminary step in the research process. However, its limitations include a potential lack of depth, inability to establish cause-and-effect relationships, and susceptibility to bias.

Frequently asked questions

When should researchers conduct descriptive research.

Descriptive research is most appropriate when researchers aim to portray and understand the characteristics of a phenomenon without manipulating variables. It is particularly valuable in the early stages of a study.

What is the difference between descriptive and exploratory research?

Descriptive research focuses on providing a detailed depiction of a phenomenon, while exploratory research aims to explore and generate insights into an issue where little is known.

What is the difference between descriptive and experimental research?

Descriptive research observes and documents without manipulating variables, whereas experimental research involves intentional interventions to establish cause-and-effect relationships.

Is descriptive research only for social sciences?

No, various descriptive research types may be applicable to all fields of study, including social science, humanities, physical science, and biological science.

How important is descriptive research?

The importance of descriptive research lies in its ability to provide a glimpse of the current state of a phenomenon, offering valuable insights and establishing a basic understanding. Further, the advantages of descriptive research include its capacity to offer a straightforward depiction of a situation or phenomenon, facilitate the identification of patterns or trends, and serve as a useful starting point for more in-depth investigations. Additionally, descriptive research can contribute to the development of hypotheses and guide the formulation of research questions for subsequent studies.

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

Based on 22+ years of experience in academia, Editage All Access empowers researchers to put their best research forward and move closer to success. Explore our top AI Tools pack, AI Tools + Publication Services pack, or Build Your Own Plan. Find everything a researcher needs to succeed, all in one place –  Get All Access now starting at just $14 a month !  

Join Us for Peer Review Week 2024

Editage All Access Boosting Productivity for Academics in India

How Editage All Access is Boosting Productivity for Academics in India

Quantitative Research

Reference work entry
First Online: 13 January 2019
Cite this reference work entry

Leigh A. Wilson 2 , 3

5280 Accesses

4 Citations

Quantitative research methods are concerned with the planning, design, and implementation of strategies to collect and analyze data. Descartes, the seventeenth-century philosopher, suggested that how the results are achieved is often more important than the results themselves, as the journey taken along the research path is a journey of discovery. High-quality quantitative research is characterized by the attention given to the methods and the reliability of the tools used to collect the data. The ability to critique research in a systematic way is an essential component of a health professional’s role in order to deliver high quality, evidence-based healthcare. This chapter is intended to provide a simple overview of the way new researchers and health practitioners can understand and employ quantitative methods. The chapter offers practical, realistic guidance in a learner-friendly way and uses a logical sequence to understand the process of hypothesis development, study design, data collection and handling, and finally data analysis and interpretation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

Get 10 units per month
Download Article/Chapter or eBook
1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
Cancel anytime
Available as PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Available as EPUB and PDF
Durable hardcover edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Writing Quantitative Research Studies

Qualitative Research Methods

Babbie ER. The practice of social research. 14th ed. Belmont: Wadsworth Cengage; 2016.

Google Scholar

Descartes. Cited in Halverston, W. (1976). In: A concise introduction to philosophy, 3rd ed. New York: Random House; 1637.

Doll R, Hill AB. The mortality of doctors in relation to their smoking habits. BMJ. 1954;328(7455):1529–33. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.328.7455.1529 .

Article Google Scholar

Liamputtong P. Research methods in health: foundations for evidence-based practice. 3rd ed. Melbourne: Oxford University Press; 2017.

McNabb DE. Research methods in public administration and nonprofit management: quantitative and qualitative approaches. 2nd ed. New York: Armonk; 2007.

Merriam-Webster. Dictionary. http://www.merriam-webster.com . Accessed 20th December 2017.

Olesen Larsen P, von Ins M. The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index. Scientometrics. 2010;84(3):575–603.

Pannucci CJ, Wilkins EG. Identifying and avoiding bias in research. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126(2):619–25. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181de24bc .

Petrie A, Sabin C. Medical statistics at a glance. 2nd ed. London: Blackwell Publishing; 2005.

Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice. 3rd ed. New Jersey: Pearson Publishing; 2009.

Sheehan J. Aspects of research methodology. Nurse Educ Today. 1986;6:193–203.

Wilson LA, Black DA. Health, science research and research methods. Sydney: McGraw Hill; 2013.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Science and Health, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW, Australia

Leigh A. Wilson

Faculty of Health Science, Discipline of Behavioural and Social Sciences in Health, University of Sydney, Lidcombe, NSW, Australia

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leigh A. Wilson .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Pranee Liamputtong

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Wilson, L.A. (2019). Quantitative Research. In: Liamputtong, P. (eds) Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_54

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_54

Published : 13 January 2019

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-10-5250-7

Online ISBN : 978-981-10-5251-4

eBook Packages : Social Sciences Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Share this entry

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

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

Search Menu

Sign in through your institution

Browse content in Arts and Humanities
Browse content in Archaeology
Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
Archaeology by Region
Archaeology of Religion
Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
Biblical Archaeology
Contemporary and Public Archaeology
Environmental Archaeology
Historical Archaeology
History and Theory of Archaeology
Industrial Archaeology
Landscape Archaeology
Mortuary Archaeology
Prehistoric Archaeology
Underwater Archaeology
Zooarchaeology
Browse content in Architecture
Architectural Structure and Design
History of Architecture
Residential and Domestic Buildings
Theory of Architecture
Browse content in Art
Art Subjects and Themes
History of Art
Industrial and Commercial Art
Theory of Art
Biographical Studies
Byzantine Studies
Browse content in Classical Studies
Classical History
Classical Philosophy
Classical Mythology
Classical Numismatics
Classical Literature
Classical Reception
Classical Art and Architecture
Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
Greek and Roman Papyrology
Greek and Roman Epigraphy
Greek and Roman Law
Greek and Roman Archaeology
Late Antiquity
Religion in the Ancient World
Social History
Digital Humanities
Browse content in History
Colonialism and Imperialism
Diplomatic History
Environmental History
Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
Historical Geography
History by Period
History of Emotions
History of Agriculture
History of Education
History of Gender and Sexuality
Industrial History
Intellectual History
International History
Labour History
Legal and Constitutional History
Local and Family History
Maritime History
Military History
National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
Oral History
Political History
Public History
Regional and National History
Revolutions and Rebellions
Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
Social and Cultural History
Theory, Methods, and Historiography
Urban History
World History
Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
Language Learning (Specific Skills)
Language Teaching Theory and Methods
Browse content in Linguistics
Applied Linguistics
Cognitive Linguistics
Computational Linguistics
Forensic Linguistics
Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
History of English
Language Evolution
Language Reference
Language Acquisition
Language Variation
Language Families
Lexicography
Linguistic Anthropology
Linguistic Theories
Linguistic Typology
Phonetics and Phonology
Psycholinguistics
Sociolinguistics
Translation and Interpretation
Writing Systems
Browse content in Literature
Bibliography
Children's Literature Studies
Literary Studies (Romanticism)
Literary Studies (American)
Literary Studies (Asian)
Literary Studies (European)
Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
Literary Studies (Modernism)
Literary Studies - World
Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
Literary Studies (19th Century)
Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
Literary Studies (African American Literature)
Literary Studies (British and Irish)
Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
Literary Studies (History of the Book)
Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
Literary Studies (War Literature)
Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
Mythology and Folklore
Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
Browse content in Media Studies
Browse content in Music
Applied Music
Dance and Music
Ethics in Music
Ethnomusicology
Gender and Sexuality in Music
Medicine and Music
Music Cultures
Music and Media
Music and Religion
Music and Culture
Music Education and Pedagogy
Music Theory and Analysis
Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
Musicology and Music History
Performance Practice and Studies
Race and Ethnicity in Music
Sound Studies
Browse content in Performing Arts
Browse content in Philosophy
Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
Epistemology
Feminist Philosophy
History of Western Philosophy
Meta-Philosophy
Metaphysics
Moral Philosophy
Non-Western Philosophy
Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Mind
Philosophy of Perception
Philosophy of Science
Philosophy of Action
Philosophy of Law
Philosophy of Religion
Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
Practical Ethics
Social and Political Philosophy
Browse content in Religion
Biblical Studies
Christianity
East Asian Religions
History of Religion
Judaism and Jewish Studies
Qumran Studies
Religion and Education
Religion and Health
Religion and Politics
Religion and Science
Religion and Law
Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
Religious Studies
Browse content in Society and Culture
Cookery, Food, and Drink
Cultural Studies
Customs and Traditions
Ethical Issues and Debates
Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
Sports and Outdoor Recreation
Technology and Society
Travel and Holiday
Visual Culture
Browse content in Law
Arbitration
Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
Commercial Law
Company Law
Browse content in Comparative Law
Systems of Law
Competition Law
Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
Government Powers
Judicial Review
Local Government Law
Military and Defence Law
Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
Construction Law
Contract Law
Browse content in Criminal Law
Criminal Procedure
Criminal Evidence Law
Sentencing and Punishment
Employment and Labour Law
Environment and Energy Law
Browse content in Financial Law
Banking Law
Insolvency Law
History of Law
Human Rights and Immigration
Intellectual Property Law
Browse content in International Law
Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
Public International Law
IT and Communications Law
Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
Law and Politics
Law and Society
Browse content in Legal System and Practice
Courts and Procedure
Legal Skills and Practice
Legal System - Costs and Funding
Primary Sources of Law
Regulation of Legal Profession
Medical and Healthcare Law
Browse content in Policing
Criminal Investigation and Detection
Police and Security Services
Police Procedure and Law
Police Regional Planning
Browse content in Property Law
Personal Property Law
Restitution
Study and Revision
Terrorism and National Security Law
Browse content in Trusts Law
Wills and Probate or Succession
Browse content in Medicine and Health
Browse content in Allied Health Professions
Arts Therapies
Clinical Science
Dietetics and Nutrition
Occupational Therapy
Operating Department Practice
Physiotherapy
Radiography
Speech and Language Therapy
Browse content in Anaesthetics
General Anaesthesia
Clinical Neuroscience
Browse content in Clinical Medicine
Acute Medicine
Cardiovascular Medicine
Clinical Genetics
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Dermatology
Endocrinology and Diabetes
Gastroenterology
Genito-urinary Medicine
Geriatric Medicine
Infectious Diseases
Medical Toxicology
Medical Oncology
Pain Medicine
Palliative Medicine
Rehabilitation Medicine
Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
Rheumatology
Sleep Medicine
Sports and Exercise Medicine
Community Medical Services
Critical Care
Emergency Medicine
Forensic Medicine
Haematology
History of Medicine
Browse content in Medical Skills
Clinical Skills
Communication Skills
Nursing Skills
Surgical Skills
Browse content in Medical Dentistry
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Paediatric Dentistry
Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
Surgical Dentistry
Medical Ethics
Medical Statistics and Methodology
Browse content in Neurology
Clinical Neurophysiology
Neuropathology
Nursing Studies
Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Gynaecology
Occupational Medicine
Ophthalmology
Otolaryngology (ENT)
Browse content in Paediatrics
Neonatology
Browse content in Pathology
Chemical Pathology
Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
Histopathology
Medical Microbiology and Virology
Patient Education and Information
Browse content in Pharmacology
Psychopharmacology
Browse content in Popular Health
Caring for Others
Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Self-help and Personal Development
Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
Cell Biology
Molecular Biology and Genetics
Reproduction, Growth and Development
Primary Care
Professional Development in Medicine
Browse content in Psychiatry
Addiction Medicine
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
Forensic Psychiatry
Learning Disabilities
Old Age Psychiatry
Psychotherapy
Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
Epidemiology
Public Health
Browse content in Radiology
Clinical Radiology
Interventional Radiology
Nuclear Medicine
Radiation Oncology
Reproductive Medicine
Browse content in Surgery
Cardiothoracic Surgery
Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
General Surgery
Neurosurgery
Paediatric Surgery
Peri-operative Care
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Surgical Oncology
Transplant Surgery
Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
Vascular Surgery
Browse content in Science and Mathematics
Browse content in Biological Sciences
Aquatic Biology
Biochemistry
Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
Developmental Biology
Ecology and Conservation
Evolutionary Biology
Genetics and Genomics
Microbiology
Molecular and Cell Biology
Natural History
Plant Sciences and Forestry
Research Methods in Life Sciences
Structural Biology
Systems Biology
Zoology and Animal Sciences
Browse content in Chemistry
Analytical Chemistry
Computational Chemistry
Crystallography
Environmental Chemistry
Industrial Chemistry
Inorganic Chemistry
Materials Chemistry
Medicinal Chemistry
Mineralogy and Gems
Organic Chemistry
Physical Chemistry
Polymer Chemistry
Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
Theoretical Chemistry
Browse content in Computer Science
Artificial Intelligence
Computer Architecture and Logic Design
Game Studies
Human-Computer Interaction
Mathematical Theory of Computation
Programming Languages
Software Engineering
Systems Analysis and Design
Virtual Reality
Browse content in Computing
Business Applications
Computer Security
Computer Games
Computer Networking and Communications
Digital Lifestyle
Graphical and Digital Media Applications
Operating Systems
Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
Atmospheric Sciences
Environmental Geography
Geology and the Lithosphere
Maps and Map-making
Meteorology and Climatology
Oceanography and Hydrology
Palaeontology
Physical Geography and Topography
Regional Geography
Soil Science
Urban Geography
Browse content in Engineering and Technology
Agriculture and Farming
Biological Engineering
Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
Electronics and Communications Engineering
Energy Technology
Engineering (General)
Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
History of Engineering and Technology
Mechanical Engineering and Materials
Technology of Industrial Chemistry
Transport Technology and Trades
Browse content in Environmental Science
Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
Environmental Sustainability
Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
History of Science and Technology
Browse content in Materials Science
Ceramics and Glasses
Composite Materials
Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
Nanotechnology
Browse content in Mathematics
Applied Mathematics
Biomathematics and Statistics
History of Mathematics
Mathematical Education
Mathematical Finance
Mathematical Analysis
Numerical and Computational Mathematics
Probability and Statistics
Pure Mathematics
Browse content in Neuroscience
Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
Development of the Nervous System
Disorders of the Nervous System
History of Neuroscience
Invertebrate Neurobiology
Molecular and Cellular Systems
Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
Neuroscientific Techniques
Sensory and Motor Systems
Browse content in Physics
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
Biological and Medical Physics
Classical Mechanics
Computational Physics
Condensed Matter Physics
Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
History of Physics
Mathematical and Statistical Physics
Measurement Science
Nuclear Physics
Particles and Fields
Plasma Physics
Quantum Physics
Relativity and Gravitation
Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
Browse content in Psychology
Affective Sciences
Clinical Psychology
Cognitive Psychology
Cognitive Neuroscience
Criminal and Forensic Psychology
Developmental Psychology
Educational Psychology
Evolutionary Psychology
Health Psychology
History and Systems in Psychology
Music Psychology
Neuropsychology
Organizational Psychology
Psychological Assessment and Testing
Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
Psychology Professional Development and Training
Research Methods in Psychology
Social Psychology
Browse content in Social Sciences
Browse content in Anthropology
Anthropology of Religion
Human Evolution
Medical Anthropology
Physical Anthropology
Regional Anthropology
Social and Cultural Anthropology
Theory and Practice of Anthropology
Browse content in Business and Management
Business Ethics
Business Strategy
Business History
Business and Technology
Business and Government
Business and the Environment
Comparative Management
Corporate Governance
Corporate Social Responsibility
Entrepreneurship
Health Management
Human Resource Management
Industrial and Employment Relations
Industry Studies
Information and Communication Technologies
International Business
Knowledge Management
Management and Management Techniques
Operations Management
Organizational Theory and Behaviour
Pensions and Pension Management
Public and Nonprofit Management
Social Issues in Business and Management
Strategic Management
Supply Chain Management
Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
Criminal Justice
Criminology
Forms of Crime
International and Comparative Criminology
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
Development Studies
Browse content in Economics
Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
Asian Economics
Behavioural Finance
Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
Economic History
Economic Systems
Economic Methodology
Economic Development and Growth
Financial Markets
Financial Institutions and Services
General Economics and Teaching
Health, Education, and Welfare
History of Economic Thought
International Economics
Labour and Demographic Economics
Law and Economics
Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
Microeconomics
Public Economics
Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
Welfare Economics
Browse content in Education
Adult Education and Continuous Learning
Care and Counselling of Students
Early Childhood and Elementary Education
Educational Equipment and Technology
Educational Strategies and Policy
Higher and Further Education
Organization and Management of Education
Philosophy and Theory of Education
Schools Studies
Secondary Education
Teaching of a Specific Subject
Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
Teaching Skills and Techniques
Browse content in Environment
Applied Ecology (Social Science)
Climate Change
Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
Management of Land and Natural Resources (Social Science)
Natural Disasters (Environment)
Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Social Science)
Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
Sustainability
Browse content in Human Geography
Cultural Geography
Economic Geography
Political Geography
Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
Communication Studies
Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
Browse content in Politics
African Politics
Asian Politics
Chinese Politics
Comparative Politics
Conflict Politics
Elections and Electoral Studies
Environmental Politics
Ethnic Politics
European Union
Foreign Policy
Gender and Politics
Human Rights and Politics
Indian Politics
International Relations
International Organization (Politics)
Irish Politics
Latin American Politics
Middle Eastern Politics
Political Behaviour
Political Economy
Political Institutions
Political Methodology
Political Communication
Political Philosophy
Political Sociology
Political Theory
Politics and Law
Politics of Development
Public Policy
Public Administration
Qualitative Political Methodology
Quantitative Political Methodology
Regional Political Studies
Russian Politics
Security Studies
State and Local Government
UK Politics
US Politics
Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
African Studies
Asian Studies
East Asian Studies
Japanese Studies
Latin American Studies
Middle Eastern Studies
Native American Studies
Scottish Studies
Browse content in Research and Information
Research Methods
Browse content in Social Work
Addictions and Substance Misuse
Adoption and Fostering
Care of the Elderly
Child and Adolescent Social Work
Couple and Family Social Work
Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
Emergency Services
Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
International and Global Issues in Social Work
Mental and Behavioural Health
Social Justice and Human Rights
Social Policy and Advocacy
Social Work and Crime and Justice
Social Work Macro Practice
Social Work Practice Settings
Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
Welfare and Benefit Systems
Browse content in Sociology
Childhood Studies
Community Development
Comparative and Historical Sociology
Disability Studies
Economic Sociology
Gender and Sexuality
Gerontology and Ageing
Health, Illness, and Medicine
Marriage and the Family
Migration Studies
Occupations, Professions, and Work
Organizations
Population and Demography
Race and Ethnicity
Social Theory
Social Movements and Social Change
Social Research and Statistics
Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
Sociology of Religion
Sociology of Education
Sport and Leisure
Urban and Rural Studies
Browse content in Warfare and Defence
Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
Land Forces and Warfare
Military Administration
Military Life and Institutions
Naval Forces and Warfare
Other Warfare and Defence Issues
Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
Weapons and Equipment

Design and Analysis for Quantitative Research in Music Education

< Previous chapter
Next chapter >

3 Descriptive Research Design

Published: March 2018
Cite Icon Cite
Permissions Icon Permissions

This chapter presents two of the most prominent approaches to the design of descriptive research in music education. Simply creating depictions of music teaching and learning experiences that are organized and illustrative of the variation that can exist in any given setting is a worthwhile scientific endeavor in and of itself. Descriptive research is most typically an exploration of what is, what exists, and/or the status of any given topic of interest. The first section deals with basic steps in observational research designs, and the second section outlines critical features of survey designs. These fundamental research design options are excellent entry points for emerging scholars and when employed imaginatively can yield many benefits for the profession.

Personal account

Sign in with email/username & password
Get email alerts
Save searches
Purchase content
Activate your purchase/trial code
Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with username/password
Recommend to your librarian
Institutional account management
Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institutionâ€™s website and Oxford Academic.

Click Sign in through your institution.
Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institutionâ€™s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see â€˜Sign in through society siteâ€™ in the sign in pane within a journal:

Click Sign in through society site.
When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

Month:	Total Views:
October 2022	19
November 2022	16
December 2022	1
January 2023	23
February 2023	14
March 2023	3
April 2023	4
May 2023	4
June 2023	1
July 2023	3
August 2023	15
September 2023	13
October 2023	3
November 2023	8
December 2023	8
January 2024	6
February 2024	1
March 2024	10
April 2024	9
May 2024	7
June 2024	2
July 2024	13
August 2024	10
September 2024	12

About Oxford Academic
Publish journals with us
University press partners
What we publish
New features
Open access
Rights and permissions
Accessibility
Advertising
Media enquiries
Oxford University Press
Oxford Languages
University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
Cookie settings
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

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

Descriptive Research Design and Its Myriad Uses

3 minute read
15.5K views

Table of Contents

The design of a research study can be of two broad types—observational or interventional. In interventional studies, at least one variable can be controlled by the researcher. For example, drug trials that examine the efficacy of novel medicines are interventional studies. Observational studies, on the other hand, simply examine and describe uncontrollable variables¹ .

What is descriptive research design?¹

Descriptive design is one of the simplest forms of observational study design. It can either quantify the distribution of certain variables (quantitative descriptive research) or simply report the qualities of these variables without quantifying them (qualitative descriptive research).

When can descriptive research design be used?¹

It is useful when you wish to examine the occurrence of a phenomenon, delineate trends or patterns within the phenomenon, or describe the relationship between variables. As such, descriptive design is great for¹ :

A survey conducted to measure the changes in the levels of customer satisfaction among shoppers in the US is the perfect example of quantitative descriptive research.
Conversely, a case report detailing the experiences and perspectives of individuals living with a particular rare disease is a good example of qualitative descriptive research.
Cross-sectional studies : Descriptive research is ideal for cross-sectional studies that capture a snapshot of a population at a specific point in time. This approach can be used to observe the variations in risk factors and diseases in a population. Take the following examples:
In quantitative descriptive research: A study that measures the prevalence of heart disease among college students in the current academic year.
In qualitative descriptive research: A cross-sectional study exploring the cultural perceptions of mental health across different communities.
Ecological studies : Descriptive research design is also well-suited for studies that seek to understand relationships between variables and outcomes in specific populations. For example:
A study that measures the relationship between the number of police personnel and homicides in India can use quantitative descriptive research design
A study describing the impact of deforestation on indigenous communities’ cultural practices and beliefs can use qualitative descriptive research design.
Focus group discussion reports : Descriptive research can help in capturing diverse perspectives and understanding the nuances of participants’ experiences.
First, an example of quantitative descriptive research: A study that uses two focus groups to explore the perceptions of mental health among immigrants in London.
Next, an example of qualitative descriptive research: A focus group report analyzing the themes and emotions associated with different advertising campaigns.

Benefits of descriptive research design¹

Easy to conduct: Due to its simplicity, descriptive research design can be employed by researchers of all experience levels.
Economical: Descriptive research design is not resource intensive. It is a budget-friendly approach to studying many phenomena without costly equipment.
Provides comprehensive and useful information: Descriptive research is a more thorough approach that can capture many different aspects of a phenomena, facilitating a wholistic understanding.
Aids planning of major projects or future research: As a tool for preliminary exploration, descriptive research guides can guide strategic decision-making and guide major projects.

The Bottom Line

Descriptive research plays a crucial role in improving our lives. Surveys help create better policies and cross-sectional studies help us understand problems affecting different populations including diseases. Used in the right context, descriptive research can advance knowledge and inform decision making¹ .

We, at Elsevier Language Services, understand the value of your descriptive research, as well as the importance of communicating it correctly. If you have a manuscript based on a descriptive study, our experienced editors can help improve its myriad aspects. By improving the logical flow, tone, and accuracy of your writing, we ensure that your descriptive research gets published in a top tier journal and makes maximum impact in academia and beyond. Contact us for a comprehensive list of services!

Type in wordcount for Plus Total: USD EUR JPY Follow this link if your manuscript is longer than 9,000 words. Upload

References

Aggarwal, R., & Ranganathan, P. (2019). Study designs: Part 2 – Descriptive studies. Perspectives in Clinical Research , 10 (1), 34. https://doi.org/10.4103/picr.picr_154_18 .

Is The Use of AI in Manuscript Editing Feasible? Here’s Three Tips to Steer Clear of Potential Issues

Navigating “Chinglish” Errors in Academic English Writing

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

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

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

Demystifying the research process: understanding a descriptive comparative research design

Pediatric Nursing 37(4):188-9
37(4):188-9

Villanova University

Discover the world's research

25+ million members
160+ million publication pages
2.3+ billion citations

No full-text available

To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the author.

Karen Joy A. Masepequeña
Jay Ric L. Pangalaya

Perzeus Lhey D. Villahermosa
July M. Villaren
Alberto Sarte
Jennisa E Baroro

Liezel Maravilla

(  Corresponding
Ali 1 Bylieva

Rocelyn A Camino
Rosalie N Darunday
Honey Claire B Gallando
Zainal Abidin

Univers Access Inform Soc

Kawther Sacor I. Abdulhalim

Hong-va Leong

Ellenie Jean Poliquit
Jackelyn Pinlac
Hazel Ligaray

Lemuel Perez

Mary Kris Maranga
Novie Jane Maranga
Charlene Mae Tautu-An

Bliss Ann Marie V. Nene
Kenn Carlo A. Delao
, Abeguel M. Vargas

Arlene A. Matawaran
Elvin B. Rodriguez
Recruit researchers
Join for free
Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Matthew DeCarlo

Chapter Outline

Empirical vs. ethical questions (4 minute read)
Characteristics of a good research question (4 minute read)
Quantitative research questions (7 minute read)
Qualitative research questions (3 minute read)
Evaluating and updating your research questions (4 minute read)

Content warning: examples in this chapter include references to sexual violence, sexism, substance use disorders, homelessness, domestic violence, the child welfare system, cissexism and heterosexism, and truancy and school discipline.

9.1 Empirical vs. ethical questions

Learning objectives.

Learners will be able to…

Define empirical questions and provide an example
Define ethical questions and provide an example

Writing a good research question is an art and a science. It is a science because you have to make sure it is clear, concise, and well-developed. It is an art because often your language needs “wordsmithing” to perfect and clarify the meaning. This is an exciting part of the research process; however, it can also be one of the most stressful.

Creating a good research question begins by identifying a topic you are interested in studying. At this point, you already have a working question. You’ve been applying it to the exercises in each chapter, and after reading more about your topic in the scholarly literature, you’ve probably gone back and revised your working question a few times. We’re going to continue that process in more detail in this chapter. Keep in mind that writing research questions is an iterative process, with revisions happening week after week until you are ready to start your project.

Empirical vs. ethical questions

When it comes to research questions, social science is best equipped to answer empirical questions —those that can be answered by real experience in the real world—as opposed to ethical questions —questions about which people have moral opinions and that may not be answerable in reference to the real world. While social workers have explicit ethical obligations (e.g., service, social justice), research projects ask empirical questions to help actualize and support the work of upholding those ethical principles.

In order to help you better understand the difference between ethical and empirical questions, let’s consider a topic about which people have moral opinions. How about SpongeBob SquarePants? [1] In early 2005, members of the conservative Christian group Focus on the Family (2005) [2] denounced this seemingly innocuous cartoon character as “morally offensive” because they perceived his character to be one that promotes a “pro-gay agenda.” Focus on the Family supported their claim that SpongeBob is immoral by citing his appearance in a children’s video designed to promote tolerance of all family forms (BBC News, 2005). [3] They also cited SpongeBob’s regular hand-holding with his male sidekick Patrick as further evidence of his immorality.

So, can we now conclude that SpongeBob SquarePants is immoral? Not so fast. While your mother or a newspaper or television reporter may provide an answer, a social science researcher cannot. Questions of morality are ethical, not empirical. Of course, this doesn’t mean that social science researchers cannot study opinions about or social meanings surrounding SpongeBob SquarePants (Carter, 2010). [4] We study humans after all, and as you will discover in the following chapters of this textbook, we are trained to utilize a variety of scientific data-collection techniques to understand patterns of human beliefs and behaviors. Using these techniques, we could find out how many people in the United States find SpongeBob morally reprehensible, but we could never learn, empirically, whether SpongeBob is in fact morally reprehensible.

Let’s consider an example from a recent MSW research class I taught. A student group wanted to research the penalties for sexual assault. Their original research question was: “How can prison sentences for sexual assault be so much lower than the penalty for drug possession?” Outside of the research context, that is a darn good question! It speaks to how the War on Drugs and the patriarchy have distorted the criminal justice system towards policing of drug crimes over gender-based violence.

Unfortunately, it is an ethical question, not an empirical one. To answer that question, you would have to draw on philosophy and morality, answering what it is about human nature and society that allows such unjust outcomes. However, you could not answer that question by gathering data about people in the real world. If I asked people that question, they would likely give me their opinions about drugs, gender-based violence, and the criminal justice system. But I wouldn’t get the real answer about why our society tolerates such an imbalance in punishment.

As the students worked on the project through the semester, they continued to focus on the topic of sexual assault in the criminal justice system. Their research question became more empirical because they read more empirical articles about their topic. One option that they considered was to evaluate intervention programs for perpetrators of sexual assault to see if they reduced the likelihood of committing sexual assault again. Another option they considered was seeing if counties or states with higher than average jail sentences for sexual assault perpetrators had lower rates of re-offense for sexual assault. These projects addressed the ethical question of punishing perpetrators of sexual violence but did so in a way that gathered and analyzed empirical real-world data. Our job as social work researchers is to gather social facts about social work issues, not to judge or determine morality.

Key Takeaways

Empirical questions are distinct from ethical questions.
There are usually a number of ethical questions and a number of empirical questions that could be asked about any single topic.
While social workers may research topics about which people have moral opinions, a researcher’s job is to gather and analyze empirical data.
Take a look at your working question. Make sure you have an empirical question, not an ethical one. To perform this check, describe how you could find an answer to your question by conducting a study, like a survey or focus group, with real people.

9.2 Characteristics of a good research question

Identify and explain the key features of a good research question
Explain why it is important for social workers to be focused and clear with the language they use in their research questions

Now that you’ve made sure your working question is empirical, you need to revise that working question into a formal research question. So, what makes a good research question? First, it is generally written in the form of a question. To say that your research question is “the opioid epidemic” or “animal assisted therapy” or “oppression” would not be correct. You need to frame your topic as a question, not a statement. A good research question is also one that is well-focused. A well-focused question helps you tune out irrelevant information and not try to answer everything about the world all at once. You could be the most eloquent writer in your class, or even in the world, but if the research question about which you are writing is unclear, your work will ultimately lack direction.

In addition to being written in the form of a question and being well-focused, a good research question is one that cannot be answered with a simple yes or no. For example, if your interest is in gender norms, you could ask, “Does gender affect a person’s performance of household tasks?” but you will have nothing left to say once you discover your yes or no answer. Instead, why not ask, about the relationship between gender and household tasks. Alternatively, maybe we are interested in how or to what extent gender affects a person’s contributions to housework in a marriage? By tweaking your question in this small way, you suddenly have a much more fascinating question and more to say as you attempt to answer it.

A good research question should also have more than one plausible answer. In the example above, the student who studied the relationship between gender and household tasks had a specific interest in the impact of gender, but she also knew that preferences might be impacted by other factors. For example, she knew from her own experience that her more traditional and socially conservative friends were more likely to see household tasks as part of the female domain, and were less likely to expect their male partners to contribute to those tasks. Thinking through the possible relationships between gender, culture, and household tasks led that student to realize that there were many plausible answers to her questions about how gender affects a person’s contribution to household tasks. Because gender doesn’t exist in a vacuum, she wisely felt that she needed to consider other characteristics that work together with gender to shape people’s behaviors, likes, and dislikes. By doing this, the student considered the third feature of a good research question–she thought about relationships between several concepts. While she began with an interest in a single concept—household tasks—by asking herself what other concepts (such as gender or political orientation) might be related to her original interest, she was able to form a question that considered the relationships among those concepts.

This student had one final component to consider. Social work research questions must contain a target population. Her study would be very different if she were to conduct it on older adults or immigrants who just arrived in a new country. The target population is the group of people whose needs your study addresses. Maybe the student noticed issues with household tasks as part of her social work practice with first-generation immigrants, and so she made it her target population. Maybe she wants to address the needs of another community. Whatever the case, the target population should be chosen while keeping in mind social work’s responsibility to work on behalf of marginalized and oppressed groups.

In sum, a good research question generally has the following features:

It is written in the form of a question
It is clearly written
It cannot be answered with “yes” or “no”
It has more than one plausible answer
It considers relationships among multiple variables
It is specific and clear about the concepts it addresses
It includes a target population
A poorly focused research question can lead to the demise of an otherwise well-executed study.
Research questions should be clearly worded, consider relationships between multiple variables, have more than one plausible answer, and address the needs of a target population.

Okay, it’s time to write out your first draft of a research question.

Once you’ve done so, take a look at the checklist in this chapter and see if your research question meets the criteria to be a good one.

Brainstorm whether your research question might be better suited to quantitative or qualitative methods.

Describe why your question fits better with quantitative or qualitative methods.
Provide an alternative research question that fits with the other type of research method.

9.3 Quantitative research questions

Describe how research questions for exploratory, descriptive, and explanatory quantitative questions differ and how to phrase them
Identify the differences between and provide examples of strong and weak explanatory research questions

Quantitative descriptive questions

The type of research you are conducting will impact the research question that you ask. Probably the easiest questions to think of are quantitative descriptive questions. For example, “What is the average student debt load of MSW students?” is a descriptive question—and an important one. We aren’t trying to build a causal relationship here. We’re simply trying to describe how much debt MSW students carry. Quantitative descriptive questions like this one are helpful in social work practice as part of community scans, in which human service agencies survey the various needs of the community they serve. If the scan reveals that the community requires more services related to housing, child care, or day treatment for people with disabilities, a nonprofit office can use the community scan to create new programs that meet a defined community need.

Quantitative descriptive questions will often ask for percentage, count the number of instances of a phenomenon, or determine an average. Descriptive questions may only include one variable, such as ours about student debt load, or they may include multiple variables. Because these are descriptive questions, our purpose is not to investigate causal relationships between variables. To do that, we need to use a quantitative explanatory question.

Quantitative explanatory questions

Most studies you read in the academic literature will be quantitative and explanatory. Why is that? If you recall from Chapter 2 , explanatory research tries to build nomothetic causal relationships. They are generalizable across space and time, so they are applicable to a wide audience. The editorial board of a journal wants to make sure their content will be useful to as many people as possible, so it’s not surprising that quantitative research dominates the academic literature.

Structurally, quantitative explanatory questions must contain an independent variable and dependent variable. Questions should ask about the relationship between these variables. The standard format I was taught in graduate school for an explanatory quantitative research question is: “What is the relationship between [independent variable] and [dependent variable] for [target population]?” You should play with the wording for your research question, revising that standard format to match what you really want to know about your topic.

Let’s take a look at a few more examples of possible research questions and consider the relative strengths and weaknesses of each. Table 9.1 does just that. While reading the table, keep in mind that I have only noted what I view to be the most relevant strengths and weaknesses of each question. Certainly each question may have additional strengths and weaknesses not noted in the table. Each of these questions is drawn from student projects in my research methods classes and reflects the work of many students on their research question over many weeks.

Table 9.1 Sample research questions: Strengths and weaknesses

What are the internal and external effects/problems associated with children witnessing domestic violence?	Written as a question	Not clearly focused	How does witnessing domestic violence impact a child’s romantic relationships in adulthood?
	Considers relationships among multiple concepts	Not specific and clear about the concepts it addresses
	Contains a population
What causes foster children who are transitioning to adulthood to become homeless, jobless, pregnant, unhealthy, etc.?	Considers relationships among multiple concepts	Concepts are not specific and clear	What is the relationship between sexual orientation or gender identity and homelessness for late adolescents in foster care?
	Contains a population
	Not written as a yes/no question
How does income inequality predict ambivalence in the Stereo Content Model using major U.S. cities as target populations?	Written as a question	Unclear wording	How does income inequality affect ambivalence in high-density urban areas?
	Considers relationships among multiple concepts	Population is unclear
Why are mental health rates higher in white foster children than African Americans and other races?	Written as a question	Concepts are not clear	How does race impact rates of mental health diagnosis for children in foster care?
	Not written as a yes/no question	Does not contain a target population

Making it more specific

A good research question should also be specific and clear about the concepts it addresses. A student investigating gender and household tasks knows what they mean by “household tasks.” You likely also have an impression of what “household tasks” means. But are your definition and the student’s definition the same? A participant in their study may think that managing finances and performing home maintenance are household tasks, but the researcher may be interested in other tasks like childcare or cleaning. The only way to ensure your study stays focused and clear is to be specific about what you mean by a concept. The student in our example could pick a specific household task that was interesting to them or that the literature indicated was important—for example, childcare. Or, the student could have a broader view of household tasks, one that encompasses childcare, food preparation, financial management, home repair, and care for relatives. Any option is probably okay, as long as the researcher is clear on what they mean by “household tasks.” Clarifying these distinctions is important as we look ahead to specifying how your variables will be measured in Chapter 11 .

Table 9.2 contains some “watch words” that indicate you may need to be more specific about the concepts in your research question.

Table 9.2 “Watch words” in explanatory research questions

Factors, Causes, Effects, Outcomes	What causes or effects are you interested in? What causes and effects are important, based on the literature in your topic area? Try to choose one or a handful you consider to be the most important.
Effective, Effectiveness, Useful, Efficient	Effective at doing what? Effectiveness is meaningless on its own. What outcome should the program or intervention have? Reduced symptoms of a mental health issue? Better socialization?
Etc., and so forth	Don’t assume that your reader understands what you mean by “and so forth.” Remember that focusing on two or a small handful concepts is necessary. Your study cannot address everything about a social problem, though the results will likely have implications on other aspects of the social world.

It can be challenging to be this specific in social work research, particularly when you are just starting out your project and still reading the literature. If you’ve only read one or two articles on your topic, it can be hard to know what you are interested in studying. Broad questions like “What are the causes of chronic homelessness, and what can be done to prevent it?” are common at the beginning stages of a research project as working questions. However, moving from working questions to research questions in your research proposal requires that you examine the literature on the topic and refine your question over time to be more specific and clear. Perhaps you want to study the effect of a specific anti-homelessness program that you found in the literature. Maybe there is a particular model to fighting homelessness, like Housing First or transitional housing, that you want to investigate further. You may want to focus on a potential cause of homelessness such as LGBTQ+ discrimination that you find interesting or relevant to your practice. As you can see, the possibilities for making your question more specific are almost infinite.

Quantitative exploratory questions

In exploratory research, the researcher doesn’t quite know the lay of the land yet. If someone is proposing to conduct an exploratory quantitative project, the watch words highlighted in Table 9.2 are not problematic at all. In fact, questions such as “What factors influence the removal of children in child welfare cases?” are good because they will explore a variety of factors or causes. In this question, the independent variable is less clearly written, but the dependent variable, family preservation outcomes, is quite clearly written. The inverse can also be true. If we were to ask, “What outcomes are associated with family preservation services in child welfare?”, we would have a clear independent variable, family preservation services, but an unclear dependent variable, outcomes. Because we are only conducting exploratory research on a topic, we may not have an idea of what concepts may comprise our “outcomes” or “factors.” Only after interacting with our participants will we be able to understand which concepts are important.

Remember that exploratory research is appropriate only when the researcher does not know much about topic because there is very little scholarly research. In our examples above, there is extensive literature on the outcomes in family reunification programs and risk factors for child removal in child welfare. Make sure you’ve done a thorough literature review to ensure there is little relevant research to guide you towards a more explanatory question.

Descriptive quantitative research questions are helpful for community scans but cannot investigate causal relationships between variables.
Explanatory quantitative research questions must include an independent and dependent variable.
Exploratory quantitative research questions should only be considered when there is very little previous research on your topic.
Identify the type of research you are engaged in (descriptive, explanatory, or exploratory).
Create a quantitative research question for your project that matches with the type of research you are engaged in.

Preferably, you should be creating an explanatory research question for quantitative research.

9.4 Qualitative research questions

List the key terms associated with qualitative research questions
Distinguish between qualitative and quantitative research questions

Qualitative research questions differ from quantitative research questions. Because qualitative research questions seek to explore or describe phenomena, not provide a neat nomothetic explanation, they are often more general and openly worded. They may include only one concept, though many include more than one. Instead of asking how one variable causes changes in another, we are instead trying to understand the experiences , understandings , and meanings that people have about the concepts in our research question. These keywords often make an appearance in qualitative research questions.

Let’s work through an example from our last section. In Table 9.1, a student asked, “What is the relationship between sexual orientation or gender identity and homelessness for late adolescents in foster care?” In this question, it is pretty clear that the student believes that adolescents in foster care who identify as LGBTQ+ may be at greater risk for homelessness. This is a nomothetic causal relationship—LGBTQ+ status causes changes in homelessness.

However, what if the student were less interested in predicting homelessness based on LGBTQ+ status and more interested in understanding the stories of foster care youth who identify as LGBTQ+ and may be at risk for homelessness? In that case, the researcher would be building an idiographic causal explanation . The youths whom the researcher interviews may share stories of how their foster families, caseworkers, and others treated them. They may share stories about how they thought of their own sexuality or gender identity and how it changed over time. They may have different ideas about what it means to transition out of foster care.

Because qualitative questions usually center on idiographic causal relationships, they look different than quantitative questions. Table 9.3 below takes the final research questions from Table 9.1 and adapts them for qualitative research. The guidelines for research questions previously described in this chapter still apply, but there are some new elements to qualitative research questions that are not present in quantitative questions.

Qualitative research questions often ask about lived experience, personal experience, understanding, meaning, and stories.
Qualitative research questions may be more general and less specific.
Qualitative research questions may also contain only one variable, rather than asking about relationships between multiple variables.

Table 9.3 Quantitative vs. qualitative research questions

How does witnessing domestic violence impact a child’s romantic relationships in adulthood?	How do people who witness domestic violence understand its effects on their current relationships?
What is the relationship between sexual orientation or gender identity and homelessness for late adolescents in foster care?	What is the experience of identifying as LGBTQ+ in the foster care system?
How does income inequality affect ambivalence in high-density urban areas?	What does racial ambivalence mean to residents of an urban neighborhood with high income inequality?
How does race impact rates of mental health diagnosis for children in foster care?	How do African-Americans experience seeking help for mental health concerns?

Qualitative research questions have one final feature that distinguishes them from quantitative research questions: they can change over the course of a study. Qualitative research is a reflexive process, one in which the researcher adapts their approach based on what participants say and do. The researcher must constantly evaluate whether their question is important and relevant to the participants. As the researcher gains information from participants, it is normal for the focus of the inquiry to shift.

For example, a qualitative researcher may want to study how a new truancy rule impacts youth at risk of expulsion. However, after interviewing some of the youth in their community, a researcher might find that the rule is actually irrelevant to their behavior and thoughts. Instead, their participants will direct the discussion to their frustration with the school administrators or the lack of job opportunities in the area. This is a natural part of qualitative research, and it is normal for research questions and hypothesis to evolve based on information gleaned from participants.

However, this reflexivity and openness unacceptable in quantitative research for good reasons. Researchers using quantitative methods are testing a hypothesis, and if they could revise that hypothesis to match what they found, they could never be wrong! Indeed, an important component of open science and reproducability is the preregistration of a researcher’s hypotheses and data analysis plan in a central repository that can be verified and replicated by reviewers and other researchers. This interactive graphic from 538 shows how an unscrupulous research could come up with a hypothesis and theoretical explanation after collecting data by hunting for a combination of factors that results in a statistically significant relationship. This is an excellent example of how the positivist assumptions behind quantitative research and intepretivist assumptions behind qualitative research result in different approaches to social science.

Qualitative research questions often contain words or phrases like “lived experience,” “personal experience,” “understanding,” “meaning,” and “stories.”
Qualitative research questions can change and evolve over the course of the study.
Using the guidance in this chapter, write a qualitative research question. You may want to use some of the keywords mentioned above.

9.5 Evaluating and updating your research questions

Evaluate the feasibility and importance of your research questions
Begin to match your research questions to specific designs that determine what the participants in your study will do

Feasibility and importance

As you are getting ready to finalize your research question and move into designing your research study, it is important to check whether your research question is feasible for you to answer and what importance your results will have in the community, among your participants, and in the scientific literature

Key questions to consider when evaluating your question’s feasibility include:

Do you have access to the data you need?
Will you be able to get consent from stakeholders, gatekeepers, and others?
Does your project pose risk to individuals through direct harm, dual relationships, or breaches in confidentiality? (see Chapter 6 for more ethical considerations)
Are you competent enough to complete the study?
Do you have the resources and time needed to carry out the project?

Key questions to consider when evaluating the importance of your question include:

Can we answer your research question simply by looking at the literature on your topic?
How does your question add something new to the scholarly literature? (raises a new issue, addresses a controversy, studies a new population, etc.)
How will your target population benefit, once you answer your research question?
How will the community, social work practice, and the broader social world benefit, once you answer your research question?
Using the questions above, check whether you think your project is feasible for you to complete, given the constrains that student projects face.
Realistically, explore the potential impact of your project on the community and in the scientific literature. Make sure your question cannot be answered by simply reading more about your topic.

Matching your research question and study design

This chapter described how to create a good quantitative and qualitative research question. In Parts 3 and 4 of this textbook, we will detail some of the basic designs like surveys and interviews that social scientists use to answer their research questions. But which design should you choose?

As with most things, it all depends on your research question. If your research question involves, for example, testing a new intervention, you will likely want to use an experimental design. On the other hand, if you want to know the lived experience of people in a public housing building, you probably want to use an interview or focus group design.

We will learn more about each one of these designs in the remainder of this textbook. We will also learn about using data that already exists, studying an individual client inside clinical practice, and evaluating programs, which are other examples of designs. Below is a list of designs we will cover in this textbook:

Surveys: online, phone, mail, in-person
Experiments: classic, pre-experiments, quasi-experiments
Interviews: in-person or via phone or videoconference
Focus groups: in-person or via videoconference
Content analysis of existing data
Secondary data analysis of another researcher’s data
Program evaluation

The design of your research study determines what you and your participants will do. In an experiment, for example, the researcher will introduce a stimulus or treatment to participants and measure their responses. In contrast, a content analysis may not have participants at all, and the researcher may simply read the marketing materials for a corporation or look at a politician’s speeches to conduct the data analysis for the study.

I imagine that a content analysis probably seems easier to accomplish than an experiment. However, as a researcher, you have to choose a research design that makes sense for your question and that is feasible to complete with the resources you have. All research projects require some resources to accomplish. Make sure your design is one you can carry out with the resources (time, money, staff, etc.) that you have.

There are so many different designs that exist in the social science literature that it would be impossible to include them all in this textbook. The purpose of the subsequent chapters is to help you understand the basic designs upon which these more advanced designs are built. As you learn more about research design, you will likely find yourself revising your research question to make sure it fits with the design. At the same time, your research question as it exists now should influence the design you end up choosing. There is no set order in which these should happen. Instead, your research project should be guided by whether you can feasibly carry it out and contribute new and important knowledge to the world.

Research questions must be feasible and important.
Research questions must match study design.
Based on what you know about designs like surveys, experiments, and interviews, describe how you might use one of them to answer your research question.
You may want to refer back to Chapter 2 which discusses how to get raw data about your topic and the common designs used in student research projects.
Not familiar with SpongeBob SquarePants? You can learn more about him on Nickelodeon’s site dedicated to all things SpongeBob: http://www.nick.com/spongebob-squarepants/ ↵
Focus on the Family. (2005, January 26). Focus on SpongeBob. Christianity Today . Retrieved from http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/januaryweb-only/34.0c.html ↵
BBC News. (2005, January 20). US right attacks SpongeBob video. Retrieved from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4190699.stm ↵
In fact, an MA thesis examines representations of gender and relationships in the cartoon: Carter, A. C. (2010). Constructing gender and relationships in “SpongeBob SquarePants”: Who lives in a pineapple under the sea . MA thesis, Department of Communication, University of South Alabama, Mobile, AL. ↵
Writing from an outline (10 minute read plus an 8 minute video, and then a 15 minute video)
Writing your literature review (30 minute read)

Content warning: TBA

6.1: Writing from an outline

Learners will be able to...

Integrate facts from the literature into scholarly writing
Experiment with different approaches to integrating information that do not involve direct quotations from other authors

Congratulations! By now, you should have discovered, retrieved, evaluated, synthesized, and organized the information you need for your literature review. It’s now time to turn that stack of articles, papers, and notes into a literature review–it’s time to start writing!

The first step in research writing is outlining. In Chapter 4, we reviewed how to build a topical outline using quotations and facts from other authors. Use that outline (or one you write now) as a way to organize your thoughts.

Watch this video from Nicholas Cifuentes-Goodbody on Outlining . As he highlights, outlining is like building a mise en place before a meal--arranging your ingredients in an orderly way so you can create your masterpiece.

From quotations to original writing

Much like combining ingredients on a kitchen countertop, you will need to mix your ingredients together. That means you will not be relying extensively on quotations from other authors in your literature review. In moving from an outline to a literature review, the key intellectual move is relying on your own ideas about the literature, rather than quoting extensively from other sources.

Integrating ideas from other authors

Watch this video from Nicholas Cifuentes-Goodbody on using quotations in academic writing . In the video, he reviews a few different techniques to integrate quotations or ideas from other authors into your writing. All literature reviews use the ideas from other authors, but it's important not to overuse others' words. Your literature review is evaluated by your professor based on how well it shows you are able to make connections between different facts in the scientific literature. The examples in this section should highlight how to get other people's words out of the way of your own. Use these strategies to diversify your writing and show your readers how your sources contributed to your work.

1. Make a claim without a quote

Claim ( Citation )

Some view cities as the storehouse of culture and creativity, and propose that urbanization is a consequence of the attractiveness of these social benefits ( Mumford, 1961 ).

More information

Oftentimes you do not need to directly quote a source to convey its conclusions or arguments – and some disciplines discourage quoting directly! Rather you can paraphrase the main point of a paper in your own words and provide an in-text citation. A benefit of using this strategy is that you can offer support for a claim without using a whole paragraph to introduce and frame a quote. You should make sure that you fully understand the paper's argument and that you are following university citation guidelines before attempting to paraphrase something from a paper.

2. Make a claim that is supported by two or more sources:

Claim ( Citation 1 ; Citation 2 ).

Reviews of this literature concede difficulty in making direct comparisons of emission levels across different sets of analysis ( Bader and Bleischwitz, 2009 ; Kennedy et al., 2009 ; Ramaswami et al., 2012 ).

Sometimes multiple sources support your claim, or there are two major publications that deserve credit for providing evidence on a topic. This is a perfect time to use multiple citations. You can cite two, three, or more sources in a single sentence!

Make a claim that has been supported in multiple contexts:

Context 1 ( Citation ), Context 2 ( Citation ), Context 3 ( Citation ).

These results are supported by more recent research on transportation energy consumption ( Liddle, 2014 ), electricity consumption in buildings ( Lariviere and Lafrance, 1999 ), and overall urban GHG emissions ( Marcotullio et al., 2013b ).

More information:

Use this citation strategy when you want to show that a body of research has found support for some claim across several different contexts. This can show the robustness of an effect or phenomenon and can give your claim some added validity

3. Quote important or unique terms

Claim " Term " ( Citation ).

The spatial implications of this thinking are manifest in the " concentric ring model " of urban expansion and its variants ( Harris and Ullman, 1945 ).

While block or even whole-sentence citations are rare in most research papers in the science and social science disciplines, there is often a need to quote specific terms or phrases that were first coined by a certain source or that were well-explained in a specific paper.

4. Quoting definitions

Contextualize quote , " important word or phrase ."

Role conflict is defined as "A situation in which contradictory, competing, or incompatible expectations are placed on an individual by two or more roles held at the same time" (Open Sociology Dictionary, 2023); whereas, role strain is defined as "a situation caused by higher-than-expected demands placed on an individual performing a specific role that leads to difficulty or stress" (Open Sociology Dictionary, 2023). In our study, we hypothesize that caregivers who reenter higher education experience role conflict between school work, paid work, and care work. Further, we hypothesize that this conflict is greater in individuals who had experienced role strain in employment or caregiving prior to entering college.

A direct quotation can bring attention to specific language in your source. When someone puts something perfectly, you can use a quotation to convey the identical meaning in your work. Definitions are an excellent example of when to use a quotation. In other cases, there may be quotations from important thinkers, clients or community members, and others whose specific wording is important.

I encourage you to use few, if any, direct quotations in your literature review. Personally, I think most students are scared of looking stupid and would rather use a good quotation than risk not getting it right. If you are a student who considers themselves a strong writer, this may not sound relevant to you. However, I'm willing to bet that there are many of your peers for whom this describes a particular bit of research anxiety.

When using quotations, make sure to only include the parts of the quotation that are necessary. You do not need to use quotation marks for statistics you use. And I encourage you to find ways to put others' statistics in your sentences.

Why share information from other sources?

Now that you know some different sentence structures using APA citations, let's examine the purpose behind why you are sharing information from another source. Cited evidence can serve a wide range of purposes in academic papers. These examples will give you an idea of the different ways that you can use citations in your paper.

1. Summarize your source

The studies of Newman and Kenworthy ( 1989, 1999 ) demonstrate a negative relationship between population density and transportation fuel use .

You will help your reader understand your points better if you summarize the key points of a study. Describe the strengths or weaknesses a specific source that has been pivotal in your field. Describe the source's specific methodology, theory, or approach. Be sure to still include a citation. If you mention the name of the author in your text, you still need to provide the date of the study in a parenthetical citation.

2. Cite a method

Despite the popularity of the WUP indicators , they have been routinely criticized because the methodology relies on local- and country-speciﬁc deﬁnitions of bounding urban areas, resulting in of ten incomparable and widely divergent deﬁnitions of the population, density thresholds, or administrative/political units designated ( Satterthwaite, 2007 ).

This is an easy way to give credit to a source that has provided some evidence for the validity of a method or questionnaire. Readers can reference your citation if they are interested in knowing more about the method and its standing in the current literature.

3. Compare sources

Some evidence for this scaling relationship suggests that urban areas with larger population sizes have proportionally smaller energy infrastructures than smaller cities ( Bettencourt et al., 2007 ; Fragkias et al., 2013 ). Other evidence suggests that GHG emissions may increase more than proportionally to population size, such that larger cities exhibit proportionally higher energy demand as they grow than do smaller cities ( Marcotullio et al., 2013 ).

This is one of the most important techniques for creating an effective literature review. This allows you and your readers to consider controversies and discrepancies among the current literature, revealing gaps in the literature or points of contention for further study.

The examples in this guide come from:

Marcotullio, P. J., Hughes, S., Sarzynski, A., Pincetl, S., Sanchez Peña, L., Romero-Lankao, P., Runfola, D. and Seto, K. C. (2014), Urbanization and the carbon cycle: Contributions from social science. Earth's Future, 2: 496–514. doi:10.1002/2014EF000257

Avoiding plagiarism

The most difficult thing about avoiding plagiarism is that reading so much of other people's ideas can make them seem like your own after a while. We recommend you work through this interactive activity on determining how and when to cite other authors.

Research writing requires outlining, which helps you arrange your facts neatly before writing. It's similar to arranging all of your ingredients before you start cooking.
Eliminate quotations from your writing as much as possible. Your literature review needs to be your analysis of the literature, not just a summary of other people's good ideas.
Experiment with the prompts in this chapter as you begin to write your research question.

6.2 Writing your literature review

Describe the components of a literature review
Begin to write your literature review
Identify the purpose of a problem statement
Apply the components of a formal argument to your topic
Use elements of formal writing style, including signposting and transitions
Recognize commons errors in literature reviews

Writing about research is different than other types of writing. Research writing is not like a journal entry or opinion paper. The goal here is not to apply your research question to your life or growth as a practitioner. Research writing is about the provision and interpretation of facts. The tone should be objective and unbiased, and personal experiences and opinions are excluded. Particularly for students who are used to writing case notes, research writing can be a challenge. That's why its important to normalize getting help! If your professor has not built in peer review, consider setting up a peer review group among your peers. You should also reach out to your academic advisor to see if there are writing services on your campus available to graduate students. No one should feel bad for needing help with something they haven't done before, haven't done in a while, or were never taught how to do.

If you’ve followed the steps in this chapter, you likely have an outline, summary table, and concept map from which you can begin the writing process. But what do you need to include in your literature review? We’ve mentioned it before, but to summarize, a literature review should:

Introduce the topic and define its key terms.
Establish the importance of the topic.
Provide an overview of the important literature related to the concepts found in the research question.
Identify gaps or controversies in the literature.
Point out consistent findings across studies.
Synthesize that which is known about a topic, rather than just provide a summary of the articles you read.
Discuss possible implications and directions for future research.

Do you have enough facts and sources to accomplish these tasks? It’s a good time to consult your outlines and notes on each article you plan to include in your literature review. You may also want to consult with your professor on what is expected of you. If there is something you are missing, you may want to jump back to section 2.3 where we discussed how to search for literature. While you can always fill in material, there is the danger that you will start writing without really knowing what you are talking about or what you want to say. For example, if you don’t have a solid definition of your key concepts or a sense of how the literature has developed over time, it will be difficult to make coherent scholarly claims about your topic.

There is no magical point at which one is ready to write. As you consider whether you are ready, it may be useful to ask yourself these questions:

How will my literature review be organized?
What section headings will I be using?
How do the various studies relate to each other?
What contributions do they make to the field?
Where are the gaps or limitations in existing research?
And finally, but most importantly, how does my own research fit into what has already been done?

The problem statement

Scholarly works often begin with a problem statement, which serves two functions. First, it establishes why your topic is a social problem worth studying. Second, it pulls your reader into the literature review. Who would want to read about something unimportant?

A problem statement generally answers the following questions, though these are far from exhaustive:

Why is this an important problem to study?
How many people are affected by this problem?
How does this problem impact other social issues relevant to social work?
Why is your target population an important one to study?

A strong problem statement, like the rest of your literature review, should be filled with empirical results, theory, and arguments based on the extant literature. A research proposal differs significantly from other more reflective essays you’ve likely completed during your social work studies. If your topic were domestic violence in rural Appalachia, I’m sure you could come up with answers to the above questions without looking at a single source. However, the purpose of the literature review is not to test your intuition, personal experience, or empathy. Instead, research methods are about gaining specific and articulable knowledge to inform action. With a problem statement, you can take a “boring” topic like the color of rooms used in an inpatient psychiatric facility, transportation patterns in major cities, or the materials used to manufacture baby bottles, and help others see the topic as you see it—an important part of the social world that impacts social work practice.

The structure of a literature review

In general, the problem statement belongs at the beginning of the literature review. We usually advise students to spend no more than a paragraph or two for a problem statement. For the rest of your literature review, there is no set formula by which it needs to be organized. However, a literature review generally follows the format of any other essay—Introduction, Body, and Conclusion.

The introduction to the literature review contains a statement or statements about the overall topic. At a minimum, the introduction should define or identify the general topic, issue, or area of concern. You might consider presenting historical background, mentioning the results of a seminal study, and providing definitions of important terms. The introduction may also point to overall trends in what has been previously published on the topic or on conflicts in theory, methodology, evidence, conclusions, or gaps in research and scholarship. We also suggest putting in a few sentences that walk the reader through the rest of the literature review. Highlight your main arguments from the body of the literature review and preview your conclusion. An introduction should let the reader know what to expect from the rest of your review.

The body of your literature review is where you demonstrate your synthesis and analysis of the literature. Again, do not just summarize the literature. We would also caution against organizing your literature review by source—that is, one paragraph for source A, one paragraph for source B, etc. That structure will likely provide an adequate summary of the literature you’ve found, but it would give you almost no synthesis of the literature. That approach doesn’t tell your reader how to put those facts together, it doesn't highlight points of agreement or contention, or how each study builds on the work of others. In short, it does not demonstrate critical thinking.

Organize your review by argument

Instead, use your outlines and notes as a guide what you have to say about the important topics you need to cover. Literature reviews are written from the perspective of an expert in that field. After an exhaustive literature review, you should feel as though you are able to make strong claims about what is true—so make them! There is no need to hide behind “I believe” or “I think.” Put your voice out in front, loud and proud! But make sure you have facts and sources that back up your claims.

I’ve used the term “ argument ” here in a specific way. An argument in writing means more than simply disagreeing with what someone else said, as this classic Monty Python sketch demonstrates. Toulman, Rieke, and Janik (1984) identify six elements of an argument:

Claim: the thesis statement—what you are trying to prove
Grounds: theoretical or empirical evidence that supports your claim
Warrant: your reasoning (rule or principle) connecting the claim and its grounds
Backing: further facts used to support or legitimize the warrant
Qualifier: acknowledging that the argument may not be true for all cases
Rebuttal: considering both sides (as cited in Burnette, 2012) [1]

Let’s walk through an example. If I were writing a literature review on a negative income tax, a policy in which people in poverty receive an unconditional cash stipend from the government each month equal to the federal poverty level, I would want to lay out the following:

Claim: the negative income tax is superior to other forms of anti-poverty assistance.
Grounds: data comparing negative income tax recipients to people receiving anti-poverty assistance in existing programs, theory supporting a negative income tax, data from evaluations of existing anti-poverty programs, etc.
Warrant: cash-based programs like the negative income tax are superior to existing anti-poverty programs because they allow the recipient greater self-determination over how to spend their money.
Backing: data demonstrating the beneficial effects of self-determination on people in poverty.
Qualifier: the negative income tax does not provide taxpayers and voters with enough control to make sure people in poverty are not wasting financial assistance on frivolous items.
Rebuttal: policy should be about empowering the oppressed, not protecting the taxpayer, and there are ways of addressing taxpayer spending concerns through policy design.

Like any effective argument, your literature review must have some kind of structure. For example, it might begin by describing a phenomenon in a general way along with several studies that provide some detail, then describing two or more competing theories of the phenomenon, and finally presenting a hypothesis to test one or more of the theories. Or, it might describe one phenomenon, then describe another that seems inconsistent with the first, then propose a theory that resolves the inconsistency, and finally present a hypothesis to test that theory. In applied research, it might describe a phenomenon or theory, then describe how that phenomenon or theory applies to some important real-world situation, and finally, may suggest a way to test whether it does, in fact, apply to that situation.

Use signposts

Another important issue is signposting . It may not be a term you are familiar with, but you are likely familiar with the concept. Signposting refers to the words used to identify the organization and structure of your literature review to your reader. The most basic form of signposting is using a topic sentence at the beginning of each paragraph. A topic sentence introduces the argument you plan to make in that paragraph. For example, you might start a paragraph stating, “There is strong disagreement in the literature as to whether psychedelic drugs cause people to develop psychotic disorders, or whether psychotic disorders cause people to use psychedelic drugs.” Within that paragraph, your reader would likely assume you will present evidence for both arguments. The concluding sentence of your paragraph should address the topic sentence, discussing how the facts and arguments from the paragraph you've written support a specific conclusion. To continue with our example, I might say, “There is likely a reciprocal effect in which both the use of psychedelic drugs worsens pre-psychotic symptoms and worsening psychosis increases the desire to use psychedelic drugs.”

Signposting also involves using headings and subheadings. Your literature review will use APA formatting, which means you need to follow their rules for bolding, capitalization, italicization, and indentation of headings. Headings help your reader understand the structure of your literature review. They can also help if the reader gets lost and needs to re-orient themselves within the document. We often tell our students to assume we know nothing (they don’t mind) and need to be shown exactly where they are addressing each part of the literature review. It’s like walking a small child around, telling them “First we’ll do this, then we’ll do that, and when we’re done, we’ll know this!”

Another way to use signposting is to open each paragraph with a sentence that links the topic of the paragraph with the one before it. Alternatively, one could end each paragraph with a sentence that links it with the next paragraph. For example, imagine we wanted to link a paragraph about barriers to accessing healthcare with one about the relationship between the patient and physician. We could use a transition sentence like this: “Even if patients overcome these barriers to accessing care, the physician-patient relationship can create new barriers to positive health outcomes.” A transition sentence like this builds a connection between two distinct topics. Transition sentences are also useful within paragraphs. They tell the reader how to consider one piece of information in light of previous information. Even simple transitional words like 'however' and 'similarly' can help demonstrate critical thinking and link each building block of your argument together.

Many beginning researchers have difficulty incorporating transitions into their writing. Let’s look at an example. Instead of beginning a sentence or paragraph by launching into a description of a study, such as “Williams (2004) found that…,” it is better to start by indicating something about why you are describing this particular study. Here are some simple examples:

Another example of this phenomenon comes from the work of Williams (2004)...
Williams (2004) offers one explanation of this phenomenon...
An alternative perspective has been provided by Williams (2004)...

Now that we know to use signposts, the natural question is “What goes on the signposts?” First, it is important to start with an outline of the main points that you want to make, organized in the order you want to make them. The basic structure of your argument should then be apparent from the outline itself. Unfortunately, there is no formula we can give you that will work for everyone, but we can provide some general pointers on structuring your literature review.

The literature review tends to move from general to more specific ideas. You can build a review by identifying areas of consensus and areas of disagreement. You may choose to present historical studies—preferably seminal studies that are of significant importance—and close with the most recent research. Another approach is to start with the most distantly related facts and literature and then report on those most closely related to your research question. You could also compare and contrast valid approaches, features, characteristics, theories – that is, one approach, then a second approach, followed by a third approach.

Here are some additional tips for writing the body of your literature review:

Start broad and then narrow down to more specific information.
When appropriate, cite two or more sources for a single point, but avoid long strings of references for a single idea.
Use quotes sparingly. Quotations for definitions are okay, but reserve quotes for when something is said so well you couldn’t possible phrase it differently. Never use quotes for statistics.
Paraphrase when you need to relay the specific details within an article
Include only the aspects of the study that are relevant to your literature review. Don’t insert extra facts about a study just to take up space.
Avoid reflective, personal writing. It is traditional to avoid using first-person language (I, we, us, etc.).
Avoid informal language like contractions, idioms, and rhetorical questions.
Note any sections of your review that lack citations from the literature. Your arguments need to be based in empirical or theoretical facts. Do not approach this like a reflective journal entry.
Point out consistent findings and emphasize stronger studies over weaker ones.
Point out important strengths and weaknesses of research studies, as well as contradictions and inconsistent findings.
Implications and suggestions for further research (where there are gaps in the current literature) should be specific.

The conclusion should summarize your literature review, discuss implications, and create a space for further research needed in this area. Your conclusion, like the rest of your literature review, should make a point. What are the important implications of your literature review? How do they inform the question you are trying to answer?

You should consult with your professor and the course syllabus about the final structure your literature review should take. Here is an example of one possible structure:

Establish the importance of the topic
Number and type of people affected
Seriousness of the impact
Physical, psychological, economic, social, or spiritual consequences of the problem
Definitions of key terms
Supporting evidence
Common findings across studies, gaps in the literature
Research question(s) and hypothesis(es)

Editing your literature review

Literature reviews are more than a summary of the publications you find on a topic. As you have seen in this brief introduction, literature reviews represent a very specific type of research, analysis, and writing. We will explore these topics further in upcoming chapters. As you begin your literature review, here are some common errors to avoid:

Accepting a researcher’s finding as valid without evaluating methodology and data
Ignoring contrary findings and alternative interpretations
Using findings that are not clearly related to your own study or using findings that are too general
Dedicating insufficient time to literature searching
Reporting statistical results from a single study, rather than synthesizing the results of multiple studies to provide a comprehensive view of the literature on a topic
Relying too heavily on secondary sources
Overusing quotations
Not justifying arguments using specific facts or theories from the literature

For your literature review, remember that your goal is to construct an argument for the importance of your research question. As you start editing your literature review, make sure it is balanced. Accurately report common findings, areas where studies contradict each other, new theories or perspectives, and how studies cause us to reaffirm or challenge our understanding of your topic.

It is acceptable to argue that the balance of the research supports the existence of a phenomenon or is consistent with a theory (and that is usually the best that researchers in social work can hope for), but it is not acceptable to ignore contradictory evidence. A large part of what makes a research question interesting is uncertainty about its answer (University of Minnesota, 2016). [2]

In addition to subjectivity and bias, writer's block can obstruct the completion of your literature review. Often times, writer’s block can stem from confusing the creating and editing parts of the writing process. Many writers often start by simply trying to type out what they want to say, regardless of how good it is. Author Anne Lamott (1995) [3] terms these “shitty first drafts,” and we all write them. They are a natural and important part of the writing process.

Even if you have a detailed outline from which to work, the words are not going to fall into place perfectly the first time you start writing. You should consider turning off the editing and critiquing part of your brain for a while and allow your thoughts to flow. Don’t worry about putting a correctly formatted internal citation (as long as you know which source you used there) when you first write. Just get the information out. Only after you’ve reached a natural stopping point might you go back and edit your draft for grammar, APA style, organization, flow, and more. Divorcing the writing and editing process can go a long way to addressing writer’s block—as can picking a topic about which you have something to say!

As you are editing, keep in mind these questions adapted from Green (2012): [4]

Content: Have I clearly stated the main idea or purpose of the paper? Is the thesis or focus clearly presented and appropriate for the reader?
Organization: How well is it structured? Is the organization spelled out and easy to follow for the reader ?
Flow: Is there a logical flow from section to section, paragraph to paragraph, sentence to sentence? Are there transitions between and within paragraphs that link ideas together?
Development: Have I validated the main idea with supporting material? Are supporting data sufficient? Does the conclusion match the introduction?
Form: Are there any APA style issues, redundancy, problematic wording and terminology (always know the definition of any word you use!), flawed sentence constructions and selection, spelling, and punctuation?

Social workers use the APA style guide to format and structure their literature reviews. Most students know APA style only as it relates to internal and external citations. If you are confused about them, consult this amazing APA style guide from the University of Texas-Arlington library. Your university's library likely has resources they created to help you with APA style, and you can meet with a librarian or your professor to talk about formatting questions you have. Make sure you budget in a few hours at the end of each project to build a correctly formatted references page and check your internal citations. The highest quality online source of information on APA style is the APA style blog, where you can search questions and answers from the

Of course, APA style is about much more than knowing there is a period after "et al." or citing the location a book was published. APA style is also about what the profession considers to be good writing. If you haven't picked up an APA publication manual because you use citation generators, know that I did the same thing when I was in school. Purchasing the APA manual can help you with a common problem we hear about from students. Every professor (and every website about APA style) seems to have their own peculiar idea of "correct" APA style that you can, if needed, demonstrate is not accurate.

A literature review is not a book report. Do not organize it by article, with one paragraph for each source in your references. Instead, organize it based on the key ideas and arguments.
The problem statement draws the reader into your topic by highlighting the importance of the topic to social work and to society overall.
Signposting is an important component of academic writing that helps your reader follow the structure of your argument and of your literature review.
Transitions demonstrate critical thinking and help guide your reader through your arguments.
Editing and writing are separate processes.
Consult with an APA style guide or a librarian to help you format your paper.

Look at your professor's prompt for the literature review component of your research proposal (or if you don't have one, use the example question provided in this section).

Write 2-3 facts you would use to address each question or component in the prompt.
Reflect on which questions you have a lot of information about and which you need to gather more information about in order to answer adequately.

Outline the structure of your literature review using your concept map from Section 5.2 as a guide.

Identify the key arguments you will make and how they are related to each other.
Reflect on topic sentences and concluding sentences you would use for each argument.
Human subjects research (19 minute read)
Specific ethical issues to consider (12 minute read)
Benefits and harms of research across the ecosystem (7 minute read)
Being an ethical researcher (8 minute read)

Content warning: examples in this chapter contain references to numerous incidents of unethical medical experimentation (e.g. intentionally injecting diseases into unknowing participants, withholding proven treatments), social experimentation under extreme conditions (e.g. being directed to deliver electric shocks to test obedience), violations of privacy, gender and racial inequality, research with people who are incarcerated or on parole, experimentation on animals, abuse of people with Autism, community interactions with law enforcement, WWII, the Holocaust, and Nazi activities (especially related to research on humans).

With your literature review underway, you are ready to begin thinking in more concrete terms about your research topic. Recall our discussion in Chapter 2 on practical and ethical considerations that emerge as part of the research process. In this chapter, we will expand on the ethical boundaries that social scientists must abide by when conducting human subjects research. As a result of reading this chapter, you should have a better sense of what is possible and ethical for the research project you create.

6.1 Human subjects research

Understand what we mean by ethical research and why it is important
Understand some of the egregious ethical violations that have occurred throughout history

While all research comes with its own set of ethical concerns, those associated with research conducted on human subjects vary dramatically from those of research conducted on nonliving entities. The US Department of Health and Human Services (USDHHS) defines a human subject as “a living individual about whom an investigator (whether professional or student) conducting research obtains (1) data through intervention or interaction with the individual, or (2) identifiable private information” (USDHHS, 1993, para. 1). [5] Some researchers prefer the term "participants" to "subjects'" as it acknowledges the agency of people who participate in the study. For our purposes, we will use the two terms interchangeably.

In some states, human subjects also include deceased individuals and human fetal materials. Nonhuman research subjects, on the other hand, are objects or entities that investigators manipulate or analyze in the process of conducting research. Nonhuman research subjects typically include sources such as newspapers, historical documents, pieces of clothing, television shows, buildings, and even garbage (to name just a few), that are analyzed for unobtrusive research projects. Unsurprisingly, research on human subjects is regulated much more heavily than research on nonhuman subjects. This is why many student research projects use data that is publicly available, rather than recruiting their own study participants. However, there are ethical considerations that all researchers must take into account, regardless of their research subject. We’ll discuss those considerations in addition to concerns that are unique to human subject research.

Why do research participants need protection?

First and foremost, we are professionally bound to engage in the ethical practice of research. This chapter discusses ethical research and will show you how to engage in research that is consistent with the NASW Code of Ethics as well as national and international ethical standards all researchers are accountable to. Before we begin, we need to understand the historical occurrences that were the catalyst for the formation of the current ethical standards . This chapter will enable you to view ethics from a micro, mezzo, and macro perspective.

The research process has led to many life-changing discoveries; these have improved life expectancy, improved living conditions, and helped us understand what contributes to certain social problems. That said, not all research has been conducted in respectful, responsible, or humane ways. Unfortunately, some research projects have dramatically marginalized, oppressed, and harmed participants and whole communities.

Would you believe that the following actions have been carried out in the name of research? I realize there was a content warning at the beginning of the chapter, but it is worth mentioning that the list below of research atrocities may be particularly upsetting or triggering.

intentionally froze healthy body parts of prisoners to see if they could develop a treatment for freezing [6]
scaled the body parts of prisoners to how best to treat soldiers who had injuries from being exposed to high temperatures [7]
intentionally infected healthy individuals to see if they could design effective methods of treatment for infections [8]
gave healthy people TB to see if they could treat it [9]
attempted to transplant limbs, bones, and muscles to another person to see if this was possible [10]
castrated and irradiated genitals to see if they could develop a faster method of sterilization [11]
starved people and only allowed them to drink seawater to see if they could make saline water drinkable [12]
artificially inseminated women with animal sperm to see what would happen [13]
gassed living people to document how they would die [14]
conducted cruel experiments on people and if they did not die, would kill them so they could undergo an autopsy [15]
refused to treat syphilis in African American men (when treatment was available) because they wanted to track the progression of the illness [16]
vivisected humans without anesthesia to see how illnesses that researches gave prisoners impacted their bodies [17]
intentionally tried to infect prisoners with the Bubonic Plague [18]
intentionally infected prisoners, prostitutes, soldiers, and children with syphilis to study the disease's progression [19]
performed gynecological experiments on female slaves without anesthesia to investigate new surgical methods [20]

The sad fact is that not only did all of these occur, in many instances, these travesties continued for years until exposed and halted. Additionally, these examples have contributed to the formation of a legacy of distrust toward research. Specifically, many underrepresented groups have a deep distrust of agencies that implement research and are often skeptical of research findings. This has made it difficult for groups to support and have confidence in medical treatments, advances in social service programs, and evidence-informed policy changes. While the aforementioned unethical examples may have ended, this deep and painful wound on the public's trust remains. Consequently, we must be vigilant in our commitment to ethical research.

Many of the situations described may seem like extreme historical cases of misuse of power as researchers. However, ethical problems in research don't just happen in these extreme occurrences. None of us are immune to making unethical choices and the ethical practice of research requires conscientious mindful attention to what we are asking of our research participants. A few examples of less noticeable ethical issues might include: failing to fully explain to someone in advance what their participation might involve because you are in a rush to recruit a large enough sample; or only presenting findings that support your ideas to help secure a grant that is relevant to your research area. Remember, any time research is conducted with human beings, there is the chance that ethical violations may occur that pose social, emotional, and even physical risks for groups, and this is especially true when vulnerable or oppressed groups are involved.

A brief history of unethical social science research

Research on humans hasn’t always been regulated in the way it is today. The earliest documented cases of research using human subjects are of medical vaccination trials (Rothman, 1987). [21] One such case took place in the late 1700s, when scientist Edward Jenner exposed an 8-year-old boy to smallpox in order to identify a vaccine for the devastating disease. Medical research on human subjects continued without much law or policy intervention until the mid-1900s when, at the end of World War II, a number of Nazi doctors and scientists were put on trial for conducting human experimentation during the course of which they tortured and murdered many concentration camp inmates (Faden & Beauchamp, 1986). [22] The trials, conducted in Nuremberg, Germany, resulted in the creation of the Nuremberg Code , a 10-point set of research principles designed to guide doctors and scientists who conduct research on human subjects. Today, the Nuremberg Code guides medical and other research conducted on human subjects, including social scientific research.

Medical scientists are not the only researchers who have conducted questionable research on humans. In the 1960s, psychologist Stanley Milgram (1974) [23] conducted a series of experiments designed to understand obedience to authority in which he tricked subjects into believing they were administering an electric shock to other subjects. In fact, the shocks weren’t real at all, but some, though not many, of Milgram’s research participants experienced extreme emotional distress after the experiment (Ogden, 2008). [24] A reaction of emotional distress is understandable. The realization that one is willing to administer painful shocks to another human being just because someone who looks authoritative has told you to do so might indeed be traumatizing—even if you later learn that the shocks weren’t real.

Around the same time that Milgram conducted his experiments, sociology graduate student Laud Humphreys (1970) [25] was collecting data for his dissertation on the tearoom trade, which was the practice of men engaging in anonymous sexual encounters in public restrooms. Humphreys wished to understand who these men were and why they participated in the trade. To conduct his research, Humphreys offered to serve as a “watch queen,” in a local park restroom where the tearoom trade was known to occur. His role would be to keep an eye out for police while also getting the benefit of being able to watch the sexual encounters. What Humphreys did not do was identify himself as a researcher to his research subjects. Instead, he watched his subjects for several months, getting to know several of them, learning more about the tearoom trade practice and, without the knowledge of his research subjects, jotting down their license plate numbers as they pulled into or out of the parking lot near the restroom.

Sometime after participating as a watch queen, with the help of several insiders who had access to motor vehicle registration information, Humphreys used those license plate numbers to obtain the names and home addresses of his research subjects. Then, disguised as a public health researcher, Humphreys visited his subjects in their homes and interviewed them about their lives and their health. Humphreys’ research dispelled a good number of myths and stereotypes about the tearoom trade and its participants. He learned, for example, that over half of his subjects were married to women and many of them did not identify as gay or bisexual. [26]

Once Humphreys’ work became public, there was some major controversy at his home university (e.g., the chancellor tried to have his degree revoked), among scientists in general, and among members of the public, as it raised public concerns about the purpose and conduct of social science research. In addition, the Washington Post journalist Nicholas von Hoffman wrote the following warning about “sociological snoopers”:

We’re so preoccupied with defending our privacy against insurance investigators, dope sleuths, counterespionage men, divorce detectives and credit checkers, that we overlook the social scientists behind the hunting blinds who’re also peeping into what we thought were our most private and secret lives. But they are there, studying us, taking notes, getting to know us, as indifferent as everybody else to the feeling that to be a complete human involves having an aspect of ourselves that’s unknown (von Hoffman, 1970). [27]

In the original version of his report, Humphreys defended the ethics of his actions. In 2008 [28] , years after Humphreys’ death, his book was reprinted with the addition of a retrospect on the ethical implications of his work. In his written reflections on his research and the fallout from it, Humphreys maintained that his tearoom observations constituted ethical research on the grounds that those interactions occurred in public places. But Humphreys added that he would conduct the second part of his research differently. Rather than trace license numbers and interview unwitting tearoom participants in their homes under the guise of public health research, Humphreys instead would spend more time in the field and work to cultivate a pool of informants. Those informants would know that he was a researcher and would be able to fully consent to being interviewed. In the end, Humphreys concluded “there is no reason to believe that any research subjects have suffered because of my efforts, or that the resultant demystification of impersonal sex has harmed society” (Humphreys, 2008, p. 231). [29]

Today, given increasing regulation of social scientific research, chances are slim that a researcher would be allowed to conduct a project similar to Humphreys’. Some argue that Humphreys’ research was deceptive, put his subjects at risk of losing their families and their positions in society, and was therefore unethical (Warwick, 1973; Warwick, 1982). [30] Others suggest that Humphreys’ research “did not violate any premise of either beneficence or the sociological interest in social justice” and that the benefits of Humphreys’ research, namely the dissolution of myths about the tearoom trade specifically and human sexual practice more generally, outweigh the potential risks associated with the work (Lenza, 2004, p. 23). [31] What do you think, and why?

These and other studies (Reverby, 2009) [32] led to increasing public awareness of and concern about research on human subjects. In 1974, the US Congress enacted the National Research Act , which created the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects in Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The commission produced The Belmont Report , a document outlining basic ethical principles for research on human subjects (National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects in Biomedical and Behavioral Research, 1979). [33] The National Research Act (1974) [34] also required that all institutions receiving federal support establish institutional review boards (IRBs) to protect the rights of human research subjects. Since that time, many organizations that do not receive federal support but where research is conducted have also established review boards to evaluate the ethics of the research that they conduct. IRBs are overseen by the federal Office of Human Research Protections .

The Belmont Report

As mentioned above, The Belmont Report is a federal document that outlines the foundational principles that guide the ethical practice of research in the United States. These ethical principles include: respect for persons, beneficence, and justice. Each of these terms has specific implications as they are applied to the practice of research. These three principles arose as a response to many of the mistreatment and abuses that have been previously discussed and provide important guidance as researchers consider how they will construct and conduct their research studies. As you are crafting your research proposal, makes sure you are mindful of these important ethical guidelines.

Respect for Persons

As social workers, our professional code of ethics requires that we recognize and respect the "inherent dignity and worth of the person." [35] This is very similar to the ethical research principle of r espect for persons . According to this principle, as researchers, we need to treat all research participants with respect, dignity and inherent autonomy. This is reflected by ensuring that participants have self-determination to make informed decisions about their participation in research, that they have a clear understanding of what they will be asked to do and any risks involved, and that their participation is voluntary and can be stopped at any time. Furthermore, for those persons who may have diminished autonomy (e.g. children, people who are incarcerated), extra protections must be built in to these research studies to ensure that respect for persons continues to be demonstrated towards these groups, as they may be especially vulnerable to exploitation and coercion through the research process. A critical tool in establishing respect for persons in your research is the informed consent process, which will be discussed in more detail below.

Beneficence

You may not be familiar with this word yet, but the concept is pretty straightforward. The main idea with beneficence is that the intent of research is to do good. As researchers, to accomplish this, we seek to maximize benefits and minimize risks. Benefits may be something good or advantageous directly received by the research participant, or they may represent a broader good to a wider group of people or the scientific community at large (such as increasing knowledge about the topic or social problem that you are studying). Risks are potential physical, social, or emotional harm that may come about as a response to participation in a study. These risks may be more immediate (e.g. risk of identifying information about a participant being shared, or a participant being upset or triggered by a particular question), or long-term (e.g. some aspect about the person could be shared that could lead to long-term stigmatization). As researchers, we need to think about risk that might be experienced by the individual, but also risks that might be directed towards the community or population(s) the individual may represent. For instance, if our study is specifically focused on surveying single parents, we need to consider how the sharing of our findings might impact this group and how they are perceived. It is a very rare study in which there is no risk to participants. However, a well-designed and ethically sound study will seek to minimize these risks, provide resources to anticipate and address them, and maximize the benefits that are gained through the study.

The final ethical principle we need to cover is justice. While you likely have some idea what justice is, for the purposes of research, justice is the idea that the benefits and the burdens of research are distributed fairly across populations and groups. To help illustrate the concept of justice in research, research in the area of mental health and psychology has historically been critiqued as failing to adequately represent women and people of diverse racial and ethnic groups in their samples (Cundiff, 2012). [36] This has created a body of knowledge that is overly representative of the white male experience, further reinforcing systems of power and privilege. In addition, consider the influence of language as it relates to research justice. If we create studies that only recruit participants fluent in English, which many studies do, we are often failing to satisfy the ethical principle of justice as it applies to people who don't speak English. It is unrealistic to think that we can represent all people in all studies. However, we do need to thoughtfully acknowledge voices that might not be reflected in our samples and attempt to recruit diverse and representative samples whenever possible.

These three principles provide the foundation for the oversight work that is carried out by Institutional Review Boards, our next topic.

Institutional review boards

Institutional review boards, or IRBs, are tasked with ensuring that the rights and welfare of human research subjects will be protected at all institutions, including universities, hospitals, nonprofit research institutions, and other organizations, that receive federal support for research. IRBs typically consist of members from a variety of disciplines, such as sociology, economics, education, social work, and communications (to name a few). Most IRBs also include representatives from the community in which they reside. For example, representatives from nearby prisons, hospitals, or treatment centers might sit on the IRBs of university campuses near them. The diversity of membership helps to ensure that the many and complex ethical issues that may arise from human subjects research will be considered fully and by a knowledgeable and experienced panel. Investigators conducting research on human subjects are required to submit proposals outlining their research plans to IRBs for review and approval prior to beginning their research. Even students who conduct research on human subjects must have their proposed work reviewed and approved by the IRB before beginning any research (though, on some campuses, exceptions are made for student projects that will not be shared outside of the classroom).

The IRB has three levels of review, defined in statute by the USDHHS.

Exempt review is the lowest level of review. Studies that are considered exempt expose participants to the least potential for harm and often involve little participation by human subjects. In social work, exempt studies often examine data that is publicly available or secondary data from another researcher that has been de-identified by the person who collected it.

Expedited review is the middle level of review. Studies considered under expedited review do not have to go before the full IRB board because they expose participants to minimal risk. However, the studies must be thoroughly reviewed by a member of the IRB committee. While there are many types of studies that qualify for expedited review, the most relevant to social workers include the use of existing medical records, recordings (such as interviews) gathered for research purposes, and research on individual group characteristics or behavior.

Finally, the highest level of review is called a full board review . A full board review will involve multiple members of the IRB evaluating your proposal. When researchers submit a proposal under full board review, the full IRB board will meet, discuss any questions or concerns with the study, invite the researcher to answer questions and defend their proposal, and vote to approve the study or send it back for revision. Full board proposals pose greater than minimal risk to participants. They may also involve the participation of vulnerable populations , or people who need additional protection from the IRB. Vulnerable populations include prisoners, children, people with cognitive impairments, people with physical disabilities, employees, and students. While some of these populations can fall under expedited review in some cases, they will often require the full IRB to approve their study.

It may surprise you to hear that IRBs are not always popular or appreciated by researchers. Who wouldn’t want to conduct ethical research, you ask? In some cases, the concern is that IRBs are most well-versed in reviewing biomedical and experimental research, neither of which is particularly common within social work. Much social work research, especially qualitative research, is open-ended in nature, a fact that can be problematic for IRBs. The members of IRBs often want to know in advance exactly who will be observed, where, when, and for how long, whether and how they will be approached, exactly what questions they will be asked, and what predictions the researcher has for their findings. Providing this level of detail for a year-long participant observation within an activist group of 200-plus members, for example, would be extraordinarily frustrating for the researcher in the best case and most likely would prove to be impossible. Of course, IRBs do not intend to have researchers avoid studying controversial topics or avoid using certain methodologically sound data collection techniques, but unfortunately, that is sometimes the result. The solution is not to eradicate review boards, which serve a necessary and important function, but instead to help educate IRB members about the variety of social scientific research methods and topics covered by social workers and other social scientists.

What we have provided here is only a short summary of federal regulations and international agreements that provide the boundaries between ethical and unethical research.

Here are a few more detailed guides for continued learning about research ethics and human research protections.

University of California, San Francisco: Levels of IRB Review
United States Department of Health and Human Services: The Belmont Report
NIH, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences: What is Ethics in Research & Why is it important
NIH: Guiding Principles for Ethical Research
Council on Social Work Education: National Statement on Research Integrity in Social Work
Butler, I. (2002). A code of ethics for social work and social care research. British Journal of Social Work , 32 (2), 239-248
Research on human subjects presents a unique set of challenges and opportunities when it comes to conducting ethical research.
Research on human subjects has not always been regulated to the extent that it is today.
All institutions receiving federal support for research must have an IRB. Organizations that do not receive federal support but where research is conducted also often include IRBs as part of their organizational structure.
Researchers submit studies for IRB review at one of three different levels, depending on the level of harm the study may cause.
Recall whether your project will gather data from human subjects and sketch out what the data collection process might look like.
Identify which level of IRB review is most appropriate for your project.
For many students, your professors may have existing agreements with your university's IRB that allow students to conduct research projects outside the supervision of the IRB. Make sure that your project falls squarely within those parameters. If you feel you may be outside of such an agreement, consult with your professor to see if you will need to submit your study for IRB review before starting your project.

6.2 Specific ethical issues to consider

Define informed consent, and describe how it works
Identify the unique concerns related to the study of vulnerable populations
Differentiate between anonymity and confidentiality
Explain the ethical responsibilities of social workers conducting research

As should be clear by now, conducting research on humans presents a number of unique ethical considerations. Human research subjects must be given the opportunity to consent to their participation in research, and be fully informed of the study’s risks, benefits, and purpose. Further, subjects’ identities and the information they share should be protected by researchers. Of course, how consent and identity protection are defined may vary by individual researcher, institution, or academic discipline. In this section, we’ll take a look at a few specific topics that individual researchers must consider before embarking on research with human subjects.

Informed consent

An expectation of voluntary participation is presumed in all social work research projects. In other words, we cannot force anyone to participate in our research without that person’s knowledge or consent. Researchers must therefore design procedures to obtain subjects’ informed consent to participate in their research. This specifically relates back to the ethical principle of respect for persons outlined in The Belmont Report . Informed consent is defined as a subject’s voluntary agreement to participate in research based on a full understanding of the research and of the possible risks and benefits involved. Although it sounds simple, ensuring that one has actually obtained informed consent is a much more complex process than you might initially presume.

The first requirement is that, in giving their informed consent, subjects may neither waive nor even appear to waive any of their legal rights. Subjects also cannot release a researcher, her sponsor, or institution from any legal liability should something go wrong during the course of their participation in the research (USDHHS,2009). [37] Because social work research does not typically involve asking subjects to place themselves at risk of physical harm by, for example, taking untested drugs or consenting to new medical procedures, social work researchers do not often worry about potential liability associated with their research projects. However, their research may involve other types of risks.

For example, what if a social work researcher fails to sufficiently conceal the identity of a subject who admits to participating in a local swinger’s club? In this case, a violation of confidentiality may negatively affect the participant’s social standing, marriage, custody rights, or employment. Social work research may also involve asking about intimately personal topics that may be difficult for participants to discuss, such as trauma or suicide. Participants may re-experience traumatic events and symptoms when they participate in your study. Even if you are careful to fully inform your participants of all risks before they consent to the research process, I’m sure you can empathize with thinking you could bear talking about a difficult topic and then finding it too overwhelming once you start. In cases like these, it is important for a social work researcher to have a plan to provide supports. This may mean providing referrals to counseling supports in the community or even calling the police if the participant is an imminent danger to himself or others.

It is vital that social work researchers explain their mandatory reporting duties in the consent form and ensure participants understand them before they participate. Researchers should also emphasize to participants that they can stop the research process at any time or decide to withdraw from the research study for any reason. Importantly, it is not the job of the social work researcher to act as a clinician to the participant. While a supportive role is certainly appropriate for someone experiencing a mental health crisis, social workers must ethically avoid dual roles. Referring a participant in crisis to other mental health professionals who may be better able to help them is the expectation.

Beyond the legal issues, most IRBs require researchers to share some details about the purpose of the research, possible benefits of participation, and, most importantly, possible risks associated with participating in that research with their subjects. In addition, researchers must describe how they will protect subjects’ identities, how, where, and for how long any data collected will be stored, how findings may be shared, and whom to contact for additional information about the study or about subjects’ rights. All this information is typically shared in an informed consent form that researchers provide to subjects. In some cases, subjects are asked to sign the consent form indicating that they have read it and fully understand its contents. In other cases, subjects are simply provided a copy of the consent form and researchers are responsible for making sure that subjects have read and understand the form before proceeding with any kind of data collection. Your IRB will often provide guidance or even templates for what they expect to see included in an informed consent form. This is a document that they will inspect very closely. Table 6.1 outlines elements to include in your informed consent. While these offer a guideline for you, you should always visit your schools, IRB website to see what guidance they offer. They often provide a template that they prefer researchers to use. Using these templates ensures that you are using the language that the IRB reviewers expect to see and this can also save you time.

Table 6.1 Elements to include in your informed consent

Welcome	A greeting for your participants, a few words about who you/your team are, the aim of your study
Procedures	What your participants are being asked to do throughout the entire research process
Risks	Any potential risks associated with your study (this is very rarely none!); also, make sure to provide resources that address or mitigate the risks (e.g. counseling services, hotlines, EAP)
Benefits	Any potential benefits, either direct to participant or more broadly (indirect) to community or group; include any compensation here, as well
Privacy	Brief explanation of steps taken to protect privacy.; address confidentiality or anonymity (whichever applies); also address how the results of the study may be used/disseminated
Voluntary Nature	It is important to emphasize that participation is voluntary and can be stopped at any time
Contact Information	You will provide your contact information as the researcher and often the contact of the IRB that is providing approval for the study
Signatures	We will usually seek the signature and date of participant and researcher on these forms (unless otherwise specified and approved in your IRB application)

One last point to consider when preparing to obtain informed consent is that not all potential research subjects are considered equally competent or legally allowed to consent to participate in research. Subjects from vulnerable populations may be at risk of experiencing undue influence or coercion (USDHHS, 2009). [38] The rules for consent are more stringent for vulnerable populations. For example, minors must have the consent of a legal guardian in order to participate in research. In some cases, the minors themselves are also asked to participate in the consent process by signing special, age-appropriate assent forms designed specifically for them. Prisoners and parolees also qualify as vulnerable populations. Concern about the vulnerability of these subjects comes from the very real possibility that prisoners and parolees could perceive that they will receive some highly desired reward, such as early release, if they participate in research or that there could be punitive consequences if they choose not to participate. When a participant faces undue or excess pressure to participate by either favorable or unfavorable means, this is known as coercion and must be avoided by researchers.

Another potential concern regarding vulnerable populations is that they may be underrepresented or left out of research opportunities, specifically because of concerns about their ability to consent. So, on the one hand, researchers must take extra care to ensure that their procedures for obtaining consent from vulnerable populations are not coercive. The procedures for receiving approval to conduct research with these groups may be more rigorous than that for non-vulnerable populations. On the other hand, researchers must work to avoid excluding members of vulnerable populations from participation simply on the grounds that they are vulnerable or that obtaining their consent may be more complex. While there is no easy solution to this ethical research dilemma, an awareness of the potential concerns associated with research on vulnerable populations is important for identifying whatever solution is most appropriate for a specific case.

Protection of identities

As mentioned earlier, the informed consent process includes the requirement that researchers outline how they will protect the identities of subjects. This aspect of the research process, however, is one of the most commonly misunderstood. Furthermore, failing to protect identities is one of the greatest risks to participants in social work research studies.

In protecting subjects’ identities, researchers typically promise to maintain either the anonymity or confidentiality of their research subjects. These are two distinctly different terms and they are NOT interchangeable. Anonymity is the more stringent of the two and is very hard to guarantee in most research studies. When a researcher promises anonymity to participants, not even the researcher is able to link participants’ data with their identities. Anonymity may be impossible for some social work researchers to promise due to the modes of data collection many social workers employ. Face-to-face interviewing means that subjects will be visible to researchers and will hold a conversation, making anonymity impossible. In other cases, the researcher may have a signed consent form or obtain personal information on a survey and will therefore know the identities of their research participants. In these cases, a researcher should be able to at least promise confidentiality to participants.

Offering confidentiality means that some identifying information is known at some time by the research team, but only the research team has access to this identifying information and this information will not be linked with their data in any publicly accessible way. Confidentiality in research is quite similar to confidentiality in clinical practice. You know who your clients are, but others do not. You agree to keep their information and identity private. As you can see under the “Risks” section of the consent form in Figure 5.1, sometimes it is not even possible to promise that a subject’s confidentiality will be maintained. This is the case if data are collected in public or in the presence of other research participants in the course of a focus group, for example. Participants who social work researchers deem to be of imminent danger to self or others or those that disclose abuse of children and other vulnerable populations fall under a social worker’s duty to report. Researchers must then violate confidentiality to fulfill their legal obligations.

There are a number of steps that researchers can take to protect the identities of research participants. These include, but are not limited to:

Collecting data in private spaces
Not requesting information that will uniquely identify or "out" that person as a participant
Assigning study identification codes or pseudonyms
Keeping signed informed consent forms separate from other data provided by the participant
Making sure that physical data is kept in a locked and secured location, and the virtual data is encrypted or password-protected
Reporting data in aggregate (only discussing the data collectively, not by individual responses)

Protecting research participants’ identities is not always a simple prospect, especially for those conducting research on stigmatized groups or illegal behaviors. Sociologist Scott DeMuth learned that all too well when conducting his dissertation research on a group of animal rights activists. As a participant observer, DeMuth knew the identities of his research subjects. So when some of his research subjects vandalized facilities and removed animals from several research labs at the University of Iowa, a grand jury called on Mr. DeMuth to reveal the identities of the participants in the raid. When DeMuth refused to do so, he was jailed briefly and then charged with conspiracy to commit animal enterprise terrorism and cause damage to the animal enterprise (Jaschik, 2009). [39]

Publicly, DeMuth’s case raised many of the same questions as Laud Humphreys’ work 40 years earlier. What do social scientists owe the public? Is DeMuth, by protecting his research subjects, harming those whose labs were vandalized? Is he harming the taxpayers who funded those labs? Or is it more important that DeMuth emphasize what he owes his research subjects, who were told their identities would be protected? DeMuth’s case also sparked controversy among academics, some of whom thought that as an academic himself, DeMuth should have been more sympathetic to the plight of the faculty and students who lost years of research as a result of the attack on their labs. Many others stood by DeMuth, arguing that the personal and academic freedom of scholars must be protected whether we support their research topics and subjects or not. DeMuth’s academic adviser even created a new group, Scholars for Academic Justice , to support DeMuth and other academics who face persecution or prosecution as a result of the research they conduct. What do you think? Should DeMuth have revealed the identities of his research subjects? Why or why not?

Discipline-specific considerations

Often times, specific disciplines will provide their own set of guidelines for protecting research subjects and, more generally, for conducting ethical research. For social workers, the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) Code of Ethics section 5.02 describes the responsibilities of social workers in conducting research. Summarized below, these responsibilities are framed as part of a social worker’s responsibility to the profession. As representative of the social work profession, it is your responsibility to conduct and use research in an ethical manner.

A social worker should:

Monitor and evaluate policies, programs, and practice interventions
Contribute to the development of knowledge through research
Keep current with the best available research evidence to inform practice
Ensure voluntary and fully informed consent of all participants
Not engage in any deception in the research process
Allow participants to withdraw from the study at any time
Provide access to appropriate supportive services for participants
Protect research participants from harm
Maintain confidentiality
Report findings accurately
Disclose any conflicts of interest
Researchers must obtain the informed consent of research participants.
Social workers must take steps to minimize the harms that could arise during the research process.
If anonymity is promised, individual participants cannot be linked with their data.
If confidentiality is promised, the identities of research participants cannot be revealed, even if individual participants can be linked with their data.
The NASW Code of Ethics includes specific responsibilities for social work researchers.
Talk with your professor to see if an informed consent form is required for your research project. If documentation is required, customize the template provided by your professor or the IRB at your school, using the details of your study. If documentation on consent is not required, for example if consent is given verbally, use the templates as guides to create a guide for what you will say to participants regarding informed consent.
Identify whether your data will be confidential or anonymous. Describe the measures you will take to protect the identities of individuals in your study. How will you store the data? How will you ensure that no one can identify participants based on what you report in papers and presentations? Be sure to think carefully. People can be identified by characteristics such as age, gender, disability status, location, etc.

6.3 Benefits and harms of research across the ecosystem

Identify and distinguish between micro-, mezzo-, and macro-level considerations with respect to the ethical conduct of social scientific research

This chapter began with a long list of harmful acts that researchers engaged in while conducting studies on human subjects. Indeed, even the last section on informed consent and protection of confidential information can be seen in light of minimizing harm and maximizing benefits. The benefits of your study should be greater than the harms. But who benefits from your research study, and who might be harmed? The first person who benefits is, most clearly, you as the researcher. You need a project to complete, be it for a grade, a grant, an academic responsibility, etc. However you need to make sure that your benefit does not come at the expense of harming others. Furthermore, research requires resources, including resources from the communities we work with. Part of being good stewards of these resources as social work researchers means that we need to engage in research that benefits the people we serve in meaningful and relevant ways. We need to consider how others are impacted by our research.

Box with "benefits" written in it (to the right side of scale)

Micro-, mezzo-, and macro-level concerns

One useful way to think about the breadth of ethical questions that might arise out of any research project is to think about potential issues from the perspective of different analytical levels that are familiar to us as social workers. In Chapter 1 , you learned about the micro-, mezzo-, and macro-levels of inquiry and how a researcher’s specific point of focus might vary depending on her level of inquiry. Here we’ll apply this ecological framework to a discussion of research ethics. Within most research projects, there are specific questions that arise for researchers at each of these three levels.

At the micro-level, researchers must consider their own conduct and the impact on individual research participants. For example, did Stanley Milgram behave ethically when he allowed research participants to think that they were administering electric shocks to fellow participants? Did Laud Humphreys behave ethically when he deceived his research subjects about his own identity? Were the rights of individuals in these studies protected? How did these participants benefit themselves from the research that was conducted? While not social workers by trade, would the actions of these two researchers hold up against our professional NASW Code of Ethics? The questions posed here are the sort that you will want to ask yourself as a researcher when considering ethics at the micro-level.

At the mezzo-level, researchers should think about their duty to the community. How will the results of your study impact your target population? Ideally, your results will benefit your target population by identifying important areas for social workers to intervene and to better understand the experiences of the communities they serve. However, it is possible that your study may perpetuate negative stereotypes about your target population or damage its reputation. Indigenous people in particular have highlighted how historically social science has furthered marginalization of indigenous peoples (Smith, 2013). [40] Mezzo-level concerns should also address other groups or organizations that are connected to your target population. This may include the human service agencies with whom you've partnered for your study as well as the communities and peoples they serve. If your study reflected negatively on a particular housing project in your area, for example, will community members seek to remove it from their community? Or might it draw increased law enforcement presence that is unwanted by participants or community members? Research is a powerful tool and can be used for many purposes, not all of them altruistic. In addition, research findings can have many implications, intended and unintended. As responsible researchers, we need to do our best to thoughtfully anticipate these consequences.

Finally, at the macro-level, a researcher should consider duty to, and the expectations of, society. Perhaps the most high-profile case involving macro-level questions of research ethics comes from debates over whether to use data gathered by, or cite published studies based on data gathered from, the Nazis in the course of their unethical and horrendous experiments on humans during World War II (Moe, 1984). [41] Some argue that because the data were gathered in such an unquestionably unethical manner, they should never be used. The data, say these people, are neither valid nor reliable and should therefore not be used in any current scientific investigation (Berger, 1990). [42]

On the other hand, some people argue that data themselves are neutral; that “information gathered is independent of the ethics of the methods and that the two are not linked together” (Pozos, 1992, p. 104). [43] Others point out that not using the data could inadvertently strengthen the claims of those who deny that the Holocaust ever happened. In his striking statement in support of publishing the data, medical ethics professor Velvl Greene (1992) says,

Instead of banning the Nazi data or assigning it to some archivist or custodial committee, I maintain that it be exhumed, printed, and disseminated to every medical school in the world along with the details of methodology and the names of the doctors who did it, whether or not they were indicted, acquitted, or hanged.…Let the students and the residents and the young doctors know that this was not ancient history or an episode from a horror movie where the actors get up after filming and prepare for another role. It was real. It happened yesterday (p. 169–170). [44]

While debates about the use of data collected by the Nazis are typically centered on medical scientists’ use of them, there are conceivable circumstances under which these data might be used by social scientists. Perhaps, for example, a social scientist might wish to examine contemporary reactions to the experiments. Or perhaps the data could be used in a study of the sociology of science. What do you think? Should data gathered by the Nazis be used or cited today? What arguments can you make in support of your position, and how would you respond to those who disagree?

Additionally at the macro-level, you must also consider your responsibilities to the profession of social work. When you engage in social work research, you stand on the reputation the profession has built for over a century. Since research is public-facing, meaning that research findings are intended to be shared publicly, you are an ambassador for the profession. How you conduct yourself as a social work researcher has potential implications for how the public perceives both social work and research. As a social worker, you have a responsibility to work towards greater social, environmental, and economic justice and human rights. Your research should reflect this responsibility. Attending to research ethics helps to fulfill your responsibilities to the profession, in addition to your target population.

Table 6.2 summarizes the key questions that researchers might ask themselves about the ethics of their research at each level of inquiry.

Table 6.2 Key questions for researchers about the ethics of their research at each level of inquiry.

Micro-level	Individual	Does my research interfere with the individual’s right to privacy?
		Could my research offend subjects in any way, either the collection of data or the sharing of findings?
		Could my research cause emotional distress to any of my subjects? In what ways does my research benefit me? In what ways does my research benefit participants?
		Has my own conduct been ethical throughout the research process?
Mezzo-level	Group	How does my research portray my target population?
		Could my research positively or negatively impact various communities and the systems they are connected to? How do community members perceive my research?
		Have I met my duty to those who funded my research? What are potential ripple effects for my target population by conducting this research?
Macro-level	Society	Does my research meet the societal expectations of social research? What is the historical, political, social context of my research topic?
		Have I met my social responsibilities as a researcher and as a social worker? Does my research follow the ethical guidelines of my profession and discipline? How does my research advance social, environmental or economic justice and/or human rights? How does my research reinforce or challenge systems of power, control and structural oppression?

At the micro-level, researchers should consider their own conduct and the rights of individual research participants.
At the mezzo-level, researchers should consider the expectations of their profession, any organizations that may have funded their research, and the communities affected by their research.
At the macro-level, researchers should consider their duty to and the expectations of society with respect to social science research.
Summarize the benefits and harms at the micro-, mezzo-, and macro-level of inquiry. At which level of inquiry is your research project?
In a few sentences, identify whether the benefits of your study outweigh the potential harms.

6.4 Being an ethical researcher

Identify why researchers must provide a detailed description of methodology
Describe what it means to use science in an ethical way

Research ethics has to do with both how research is conducted and how findings from that research are used. In this section, we’ll consider research ethics from both angles.

Doing science the ethical way

As you should now be aware, researchers must consider their own personal ethical principles in addition to following those of their institution, their discipline, and their community. We’ve already considered many of the ways that social workers strive to ensure the ethical practice of research, such as informing and protecting subjects. But the practice of ethical research doesn’t end once subjects have been identified and data have been collected. Social workers must also fully disclose their research procedures and findings. This means being honest about how research subjects were identified and recruited, how exactly data were collected and analyzed, and ultimately, what findings were reached.

If researchers fully disclose how they conducted their research, then those who use their work to build research projects, create social policies, or make treatment decisions can have greater confidence in the work. By sharing how research was conducted, a researcher helps assure readers they have conducted legitimate research and didn’t simply come to whatever conclusions they wanted to find. A description or presentation of research findings that is not accompanied by information about research methodology is missing relevant information. Sometimes methodological details are left out because there isn’t time or space to share them. This is often the case with news reports of research findings. Other times, there may be a more insidious reason that important information is missing. This may be the case if sharing methodological details would call the legitimacy of a study into question. As researchers, it is our ethical responsibility to fully disclose our research procedures. As consumers of research, it is our ethical responsibility to pay attention to such details. We’ll discuss this more in the next section.

There’s a New Yorker cartoon that depicts a set of filing cabinets that aptly demonstrates what we don’t want to see happen with research. Each filing cabinet drawer in the cartoon is labeled differently. The labels include such headings as, “Our Facts,” “Their Facts,” “Neutral Facts,” “Disputable Facts,” “Absolute Facts,” “Bare Facts,” “Unsubstantiated Facts,” and “Indisputable Facts.” The implication of this cartoon is that one might just choose to open the file drawer of her choice and pick whichever facts one likes best. While this may occur if we use some of the unscientific ways of knowing described in Chapter 1 , it is fortunately not how the discovery of knowledge in social work, or in any other science for that matter, takes place. There actually is a method to this madness we call research. At its best, research reflects a systematic, transparent, informative process.

Honesty in research is facilitated by the scientific principle of replication . Ideally, this means that one scientist could repeat another’s study with relative ease. By replicating a study, we may become more (or less) confident in the original study’s findings. Replication is far more difficult (perhaps impossible) to achieve in the case of many qualitative studies, as our purpose is often a deep understanding of very specific circumstances, rather than the broad, generalizable knowledge we traditionally seek in quantitative studies. Nevertheless, transparency in the research process is an important standard for all social scientific researchers—that we provide as much detail as possible about the processes by which we reach our conclusions. This allows the quality of our research to be evaluated. Along with replication, peer review is another important principle of the scientific process. Peer review involves other knowledgeable researchers in our field of study to evaluate our research and to determine if it is of sufficient quality to share with the public. There are valid critiques of the peer review process: that it is biased towards studies with positive findings, that it may reinforce systemic barriers to oppressed groups accessing and leveraging knowledge, that it is far more subjective and/or unreliable than it claims to be. Despite these critiques, peer review remains a foundational concept for how scientific knowledge is generated.

Full disclosure also includes the need to be honest about a study’s strengths and weaknesses, both with oneself and with others. Being aware of the strengths and weaknesses of your own work can help a researcher make reasonable recommendations about the next steps other researchers might consider taking in their inquiries. Awareness and disclosure of a study’s strengths and weaknesses can also help highlight the theoretical or policy implications of one’s work. In addition, openness about strengths and weaknesses helps those reading the research better evaluate the work and decide for themselves how or whether to rely on its findings. Finally, openness about a study’s sponsors is crucial. How can we effectively evaluate research without knowing who paid the bills? This allows us to assess for potential conflicts of interest that may compromise the integrity of the research.

The standard of replicability, the peer-review process, and openness about a study’s strengths, weaknesses, and funding sources enables those who read the research to evaluate it fairly and completely. Knowledge of funding sources is often raised as an issue in medical research. Understandably, independent studies of new drugs may be more compelling to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) than studies touting the virtues of a new drug that happen to have been funded by the company who created that drug. But medical researchers aren’t the only ones who need to be honest about their funding. If we know, for example, that a political think tank with ties to a particular party has funded some research, we can take that knowledge into consideration when reviewing the study’s findings and stated policy implications. Lastly, and related to this point, we must consider how, by whom, and for what purpose research may be used.

Using science the ethical way

Science has many uses. By “use” I mean the ways that science is understood and applied (as opposed to the way it is conducted). Some use science to create laws and social policies; others use it to understand themselves and those around them. Some people rely on science to improve their life conditions or those of other people, while still others use it to improve their businesses or other undertakings. In each case, the most ethical way for us to use science is to educate ourselves about the design and purpose of any studies we may wish to use. This helps us to more adequately critique the value of this research, to recognize its strengths and limitations.

As part of my research course, students are asked to critique a research article. I often find in this assignment that students often have very lofty expectations for everything that 'should' be included in the journal article they are reviewing. While I appreciate the high standards, I often give them feedback that it is perhaps unrealistic (even unattainable) for a research study to be perfectly designed and described for public consumption. All research has limitations; this may be a consequence of limited resources, issues related to feasibility, and unanticipated roadblocks or problems as we are carrying out our research. Furthermore, the ways we disseminate or share our research often has restrictions on what and how we can share our findings. This doesn't mean that a study with limitations has no value—every study has limitations! However, as we are reviewing research, we should look for an open discussion about methodology , strengths, and weaknesses of the study that helps us to interpret what took place and in what ways it may be important.

For instance, this can be especially important to think about in terms of a study's sample. It can be challenging to recruit a diverse and representative sample for your study (however, that doesn't mean we shouldn't try!). The next time you are reading research studies that were used to help establish an evidence based practice (EBP), make sure to look at the description of the sample. We cannot assume that what works for one group of people will uniformly work with all groups of people with very different life experiences; however, historically much of our intervention repertoire has been both created by and evaluated on white men. If research studies don't obtain a diverse sample, for whatever reason, we would expect that the authors would identify this as a limitation and an area requiring further study. We need to challenge our profession to provide practices, strategies, models, interventions, and policies that have been evaluated and tested for their efficacy with the diverse range of people that we work with as social workers.

Social scientists who conduct research on behalf of organizations and agencies may face additional ethical questions about the use of their research, particularly when the organization for which a study is conducted controls the final report and the publicity it receives. There is a potential conflict of interest for evaluation researchers who are employees of the agency being evaluated. A similar conflict of interest might exist between independent researchers whose work is being funded by some government agency or private foundation.

So who decides what constitutes ethical conduct or use of research? Perhaps we all do. What qualifies as ethical research may shift over time and across cultures as individual researchers, disciplinary organizations, members of society, and regulatory entities, such as institutional review boards, courts, and lawmakers, all work to define the boundaries between ethical and unethical research.

Conducting research ethically requires that researchers be ethical not only in their data collection procedures but also in reporting their methods and findings.
The ethical use of research requires an effort to understand research, an awareness of your own limitations in terms of knowledge and understanding, and the honest application of research findings.
Think about your research hypothesis at this point. What would happen if your results revealed information that could harm the population you are studying? What are your ethical responsibilities as far as reporting about your research?
Ultimately, we cannot control how others will use the results of our research. What are the implications of this for how you report on your research?
Reading the results of empirical studies (16 minute read)
Annotating empirical journal articles (15 minute read)
Generalizability and transferability of empirical results (15 minute read)

Content warning: examples in this chapter contain references to domestic violence and details on types of abuse, drug use, poverty, mental health, sexual harassment and details on harassing behaviors, children’s mental health, LGBTQ+ oppression and suicide, obesity, anti-poverty stigma, and psychotic disorders.

5.1 Reading the results of empirical studies

Describe how statistical significance and confidence intervals demonstrate which results are most important
Differentiate between qualitative and quantitative results in an empirical journal article

If you recall from section 3.1 , empirical journal articles are those that report the results of quantitative or qualitative data analyzed by the author. They follow a set structure—introduction, methods, results, discussion/conclusions. This section is about reading the most challenging section: results.

I want to normalize not understanding statistics terms and symbols. However, a basic understanding of a results section goes a very long way to understanding the key results in an article. This will take you beyond the two or three sentences in the abstract that summarize the study's results and into the nitty-gritty of what they found for each concept they studied.

Read beyond the abstract

At this point, I have read hundreds of literature reviews written by students. One of the challenges I have noted is that students will report the results as summarized in the abstract, rather than the detailed findings laid out in the results section of the article. This poses a problem when you are writing a literature review because you need to provide specific and clear facts that support your reading of the literature. The abstract may say something like: “we found that poverty is associated with mental health status.” For your literature review, you want the details, not the summary. In the results section of the article, you may find a sentence that states: “children living in households experiencing poverty are three times more likely to have a mental health diagnosis.” This more specific statistical information provides a stronger basis on which to build the arguments in your literature review.

Using the summarized results in an abstract is an understandable mistake to make. The results section often contains figures and tables that may be challenging to understand. Often, without having completed more advanced coursework on statistical or qualitative analysis, some of the terminology, symbols, or diagrams may be difficult to comprehend. This section is all about how to read and interpret the results of an empirical (quantitative or qualitative) journal article. Our discussion here will be basic, and in parts three and four of the textbook, you will learn more about how to interpret results from statistical tests and qualitative data analysis.

Remember, this section only addresses empirical articles. Non-empirical articles (e.g., theoretical articles, literature reviews) don't have results. They cite the analysis of raw data completed by other authors, not the person writing the journal article who is merely summarizing others' work.

Quantitative results

Quantitative articles often contain tables, and scanning them is a good way to begin reading the results. A table usually provides a quick, condensed summary of the report’s key findings. Tables are a concise way to report large amounts of data. Some tables present descriptive information about a researcher’s sample (often the first table in a results section). These tables will likely contain frequencies (N) and percentages (%). For example, if gender happened to be an important variable for the researcher’s analysis, a descriptive table would show how many and what percent of all study participants are of a particular gender. Frequencies or “how many” will probably be listed as N, while the percent symbol (%) might be used to indicate percentages.

In a table presenting a causal relationship, two sets of variables are represented. The independent variable , or cause, and the dependent variable , the effect. We will discuss these further when we review quantitative conceptualization and measurement. Independent variable attributes are typically presented in the table’s columns, while dependent variable attributes are presented in rows. This allows the reader to scan a table’s rows to see how values on the dependent variable change as the independent variable values change (i.e., changes in the dependent variable depend on changes in the independent variable). Tables displaying results of quantitative analysis will also likely include some information about which relationships are significant or not. We will discuss the details of significance and p-values later in this section.

Let’s look at a specific example: Table 5.1. It presents the causal relationship between gender and experiencing harassing behaviors at work. In this example, gender is the independent variable (the cause) and the harassing behaviors listed are the dependent variables (the effects). [46] Therefore, we place gender in the table’s columns and harassing behaviors in the table’s rows.

Reading across the table’s top row, we see that 2.9% of women in the sample reported experiencing subtle or obvious threats to their safety at work, while 4.7% of men in the sample reported the same. We can read across each of the rows of the table in this way. Reading across the bottom row, we see that 9.4% of women in the sample reported experiencing staring or invasion of their personal space at work while just 2.3% of men in the sample reported having the same experience. We’ll discuss p values later in this section.

Table 5.1 Percentage reporting harassing behaviors at work

Subtle or obvious threats to your safety	2.9%	4.7%	0.623
Being hit, pushed, or grabbed	2.2%	4.7%	0.480
Comments or behaviors that demean your gender	6.5%	2.3%	0.184
Comments or behaviors that demean your age	13.8%	9.3%	0.407
Staring or invasion of your personal space	9.4%	2.3%	0.039
Note: Sample size was 138 for women and 43 for men.

While you can certainly scan tables for key results, they are often difficult to understand without reading the text of the article. The article and table were meant to complement each other, and the text should provide information on how the authors interpret their findings. The table is not redundant with the text of the results section. Additionally, the first table in most results sections is a summary of the study's sample, which provides more background information on the study than information about hypotheses and findings. It is also a good idea to look back at the methods section of the article as the data analysis plan the authors outline should walk you through the steps they took to analyze their data which will inform how they report them in the results section.

Statistical significance

The statistics reported in Table 5.1 represent what the researchers found in their sample. The purpose of statistical analysis is usually to generalize from a the small number of people in a study's sample to a larger population of people. Thus, the researchers intend to make causal arguments about harassing behaviors at workplaces beyond those covered in the sample.

Generalizing is key to understanding statistical significance . According to Cassidy and colleagues, (2019) [47] 89% of research methods textbooks in psychology define statistical significance incorrectly. This includes an early draft of this textbook which defined statistical significance as "the likelihood that the relationships we observe could be caused by something other than chance." If you have previously had a research methods class, this might sound familiar to you. It certainly did to me!

But statistical significance is less about "random chance" than more about the null hypothesis . Basically, at the beginning of a study a researcher develops a hypothesis about what they expect to find, usually that there is a statistical relationship between two or more variables . The null hypothesis is the opposite. It is the hypothesis that there is no relationship between the variables in a research study. Researchers then can hopefully reject the null hypothesis because they find a relationship between the variables.

For example, in Table 5.1 researchers were examining whether gender impacts harassment. Of course, researchers assumed that women were more likely to experience harassment than men. The null hypothesis, then, would be that gender has no impact on harassment. Once we conduct the study, our results will hopefully lead us to reject the null hypothesis because we find that gender impacts harassment. We would then generalize from our study's sample to the larger population of people in the workplace.

Statistical significance is calculated using a p-value which is obtained by comparing the statistical results with a hypothetical set of results if the researchers re-ran their study a large number of times. Keeping with our example, imagine we re-ran our study with different men and women from different workplaces hundreds and hundred of times and we assume that the null hypothesis is true that gender has no impact on harassment. If results like ours come up pretty often when the null hypothesis is true, our results probably don't mean much. "The smaller the p-value, the greater the statistical incompatibility with the null hypothesis" (Wasserstein & Lazar, 2016, p. 131). [48] Generally, researchers in the social sciences have used 0.05 as the value at which a result is significant (p is less than 0.05) or not significant (p is greater than 0.05). The p-value 0.05 refers to if 5% of those hypothetical results from re-running our study show the same or more extreme relationships when the null hypothesis is true. Researchers, however, may choose a stricter standard such as 0.01 in which only 1% of those hypothetical results are more extreme or a more lenient standard like 0.1 in which 10% of those hypothetical results are more extreme than what was found in the study.

Let's look back at Table 5.1. Which one of the relationships between gender and harassing behaviors is statistically significant? It's the last one in the table, "staring or invasion of personal space," whose p-value is 0.039 (under the p<0.05 standard to establish statistical significance). Again, this indicates that if we re-ran our study over and over again and gender did not impact staring/invasion of space (i.e., the null hypothesis was true), only 3.9% of the time would we find similar or more extreme differences between men and women than what we observed in our study. Thus, we conclude that for staring or invasion of space only , there is a statistically significant relationship.

For contrast, let's look at "being pushed, hit, or grabbed" and run through the same analysis to see if it is statistically significant. If we re-ran our study over and over again and the null hypothesis was true, 48% of the time (p=.48) we would find similar or more extreme differences between men and women. That means these results are not statistically significant.

This discussion should also highlight a point we discussed previously: that it is important to read the full results section, rather than simply relying on the summary in the abstract. If the abstract stated that most tests revealed no statistically significant relationships between gender and harassment, you would have missed the detail on which behaviors were and were not associated with gender. Read the full results section! And don't be afraid to ask for help from a professor in understanding what you are reading, as results sections are often not written to be easily understood.

Statistical significance and p-values have been critiqued recently for a number of reasons, including that they are misused and misinterpreted (Wasserstein & Lazar, 2016) [49] , that researchers deliberately manipulate their analyses to have significant results (Head et al., 2015) [50] , and factor into the difficulty scientists have today in reproducing many of the results of previous social science studies (Peng, 2015). [51] For this reason, we share these principles, adapted from those put forth by the American Statistical Association, [52] for understanding and using p-values in social science:

P-values provide evidence against a null hypothesis.
P-values do not indicate whether the results were produced by random chance alone or if the researcher's hypothesis is true, though both are common misconceptions.
Statistical significance can be detected in minuscule differences that have very little effect on the real world.
Nuance is needed to interpret scientific findings, as a conclusion does not become true or false when the p-value passes from p=0.051 to p=0.049.
Real-world decision-making must use more than reported p-values. It's easy to run analyses of large datasets and only report the significant findings.
Greater confidence can be placed in studies that pre-register their hypotheses and share their data and methods openly with the public.
"By itself, a p-value does not provide a good measure of evidence regarding a model or hypothesis. For example, a p-value near 0.05 taken by itself offers only weak evidence against the null hypothesis. Likewise, a relatively large p-value does not imply evidence in favor of the null hypothesis; many other hypotheses may be equally or more consistent with the observed data" (Wasserstein & Lazar, 2016, p. 132).

Confidence intervals

Because of the limitations of p-values, scientists can use other methods to determine whether their models of the world are true. One common approach is to use a confidence interval , or a range of values in which the true value is likely to be found. Confidence intervals are helpful because, as principal #5 above points out, p-values do not measure the size of an effect (Greenland et al., 2016). [53] Remember, something that has very little impact on the world can be statistically significant, and the values in a confidence interval would be helpful. In our example from Table 5.1, imagine our analysis produced a confidence interval that women are 1.2-3.4x more likely to experience "staring or invasion of personal space" than men. As with p-values, calculation for a confidence interval compares what was found in one study with a hypothetical set of results if we repeated the study over and over again. If we calculated 95% confidence intervals for all of the hypothetical set of hundreds and hundreds of studies, that would be our confidence interval.

Confidence intervals are pretty intuitive. As of this writing, my wife and are expecting our second child. The doctor told us our due date was December 11th. But the doctor also told us that December 11th was only their best estimate. They were actually 95% sure our baby might be born any time in the 30-day period between November 27th and December 25th. Confidence intervals are often listed with a percentage, like 90% or 95%, and a range of values, such as between November 27th and December 25th. You can read that as: "we are 95% sure your baby will be born between November 27th and December 25th because we've studied hundreds of thousands of fetuses and mothers, and we're 95% sure your baby will be within these two dates."

Notice that we're hedging our bets here by using words like "best estimate." When testing hypotheses, social scientists generally phrase their findings in a tentative way, talking about what results "indicate" or "support," rather than making bold statements about what their results "prove." Social scientists have humility because they understand the limitations of their knowledge. In a literature review, using a single study or fact to "prove" an argument right or wrong is often a signal to the person reading your literature review (usually your professor) that you may not have appreciated the limitations of that study or its place in the broader literature on the topic. Strong arguments in a literature review include multiple facts and ideas that span across multiple studies.

You can learn more about creating tables, reading tables, and tests of statistical significance in a class focused exclusively on statistical analysis. We provide links to many free and openly licensed resources on statistics in Chapter 16 . For now, we hope this brief introduction to reading tables will improve your confidence in reading and understanding the results sections in quantitative empirical articles.

Qualitative results

Quantitative articles will contain a lot of numbers and the results of statistical tests demonstrating associations between those numbers. Qualitative articles, on the other hand, will consist mostly of quotations from participants. For most qualitative articles, the authors want to put their results in the words of their participants, as they are the experts. Articles that lack quotations make it difficult to assess whether the researcher interpreted the data in a trustworthy, unbiased manner. These types of articles may also indicate how often particular themes or ideas came up in the data, potentially reflective of how important they were to participants.

Authors often organize qualitative results by themes and subthemes. For example, see this snippet from the results section in Bonanno and Veselak (2019) [54] discussion parents' attitudes towards child mental health information sources.

Data analysis revealed four themes related to participants’ abilities to access mental health help and information for their children, and parents’ levels of trust in these sources. These themes are: others’ firsthand experiences family and friends with professional experience, protecting privacy, and uncertainty about schools as information sources. Trust emerged as an overarching and unifying concept for all of these themes. Others’ firsthand experiences. Several participants reported seeking information from other parents who had experienced mental health struggles similar to their own children. They often referenced friends or family members who had been or would be good sources of information due to their own personal experiences. The following quote from Adrienne demonstrates the importance of firsthand experience: [I would only feel comfortable sharing concerns or asking for advice] if I knew that they had been in the same situation. (Adrienne) Similarly, Michelle said: And I talked to a friend of mine who has kids who have IEPs in the district to see, kind of, how did she go about it. (Michelle) ... Friends/family with professional experience . Several respondents referred to friends or family members who had professional experience with or knowledge of child mental health and suggested that these individuals would be good sources of information. For example, Hannah said: Well, what happened with me was I have an uncle who’s a psychiatrist. Sometimes if he’s up in (a city to the north), he’s retired, I can call him sometimes and get information. (Hannah) Michelle, who was in nursing school, echoed this sentiment: At this point, [if my child’s behavioral difficulties continued], I would probably call one of my [nursing] professors. That’s what I’ve done in the past when I’ve needed help with certain things...I have a professor who I would probably consider a friend who I would probably talk to first. She has a big adolescent practice. (Michelle) (p. 402-403)

The terms in bold above refer to the key themes (i.e., qualitative results) that were present in the data. Researchers will state the process by which they interpret each theme, providing a definition and usually some quotations from research participants. Researchers will also draw connections between themes, note consensus or conflict over themes, and situate the themes within the study context.

Qualitative results are specific to the time, place, and culture in which they arise, so you will have to use your best judgment to determine whether these results are relevant to your study. For example, students in my class at Radford University in Southwest Virginia may be studying rural populations. Would a study on group homes in a large urban city transfer well to group homes in a rural area?

Maybe. But even if you were using data from a qualitative study in another rural area, are all rural areas the same? How is the client population and sociocultural context in the article similar or different to the one in your study? Qualitative studies have tremendous depth, but researchers must be intentional about drawing conclusions about one context based on a study in another context. To make conclusions about how a study applies in another context, researchers need to examine each component of an empirical journal article--they need to annotate!

The results section of empirical articles are often the most difficult to understand.
To understand a quantitative results section, look for results that were statistically significant and examine the confidence interval, if provided.
To understand a qualitative results section, look for definitions of themes or codes and use the quotations provided to understand the participants’ perspective.

Select a quantitative empirical article related to your topic.

Write down the results the authors identify as statistically significant in the results section.
How do the authors interpret their results in the discussion section?
Do the authors provide enough information in the introduction for you to understand their results?

Select a qualitative empirical article relevant to your topic.

Write down the key themes the authors identify and how they were defined by the participants.

5.2 Annotating empirical journal articles

Define annotation and describe how to use it to identify, extract, and reflect on the information you need from an article

Annotation refers to the process of writing notes on an article. There are many ways to do this. The most basic technique is to print out the article and build a binder related to your topic. Raul Pacheco-Vega's excellent blog has a post on his approach to taking physical notes. Honestly, while you are there, browse around that website. It is full of amazing tips for students conducting a literature review and graduate research projects. I see a lot of benefits to the paper, pen, and highlighter approach to annotating articles. Personally though, I prefer to use a computer to write notes on an article because my handwriting is terrible and typing notes allows me search for keywords. For other students, electronic notes work best because they cannot afford to print every article that they will use in their paper. No matter what you use, the point is that you need to write notes when you're reading. Reading is research!

There are a number of free software tools you can use to help you annotate a journal article. Most PDF readers like Adobe Acrobat have a commenting and highlighting feature, though the PDF readers included with internet browsers like Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge, and Safari do not have this feature. The best approach may be to use a citation manager like Zotero. Using a citation manager, you can build a library of articles, save your annotations, and link annotations across PDFs using keywords. They also provide integration with word processing programs to help with citations in a reference list

Of course, I don't follow this advice because I have a system that works well for me. I have a PDF open in one computer window and a Word document open in a window next to it. I type notes and copy quotes, listing the page number for each note I take. It's a bit low-tech, but it does make my notes searchable. This way, when I am looking for a concept or quote, I can simply search my notes using the Find feature in Word and get to the information I need.

Annotation and reviewing literature does not have to be a solo project. If are working in a group, you can use the Hypothes.is web browser extension to annotate articles collaboratively. You can also use Google Docs to collaboratively annotate a shared PDF using the commenting feature and write collaborative notes in a shared document. By sharing your highlights and comments, you can split the work of getting the most out of each article you read and build off one another's ideas.

Common annotations

In this section, we present common annotations people make when reading journal articles. These annotations are adapted from Craig Whippo and Raul Pacheco-Vega . If you are annotating on paper, I suggest using different color highlighters for each type of annotation listed below. If you are annotating electronically, you can use the names below as tags to easily find information later. For example, if you are searching for definitions of key concepts, you can either click on the tag for [definitions] in your PDF reader or thumb through a printed copy of article for whatever color or tag you used to indicate definitions of key terms. Most of all, you want to avoid reading through all of your sources again just to find that one thing you know you read somewhere . Time is a graduate student's most valuable resource, so our goal here is to help you spend your time reading the literature wisely.

Personal reflections

Personal reflections are all about you. What do you think? Are there any areas you are confused about? Any new ideas or reflections come to mind while you're reading? Treat these annotations as a means of capturing your first reflections about an article. Write down any questions or thoughts that come to mind as you read. If you think the author says something inaccurate or unsubstantiated, write that down. If you don't understand something, make a note about it and ask your professor. Don't feel bad! Journal articles are hard to understand sometimes, even for professors. Your goal is to critically read the literature, so write down what you think while reading! Table 4.2 contains some questions that might stimulate your thoughts.

Table 5.2 Questions worth asking while reading research reports

Abstract	What are the key findings? How were those findings reached? How does the author frame their study?
Acknowledgments	Who are this study’s major stakeholders? Who provided feedback? Who provided support in the form of funding or other resources?
Problem statement (introduction)	How does the author frame the research focus? What other possible ways of framing the problem exist? Why might the author have chosen this particular way of framing the problem?
Literature review (introduction)	What are the major themes the author identifies in the literature? Are there any gaps in the literature? Does the author address challenges or limitations to the studies they cite? Is there enough literature to frame the rest of the article or do you have unanswered questions? Does the author provide conceptual definitions for important ideas or use a theoretical perspective to inform their analysis?
Sample (methods)	Where was the data collected? Did the researchers provide enough information about the sample and sampling process for you to assess its quality? Did the researchers collect their own data or use someone else’s data? What population is the study trying to make claims about, and does the sample represent that population well? What are the sample’s major strengths and major weaknesses?
Data collection (methods)	How were the data collected? What do you know about the relative strengths and weaknesses of the methods employed? What other methods of data collection might have been employed, and why was this particular method employed? What do you know about the data collection strategy and instruments (e.g., questions asked, locations observed)? What you know about the data collection strategy and instruments? Look for appendixes and supplementary documents that provide details on measures.
Data analysis (methods)	How were the data analyzed? Is there enough information provided for you to feel confident that the proper analytic procedures were employed accurately? How open are the data? Can you access the data in an open repository? Did the researchers register their hypotheses and methods prior to data collection? Is there a data disclosure statement available?
Results	What are the study’s major findings? Are findings linked back to previously described research questions, objectives, hypotheses, and literature? Are sufficient amounts of data (e.g., quotes and observations in qualitative work, statistics in quantitative work) provided to support conclusions? Are tables readable?
Discussion/conclusion	Does the author generalize to some population beyond the sample? How are these claims presented? Are claims supported by data provided in the results section (e.g., supporting quotes, statistical significance)? Have limitations of the study been fully disclosed and adequately addressed? Are implications sufficiently explored?

Definitions

Note definitions of key terms for your topic. At minimum, you should include a scholarly definition for the concepts represented in your working question. If your working question asks about the process of leaving a relationship with domestic violence, your research proposal will have to explain how you define domestic violence, as well as how you define "leaving" an abusive relationship. While you may already know what you mean by domestic violence, the person reading your research proposal does not.

Annotating definitions also helps you engage with the scholarly debate around your topic. Definitions are often contested among scholars. Some definitions of domestic violence will be more comprehensive, including things such economic abuse or forcing the victim to problematically use substances. Other definitions will be less comprehensive, covering only physical, verbal, and sexual abuse. Often, how someone defines something conceptually is highly related to how they measure it in their study. Since you will have to do both of these things, find a definition that feels right to you or create your own, noting the ways in which it is similar or different from those in the literature.

Definitions are also an important way of dealing with jargon. Becoming familiar with a new content area involves learning the jargon experts use. For example, in the last paragraph I used the term economic abuse, but that's probably not a term you've heard before. If you were conducting a literature review on domestic violence, you would want to search for keywords like economic abuse if they are relevant to your working question. You will also want to know what they mean so you can use them appropriately in designing your study and writing your literature review.

Theoretical perspective

Noting the theoretical perspective of the article can help you interpret the data in the same manner as the author. For example, articles on supervised injection facilities for people who use intravenous drugs most likely come from a harm reduction perspective, and understanding the theory behind harm reduction is important to make sense of empirical results. Articles should be grounded in a theoretical perspective that helps the author conceptualize and understand the data. As we discussed in Chapter 3 , some journal articles are entirely theoretical and help you understand the theories or conceptual models related to your topic. We will help you determine a theoretical perspective for your project in Chapter 7 . For now, it's a good idea to note what theories authors mention when talking about your topic area. Some articles are better about this than others, and many authors make it a bit challenging to find theory (if mentioned at all). In other articles, it may help to note which social work theories are missing from the literature. For example, a study's findings might address issues of oppression and discrimination, but the authors may not use critical theory to make sense of what happened.

Background knowledge

It's a good idea to note any relevant information the author relies on for background. When an author cites facts or opinions from others, you are subsequently able to get information from multiple articles simultaneously. For example, if we were looking at this meta-analysis about domestic violence , in the introduction section, the authors provide facts from many other sources. These facts will likely be relevant to your inquiry on domestic violence, as well.

As you are looking at background information, you should also note any subtopics or concepts about which there is controversy or consensus. The author may present one viewpoint and then an opposing viewpoint, something you may do in your literature review as well. Similarly, they may present facts that scholars in the field have come to consensus on and describe the ways in which different sources support these conclusions.

Sources of interest

Note any relevant sources the author cites. If there is any background information you plan to use, note the original source of that information. When you write your literature review, cite the original source of a piece of information you are using, which may not be where you initially read it . Remember that you should read and refer to the primary source . If you are reading Article A and the author cites a fact from Article B, you should note Article B in your annotations and use Article B when you cite the fact in your paper. You should also make sure Article A interpreted Article B correctly and scan Article B for any other useful facts.

Research question/Purpose

Authors should be clear about the purpose of their article. Charitable authors will give you a sentence that starts with something like this:

"The purpose of this research project was..."
"Our research question was..."
"The research project was designed to test the following hypothesis..."

Unfortunately, not all authors are so clear, and you may to hunt around for the research question or hypothesis. Generally, in an empirical article, the research question or hypothesis is at the end of the introduction. In non-empirical articles, the author will likely discuss the purpose of the article in the abstract or introduction.

We will discuss in greater detail how to read the results of empirical articles in Chapter 5 . For now, just know that you should highlight any of the key findings of an article. They will be described very briefly in the abstract, and in much more detail in the article itself. In an empirical article, you should look at both the 'Results' and 'Discussion' sections. For a non-empirical article, the key findings will likely be in the conclusion. You can also find them in the topic or concluding sentences in a paragraph within the body of the article.

How do researchers know something when they see it? Found in the 'Methods' section of empirical articles, the measures section is where researchers spell out the tools, or measures, they used to gather data. For quantitative studies, you will want to get familiar with the questions researchers typically use to measure key variables. For example, to measure domestic violence, researchers often use the Conflict Tactics Scale . The more frequently used and cited a measure is, the more we know about how well it works (or not). Qualitative studies will often provide at least some of the interview or focus group questions they used with research participants. They will also include information about how their inquiry and hypotheses may have evolved over time. Keep in mind however, sometimes important information is cut out of an article during editing. If you need more information, consider reaching out to the author directly. Before you do so, check if the author provided an appendix with the information you need or if the article links to a their data and measures as part open data sharing practices.

Who exactly were the study participants and how were they recruited? In quantitative studies, you will want to pay attention to the sample size. Generally, the larger the sample, the greater the study's explanatory power. Additionally, randomly drawn samples are desirable because they leave any variation up to chance. Samples that are conducted out of convenience can be biased and non-representative of the larger population. In qualitative studies, non-random sampling is appropriate but consider this: how well does what we find for this group of people transfer to the people who will be in your study? For qualitative studies and quantitative studies, look for how well the sample is described and whether there are important characteristics missing from the article that you would need to determine the quality of the sample.

Limitations

Honest authors will include these at the end of each article. But you should also note any additional limitations you find with their work as well.

Your annotations

These are just a few suggested annotations, but you can come up with your own. For example, maybe there are annotations you would use for different assignments or for the problem statement in your research proposal. If you have an argument or idea that keeps coming to mind when you read, consider creating an annotation for it so you can remember which part of each article supports your ideas. Whatever works for you. The goal with annotation is to extract as much information from each article while reading, so you don't have to go back through everything again. It's useless to read an article and forget most of what you read. Annotate!

Begin your search by reading thorough and cohesive literature reviews. Review articles are great sources of information to get a broad perspective of your topic.
Don’t read an article just to say you’ve read it. Annotate and take notes so you don’t have to re-read it later.
Use software or paper-and-pencil approaches to write notes on articles.
Annotation is best used when closely reading an empirical study highly similar to your research project.
Select an empirical article highly related to the study you would like to conduct.
Annotate the article using the aforementioned annotations and create some of your own.
Create the first draft of a summary table with key information from this empirical study that you would like to compare to other empirical studies you closely read.

5.3 Generalizability and transferability of empirical results

Define generalizability and transferability.
Assess the generalizability and transferability to how researchers use the results from empirical research studies to make arguments about what is objectively true.
Relate both concepts to the hierarchy of evidence and the types of articles in the scholarly literature

Now that you have read an empirical article in detail, it's important to put its results in conversation with the broader literature on your topic. In this chapter we discuss two important concepts-- generalizability and transferability --and the interrelationship between the two. We also explain how these two properties of empirical data impact your literature review and evidence-based practice.

Generalizability

The figure below provides a common approach to assessing empirical evidence. As you move up the pyramid below, you can be more sure that the data contained in those studies generalizes to all people who experience the issue.

An evidence pyramid with case studies on bottom and systematic reviews on top. It reviews how each stage builds on top of the next in improving quality of evidence

As we reviewed in Chapter 1, objective truth is true for everyone, regardless of context. In other words, objective truths generalize beyond the sample of people from whom data were collected to the larger population of people who experience the issue under examination. You can be much more sure that information from a systematic review or meta-analysis will generalize than something from a case study of a single person, pilot projects, and other studies that do not seek to establish generalizability.

The type of article listed here is also related to the types of research methods the authors used. While we cover many of these approaches in this textbook, some of them (like cohort studies) are somewhat less common in social work. Additionally, there is one important research method, survey design, that does not appear in this diagram. Finally, social work research uses many different types of qualitative research--some of which generates more generalizable data than others.

For a refresher on the different types of evidence available in each type of article, refer back to section 4.1. You'll recall the hierarchy of evidence as described by McNeese & Thyer (2004) [55]

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses
Randomized controlled trials
Quasi-experimental studies
Case-control and cohort studies
Pre-experimental (or non-experimental) group studies
Qualitative studies

Because there is further variation in the types of studies used by social work researchers, I expanded the hierarchy of evidence to cover a greater breadth of research methods in Figure 5.3.

Refined information from multiple sources

The top of the hierarchy represents refined scientific information or meta-research . Meta-research uses the scientific method to analyze and improve the scientific production of knowledge. For example, meta-analyses pull together samples of people from all high-quality studies on a given topic area creating a super-study with far more people than any single researcher could feasibly collect data from. Because scientists (and clinical experts) refine data across multiple studies, these represent the most generalizable research findings.

Of course, not all meta-analyses or systematic reviews are of good quality. As a peer reviewer for a scholarly journal, I have seen poor quality systematic reviews that make methodological mistakes—like not including relevant keywords—that lead to incorrect conclusions. Unfortunately, not all errors are caught in the peer review process, and not all limitations are acknowledged by the authors. Just because you are looking at a systematic review does not mean you are looking at THE OBJECTIVE TRUTH. Nevertheless, you can be pretty sure that results from these studies are generalizable to the population in the study’s research question.

A good way to visualize the process of sampling is by examining the procedure used for systematic reviews and meta-analyses to scientifically search for articles. In Figure 5.4 below, you can see how researchers conducting a systematic review identified a large pool of potentially relevant articles, downloaded and analyzed them for relevance, and in the end, analyzed only 71 articles in their systematic review out of a total of 1,589 potentially relevant articles. Because systematic reviews or meta-analyses are intended to make strong, generalizable conclusions, they often exclude studies that still contain good information.

In the process of selecting articles for a meta-analysis and systematic review, researchers may exclude articles with important information for a number of good reasons. No study is perfect, and all research methods decisions come with limitations--including meta-research. Authors conducting a meta-analysis cannot include a study unless researchers provide data for the authors to include in their meta-analysis, and many empirical journal articles do not make their data available. Additionally, a study’s intervention or measures may be a bit different than what researchers want to make conclusions about. This is a key truth applicable across all articles you read—who or what gets selected for analysis in a research project determines how well the project’s results generalize to everyone.

We will talk about this in future chapters as sampling, and in those chapters, we will learn which sampling approaches are intended to support generalizability and which are used for other purposes. For example, availability or convenience sampling is often used to get quick information while random sampling approaches are intended to support generalizability. It is impossible to know everything about your article right now, but by the end of this course, you will have the information you need to critically examine the generalizability of a sample.

Primary sources (empirical studies)

Because refined sources like systematic reviews exclude good studies, they are only a first step in getting to know a topic area. You will need to examine primary sources--the reports of researchers who conducted empirical studies--to make evidence-based conclusions about your topic. Figure 5.3 describes three different types of data and ranks them vertically based on how well you can be sure the information generalizes.

As we will discuss further in our chapter on causal explanations, a key factor in scientifically assessing what happened first. Researchers conducting intervention studies are causing change by providing therapy, housing, or whatever the intervention is and measuring the outcomes of that intervention after they happen. This is unlike survey researchers, who do not introduce an intervention but ask people to self-report information on a questionnaire. Longitudinal surveys are particularly helpful because they can provide a clearer picture of whether the cause came before the effect in a causal relationship, but because they are expensive and time-consuming to conduct, longitudinal studies are relatively rare in the literature and most surveys measure people at only one point in time. Thus, because researchers cannot tightly control the causal variable (an intervention, an experience of abuse, etc.) we can be somewhat less certain of the conclusions of surveys than experiments. At the same time, because surveys measure people in their naturalistic environment rather than in a laboratory or artificial setting, they may do a better job at reducing the potential for the researcher to influence the data a participant provides. Surveys also provide descriptive information--like the number of people with a diagnosis or risk factor--that experiments cannot provide.

Surveys and experiments are commonly used in social work, and we will describe the methods they use in future chapters. When assessing the generalizability of a given survey or experiment, you are looking at whether the methods used by the researchers improve generalizability (or, at least that those methods are intended to improve generalizability). Specifically, there are sampling, measurement, and design decisions that researchers make that can improve generalizability. And once the study is conducted, whether those methods worked as intended also impact generalizability.

We address sampling, measurement, and design in the coming chapters, and you will need more in-depth knowledge of research methods to assess the generalizability of the results you are reading. In the meantime, Figure 5.3 is organized by design, and this is a good starting point for your inquiry since it only requires you to identify the design in each empirical article--which should be included in the abstract and described in detail in the methods section. For more information on how to conduct sampling, measurement, and design in a way that maximizes generalizability, read Part 2 of this textbook.

When searching for design of a study, look for specific keywords that indicate the researcher used methods that do not generalize well like pilot study, pre-experiment, non-experiment, convenience sample, availability sample, and exploratory study. When researchers are seeking to perform a pilot study, they are optimizing for time, not generalizability. Their results may still be useful to you! But, you should not generalize from their study to all people with the issue under analysis without a lot of caution and additional supporting evidence. Instead, you should see whether the lessons from this study might transfer to the context in which you are researching--our next topic.

Qualitative studies use sampling, measures, and designs that do not try to optimize generalizability. Thus, if the results of a qualitative study indicate 10 out of 50 students who participated in the focus group found the mandatory training on harassment to be unhelpful, does that mean 20% of all college students at this university find it unhelpful? Because focus groups and interviews (and other qualitative methods we will discuss) use qualitative methods, they are not concerned with generalizability. It would not make sense to generalize from focus groups to all people in a population. Instead, focus groups methods optimize for trustworthy and authentic research projects that make sure, for example, all themes and quotes in the researcher's report are traceable to quotes from focus group participants. Instead of providing what is generally true, qualitative research provides a thick description of people's experiences so you can understand them. S ubjective inquiry is less generalizable but provides greater depth in understanding people's feelings, beliefs, and decision-making processes within their context.

In Figure 5.3, you will note that some qualitative studies are ranked higher than others in terms of generalizability. Meta-syntheses are ranked highest because they are meta-research, pooling together the themes and raw data from multiple qualitative studies into a super-study. A meta-synthesis is the qualitative equivalent of a meta-analysis, which analyzes quantitative data. Because the researchers conducting the meta-syntheses aim to make more broad generalizations across research studies, even though generalizability is not strictly the goal. In a similar way, grounded theory studies (a type of qualitative design) aim to produce a testable hypothesis that could generalize. At the bottom of the hierarchy are individual case studies, which report what happens with a single person, organization, or event. It's best not to think too long about the generalizability of qualitative results. When examining qualitative articles, you should be examining their transferability, our topic for the next subsection.

Transferability

Generalizability asks one question: How well does the sample of people in this study represent everyone with this issue? If you read in a study that 50% of people in the sample experienced depression, does that mean 50% of everyone experiences depression? We previewed future discussions in this textbook that will discuss the specific quantitative research methods used to optimize the generalizability of results. By adhering strictly to best practices in sampling, measurement, and design, researchers can provide you with good evidence for the generalizability of their study's results.

Of course, generalizability is not the only question worth asking. Just because a study's sample represents a broader population does not mean it is helpful for making conclusions about your working question. In assessing a study's transferability, you are making a weaker but compelling argument that the conclusions of one study can be applied to understanding the people in your working question and research project. Generalizable results may be applicable because they are broadly transferable across situations, and you can be confident in that when they follow the best practices in this textbook for improving generalizability. However, there may be aspects of a study that make its results difficult to transfer to your topic area.

When evaluating the transferability of a research result to your working question, consider the sample, measures, and design. That is, how data was collected from individuals, who those individuals are, and what researchers did with them. You may find that the samples in generalizable studies do not talk about the specific ethnic, cultural, or geographic group that is in your working question. Similarly, studies that measure the outcomes of substance use treatment by measuring sobriety may not match your working question on moderation, medication adherence, or substitution as an outcome in substance use treatment. Evaluating the transferability of designs may help you identify whether the methods the authors used would be similar to those you might use if you were to conduct a study gathering and collecting your own raw data.

Assessing transferability is more subjective. You are using your knowledge of your topic area and research methods (which are always improving!) to make a reasonable argument about why a given piece of evidence from a primary source helps you understand something. Look back at Table 5.2, your annotations, and the researchers' sampling, data analysis, results, and design. Using your critical thinking (and the knowledge you can in Part 2 and Part 3 of this textbook) you will need to make a reasonable argument that these results transfer to the people, places, and culture that you are talking about in your working question.

In the final chapter of Part 1, we will discuss how to assemble the facts you have taken from journal articles into a literature review that represents what you think about the topic.

Developing your theoretical framework
Conceptual definitions
Inductive & deductive reasoning

Nomothetic causal explanations

Content warning: examples in this chapter include references to sexual harassment, domestic violence, gender-based violence, the child welfare system, substance use disorders, neonatal abstinence syndrome, child abuse, racism, and sexism.

11.1 Developing your theoretical framework

Differentiate between theories that explain specific parts of the social world versus those that are more broad and sweeping in their conclusions
Identify the theoretical perspectives that are relevant to your project and inform your thinking about it
Define key concepts in your working question and develop a theoretical framework for how you understand your topic.

Theories provide a way of looking at the world and of understanding human interaction. Paradigms are grounded in big assumptions about the world—what is real, how do we create knowledge—whereas theories describe more specific phenomena. Well, we are still oversimplifying a bit. Some theories try to explain the whole world, while others only try to explain a small part. Some theories can be grouped together based on common ideas but retain their own individual and unique features. Our goal is to help you find a theoretical framework that helps you understand your topic more deeply and answer your working question.

Theories: Big and small

In your human behavior and the social environment (HBSE) class, you were introduced to the major theoretical perspectives that are commonly used in social work. These are what we like to call big-T 'T'heories. When you read about systems theory, you are actually reading a synthesis of decades of distinct, overlapping, and conflicting theories that can be broadly classified within systems theory. For example, within systems theory, some approaches focus more on family systems while others focus on environmental systems, though the core concepts remain similar.

Different theorists define concepts in their own way, and as a result, their theories may explore different relationships with those concepts. For example, Deci and Ryan's (1985) [56] self-determination theory discusses motivation and establishes that it is contingent on meeting one's needs for autonomy, competency, and relatedness. By contrast, ecological self-determination theory, as written by Abery & Stancliffe (1996), [57] argues that self-determination is the amount of control exercised by an individual over aspects of their lives they deem important across the micro, meso, and macro levels. If self-determination were an important concept in your study, you would need to figure out which of the many theories related to self-determination helps you address your working question.

Theories can provide a broad perspective on the key concepts and relationships in the world or more specific and applied concepts and perspectives. Table 7.2 summarizes two commonly used lists of big-T Theoretical perspectives in social work. See if you can locate some of the theories that might inform your project.

Table 7.2: Broad theoretical perspectives in social work

Psychodynamic	Systems
Crisis and task-centered	Conflict
Cognitive-behavioral	Exchange and choice
Systems/ecological	Social constructionist
Macro practice/social development/social pedagogy	Psychodynamic
Strengths/solution/narrative	Developmental
Humanistic/existential/spiritual	Social behavioral
Critical	Humanistic
Feminist
Anti-discriminatory/multi-cultural sensitivity

Competing theoretical explanations

Within each area of specialization in social work, there are many other theories that aim to explain more specific types of interactions. For example, within the study of sexual harassment, different theories posit different explanations for why harassment occurs.

One theory, first developed by criminologists, is called routine activities theory. It posits that sexual harassment is most likely to occur when a workplace lacks unified groups and when potentially vulnerable targets and motivated offenders are both present (DeCoster, Estes, & Mueller, 1999). [60]

Other theories of sexual harassment, called relational theories, suggest that one's existing relationships are the key to understanding why and how workplace sexual harassment occurs and how people will respond when it does occur (Morgan, 1999). [61] Relational theories focus on the power that different social relationships provide (e.g., married people who have supportive partners at home might be more likely than those who lack support at home to report sexual harassment when it occurs).

Finally, feminist theories of sexual harassment take a different stance. These theories posit that the organization of our current gender system, wherein those who are the most masculine have the most power, best explains the occurrence of workplace sexual harassment (MacKinnon, 1979). [62] As you might imagine, which theory a researcher uses to examine the topic of sexual harassment will shape the questions asked about harassment. It will also shape the explanations the researcher provides for why harassment occurs.

For a graduate student beginning their study of a new topic, it may be intimidating to learn that there are so many theories beyond what you’ve learned in your theory classes. What’s worse is that there is no central database of theories on your topic. However, as you review the literature in your area, you will learn more about the theories scientists have created to explain how your topic works in the real world. There are other good sources for theories, in addition to journal articles. Books often contain works of theoretical and philosophical importance that are beyond the scope of an academic journal. Do a search in your university library for books on your topic, and you are likely to find theorists talking about how to make sense of your topic. You don't necessarily have to agree with the prevailing theories about your topic, but you do need to be aware of them so you can apply theoretical ideas to your project.

Applying big-T theories to your topic

The key to applying theories to your topic is learning the key concepts associated with that theory and the relationships between those concepts, or propositions . Again, your HBSE class should have prepared you with some of the most important concepts from the theoretical perspectives listed in Table 7.2. For example, the conflict perspective sees the world as divided into dominant and oppressed groups who engage in conflict over resources. If you were applying these theoretical ideas to your project, you would need to identify which groups in your project are considered dominant or oppressed groups, and which resources they were struggling over. This is a very general example. Challenge yourself to find small-t theories about your topic that will help you understand it in much greater detail and specificity. If you have chosen a topic that is relevant to your life and future practice, you will be doing valuable work shaping your ideas towards social work practice.

Integrating theory into your project can be easy, or it can take a bit more effort. Some people have a strong and explicit theoretical perspective that they carry with them at all times. For me, you'll probably see my work drawing from exchange and choice, social constructionist, and critical theory. Maybe you have theoretical perspectives you naturally employ, like Afrocentric theory or person-centered practice. If so, that's a great place to start since you might already be using that theory (even subconsciously) to inform your understanding of your topic. But if you aren't aware of whether you are using a theoretical perspective when you think about your topic, try writing a paragraph off the top of your head or talking with a friend explaining what you think about that topic. Try matching it with some of the ideas from the broad theoretical perspectives from Table 7.2. This can ground you as you search for more specific theories. Some studies are designed to test whether theories apply the real world while others are designed to create new theories or variations on existing theories. Consider which feels more appropriate for your project and what you want to know.

Another way to easily identify the theories associated with your topic is to look at the concepts in your working question. Are these concepts commonly found in any of the theoretical perspectives in Table 7.2? Take a look at the Payne and Hutchison texts and see if any of those look like the concepts and relationships in your working question or if any of them match with how you think about your topic. Even if they don't possess the exact same wording, similar theories can help serve as a starting point to finding other theories that can inform your project. Remember, HBSE textbooks will give you not only the broad statements of theories but also sources from specific theorists and sub-theories that might be more applicable to your topic. Skim the references and suggestions for further reading once you find something that applies well.

Choose a theoretical perspective from Hutchison, Payne, or another theory textbook that is relevant to your project. Using their textbooks or other reputable sources, identify :

At least five important concepts from the theory
What relationships the theory establishes between these important concepts (e.g., as x increases, the y decreases)
How you can use this theory to better understand the concepts and variables in your project?

Developing your own theoretical framework

Hutchison's and Payne's frameworks are helpful for surveying the whole body of literature relevant to social work, which is why they are so widely used. They are one framework, or way of thinking, about all of the theories social workers will encounter that are relevant to practice. Social work researchers should delve further and develop a theoretical or conceptual framework of their own based on their reading of the literature. In Chapter 8 , we will develop your theoretical framework further, identifying the cause-and-effect relationships that answer your working question. Developing a theoretical framework is also instructive for revising and clarifying your working question and identifying concepts that serve as keywords for additional literature searching. The greater clarity you have with your theoretical perspective, the easier each subsequent step in the research process will be.

Getting acquainted with the important theoretical concepts in a new area can be challenging. While social work education provides a broad overview of social theory, you will find much greater fulfillment out of reading about the theories related to your topic area. We discussed some strategies for finding theoretical information in Chapter 3 as part of literature searching. To extend that conversation a bit, some strategies for searching for theories in the literature include:

Consider searching for these keywords in the title or abstract, specifically
Looking at the references and cited by links within theoretical articles and textbooks
Looking at books, edited volumes, and textbooks that discuss theory
Talking with a scholar on your topic, or asking a professor if they can help connect you to someone
Nice authors are clear about how they use theory to inform their research project, usually in the introduction and discussion section.
For example, from the broad umbrella of systems theory, you might pick out family systems theory if you want to understand the effectiveness of a family counseling program.

It's important to remember that knowledge arises within disciplines, and that disciplines have different theoretical frameworks for explaining the same topic. While it is certainly important for the social work perspective to be a part of your analysis, social workers benefit from searching across disciplines to come to a more comprehensive understanding of the topic. Reaching across disciplines can provide uncommon insights during conceptualization, and once the study is completed, a multidisciplinary researcher will be able to share results in a way that speaks to a variety of audiences. A study by An and colleagues (2015) [63] uses game theory from the discipline of economics to understand problems in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program. In order to receive TANF benefits, mothers must cooperate with paternity and child support requirements unless they have "good cause," as in cases of domestic violence, in which providing that information would put the mother at greater risk of violence. Game theory can help us understand how TANF recipients and caseworkers respond to the incentives in their environment, and highlight why the design of the "good cause" waiver program may not achieve its intended outcome of increasing access to benefits for survivors of family abuse.

Of course, there are natural limits on the depth with which student researchers can and should engage in a search for theory about their topic. At minimum, you should be able to draw connections across studies and be able to assess the relative importance of each theory within the literature. Just because you found one article applying your theory (like game theory, in our example above) does not mean it is important or often used in the domestic violence literature. Indeed, it would be much more common in the family violence literature to find psychological theories of trauma, feminist theories of power and control, and similar theoretical perspectives used to inform research projects rather than game theory, which is equally applicable to survivors of family violence as workers and bosses at a corporation. Consider using the Cited By feature to identify articles, books, and other sources of theoretical information that are seminal or well-cited in the literature. Similarly, by using the name of a theory in the keywords of a search query (along with keywords related to your topic), you can get a sense of how often the theory is used in your topic area. You should have a sense of what theories are commonly used to analyze your topic, even if you end up choosing a different one to inform your project.

Theories that are not cited or used as often are still immensely valuable. As we saw before with TANF and "good cause" waivers, using theories from other disciplines can produce uncommon insights and help you make a new contribution to the social work literature. Given the privileged position that the social work curriculum places on theories developed by white men, students may want to explore Afrocentricity as a social work practice theory (Pellebon, 2007) [64] or abolitionist social work (Jacobs et al., 2021) [65] when deciding on a theoretical framework for their research project that addresses concepts of racial justice. Start with your working question, and explain how each theory helps you answer your question. Some explanations are going to feel right, and some concepts will feel more salient to you than others. Keep in mind that this is an iterative process. Your theoretical framework will likely change as you continue to conceptualize your research project, revise your research question, and design your study.

By trying on many different theoretical explanations for your topic area, you can better clarify your own theoretical framework. Some of you may be fortunate enough to find theories that match perfectly with how you think about your topic, are used often in the literature, and are therefore relatively straightforward to apply. However, many of you may find that a combination of theoretical perspectives is most helpful for you to investigate your project. For example, maybe the group counseling program for which you are evaluating client outcomes draws from both motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioral therapy. In order to understand the change happening in the client population, you would need to know each theory separately as well as how they work in tandem with one another. Because theoretical explanations and even the definitions of concepts are debated by scientists, it may be helpful to find a specific social scientist or group of scientists whose perspective on the topic you find matches with your understanding of the topic. Of course, it is also perfectly acceptable to develop your own theoretical framework, though you should be able to articulate how your framework fills a gap within the literature.

If you are adapting theoretical perspectives in your study, it is important to clarify the original authors' definitions of each concept. Jabareen (2009) [66] offers that conceptual frameworks are not merely collections of concepts but, rather, constructs in which each concept plays an integral role. [67] A conceptual framework is a network of linked concepts that together provide a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon. Each concept in a conceptual framework plays an ontological or epistemological role in the framework, and it is important to assess whether the concepts and relationships in your framework make sense together. As your framework takes shape, you will find yourself integrating and grouping together concepts, thinking about the most important or least important concepts, and how each concept is causally related to others.

Much like paradigm, theory plays a supporting role for the conceptualization of your research project. Recall the ice float from Figure 7.1. Theoretical explanations support the design and methods you use to answer your research question. In student projects that lack a theoretical framework, I often see the biases and errors in reasoning that we discussed in Chapter 1 that get in the way of good social science. That's because theories mark which concepts are important, provide a framework for understanding them, and measure their interrelationships. If you are missing this foundation, you will operate on informal observation, messages from authority, and other forms of unsystematic and unscientific thinking we reviewed in Chapter 1 .

Theory-informed inquiry is incredibly helpful for identifying key concepts and how to measure them in your research project, but there is a risk in aligning research too closely with theory. The theory-ladenness of facts and observations produced by social science research means that we may be making our ideas real through research. This is a potential source of confirmation bias in social science. Moreover, as Tan (2016) [68] demonstrates, social science often proceeds by adopting as true the perspective of Western and Global North countries, and cross-cultural research is often when ethnocentric and biased ideas are most visible . In her example, a researcher from the West studying teacher-centric classrooms in China that rely partially on rote memorization may view them as less advanced than student-centered classrooms developed in a Western country simply because of Western philosophical assumptions about the importance of individualism and self-determination. Developing a clear theoretical framework is a way to guard against biased research, and it will establish a firm foundation on which you will develop the design and methods for your study.

Just as empirical evidence is important for conceptualizing a research project, so too are the key concepts and relationships identified by social work theory.
Using theory your theory textbook will provide you with a sense of the broad theoretical perspectives in social work that might be relevant to your project.
Try to find small-t theories that are more specific to your topic area and relevant to your working question.
In Chapter 2 , you developed a concept map for your proposal. Take a moment to revisit your concept map now as your theoretical framework is taking shape. Make any updates to the key concepts and relationships in your concept map. . If you need a refresher, we have embedded a short how-to video from the University of Guelph Library (CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0) that we also used in Chapter 2 .

11.2 Conceptual definitions

Define measurement and conceptualization
Apply Kaplan’s three categories to determine the complexity of measuring a given variable
Identify the role previous research and theory play in defining concepts
Distinguish between unidimensional and multidimensional concepts
Critically apply reification to how you conceptualize the key variables in your research project

In social science, when we use the term measurement , we mean the process by which we describe and ascribe meaning to the key facts, concepts, or other phenomena that we are investigating. At its core, measurement is about defining one’s terms in as clear and precise a way as possible. Of course, measurement in social science isn’t quite as simple as using a measuring cup or spoon, but there are some basic tenets on which most social scientists agree when it comes to measurement. We’ll explore those, as well as some of the ways that measurement might vary depending on your unique approach to the study of your topic.

An important point here is that measurement does not require any particular instruments or procedures. What it does require is a systematic procedure for assigning scores, meanings, and descriptions to individuals or objects so that those scores represent the characteristic of interest. You can measure phenomena in many different ways, but you must be sure that how you choose to measure gives you information and data that lets you answer your research question. If you're looking for information about a person's income, but your main points of measurement have to do with the money they have in the bank, you're not really going to find the information you're looking for!

The question of what social scientists measure can be answered by asking yourself what social scientists study. Think about the topics you’ve learned about in other social work classes you’ve taken or the topics you’ve considered investigating yourself. Let’s consider Melissa Milkie and Catharine Warner’s study (2011) [69] of first graders’ mental health. In order to conduct that study, Milkie and Warner needed to have some idea about how they were going to measure mental health. What does mental health mean, exactly? And how do we know when we’re observing someone whose mental health is good and when we see someone whose mental health is compromised? Understanding how measurement works in research methods helps us answer these sorts of questions.

As you might have guessed, social scientists will measure just about anything that they have an interest in investigating. For example, those who are interested in learning something about the correlation between social class and levels of happiness must develop some way to measure both social class and happiness. Those who wish to understand how well immigrants cope in their new locations must measure immigrant status and coping. Those who wish to understand how a person’s gender shapes their workplace experiences must measure gender and workplace experiences (and get more specific about which experiences are under examination). You get the idea. Social scientists can and do measure just about anything you can imagine observing or wanting to study. Of course, some things are easier to observe or measure than others.

Observing your variables

In 1964, philosopher Abraham Kaplan (1964) [70] wrote The Conduct of Inquiry, which has since become a classic work in research methodology (Babbie, 2010). [71] In his text, Kaplan describes different categories of things that behavioral scientists observe. One of those categories, which Kaplan called “observational terms,” is probably the simplest to measure in social science. Observational terms are the sorts of things that we can see with the naked eye simply by looking at them. Kaplan roughly defines them as conditions that are easy to identify and verify through direct observation. If, for example, we wanted to know how the conditions of playgrounds differ across different neighborhoods, we could directly observe the variety, amount, and condition of equipment at various playgrounds.

Indirect observables , on the other hand, are less straightforward to assess. In Kaplan's framework, they are conditions that are subtle and complex that we must use existing knowledge and intuition to define. If we conducted a study for which we wished to know a person’s income, we’d probably have to ask them their income, perhaps in an interview or a survey. Thus, we have observed income, even if it has only been observed indirectly. Birthplace might be another indirect observable. We can ask study participants where they were born, but chances are good we won’t have directly observed any of those people being born in the locations they report.

Sometimes the measures that we are interested in are more complex and more abstract than observational terms or indirect observables. Think about some of the concepts you’ve learned about in other social work classes—for example, ethnocentrism. What is ethnocentrism? Well, from completing an introduction to social work class you might know that it has something to do with the way a person judges another’s culture. But how would you measure it? Here’s another construct: bureaucracy. We know this term has something to do with organizations and how they operate but measuring such a construct is trickier than measuring something like a person’s income. The theoretical concepts of ethnocentrism and bureaucracy represent ideas whose meanings we have come to agree on. Though we may not be able to observe these abstractions directly, we can observe their components.

Kaplan referred to these more abstract things that behavioral scientists measure as constructs. Constructs are “not observational either directly or indirectly” (Kaplan, 1964, p. 55), [72] but they can be defined based on observables. For example, the construct of bureaucracy could be measured by counting the number of supervisors that need to approve routine spending by public administrators. The greater the number of administrators that must sign off on routine matters, the greater the degree of bureaucracy. Similarly, we might be able to ask a person the degree to which they trust people from different cultures around the world and then assess the ethnocentrism inherent in their answers. We can measure constructs like bureaucracy and ethnocentrism by defining them in terms of what we can observe. [73]

The idea of coming up with your own measurement tool might sound pretty intimidating at this point. The good news is that if you find something in the literature that works for you, you can use it (with proper attribution, of course). If there are only pieces of it that you like, you can reuse those pieces (with proper attribution and describing/justifying any changes). You don't always have to start from scratch!

Look at the variables in your research question.

Classify them as direct observables, indirect observables, or constructs.
Do you think measuring them will be easy or hard?
What are your first thoughts about how to measure each variable? No wrong answers here, just write down a thought about each variable.

Measurement starts with conceptualization

In order to measure the concepts in your research question, we first have to understand what we think about them. As an aside, the word concept has come up quite a bit, and it is important to be sure we have a shared understanding of that term. A concept is the notion or image that we conjure up when we think of some cluster of related observations or ideas. For example, masculinity is a concept. What do you think of when you hear that word? Presumably, you imagine some set of behaviors and perhaps even a particular style of self-presentation. Of course, we can’t necessarily assume that everyone conjures up the same set of ideas or images when they hear the word masculinity . While there are many possible ways to define the term and some may be more common or have more support than others, there is no universal definition of masculinity. What counts as masculine may shift over time, from culture to culture, and even from individual to individual (Kimmel, 2008). This is why defining our concepts is so important.\

Not all researchers clearly explain their theoretical or conceptual framework for their study, but they should! Without understanding how a researcher has defined their key concepts, it would be nearly impossible to understand the meaning of that researcher’s findings and conclusions. Back in Chapter 7 , you developed a theoretical framework for your study based on a survey of the theoretical literature in your topic area. If you haven't done that yet, consider flipping back to that section to familiarize yourself with some of the techniques for finding and using theories relevant to your research question. Continuing with our example on masculinity, we would need to survey the literature on theories of masculinity. After a few queries on masculinity, I found a wonderful article by Wong (2010) [74] that analyzed eight years of the journal Psychology of Men & Masculinity and analyzed how often different theories of masculinity were used . Not only can I get a sense of which theories are more accepted and which are more marginal in the social science on masculinity, I am able to identify a range of options from which I can find the theory or theories that will inform my project.

Identify a specific theory (or more than one theory) and how it helps you understand...

Your independent variable(s).
Your dependent variable(s).
The relationship between your independent and dependent variables.

Rather than completing this exercise from scratch, build from your theoretical or conceptual framework developed in previous chapters.

In quantitative methods, conceptualization involves writing out clear, concise definitions for our key concepts. These are the kind of definitions you are used to, like the ones in a dictionary. A conceptual definition involves defining a concept in terms of other concepts, usually by making reference to how other social scientists and theorists have defined those concepts in the past. Of course, new conceptual definitions are created all the time because our conceptual understanding of the world is always evolving.

Conceptualization is deceptively challenging—spelling out exactly what the concepts in your research question mean to you. Following along with our example, think about what comes to mind when you read the term masculinity. How do you know masculinity when you see it? Does it have something to do with men or with social norms? If so, perhaps we could define masculinity as the social norms that men are expected to follow. That seems like a reasonable start, and at this early stage of conceptualization, brainstorming about the images conjured up by concepts and playing around with possible definitions is appropriate. However, this is just the first step. At this point, you should be beyond brainstorming for your key variables because you have read a good amount of research about them

In addition, we should consult previous research and theory to understand the definitions that other scholars have already given for the concepts we are interested in. This doesn’t mean we must use their definitions, but understanding how concepts have been defined in the past will help us to compare our conceptualizations with how other scholars define and relate concepts. Understanding prior definitions of our key concepts will also help us decide whether we plan to challenge those conceptualizations or rely on them for our own work. Finally, working on conceptualization is likely to help in the process of refining your research question to one that is specific and clear in what it asks. Conceptualization and operationalization (next section) are where "the rubber meets the road," so to speak, and you have to specify what you mean by the question you are asking. As your conceptualization deepens, you will often find that your research question becomes more specific and clear.

If we turn to the literature on masculinity, we will surely come across work by Michael Kimmel , one of the preeminent masculinity scholars in the United States. After consulting Kimmel’s prior work (2000; 2008), [75] we might tweak our initial definition of masculinity. Rather than defining masculinity as “the social norms that men are expected to follow,” perhaps instead we’ll define it as “the social roles, behaviors, and meanings prescribed for men in any given society at any one time” (Kimmel & Aronson, 2004, p. 503). [76] Our revised definition is more precise and complex because it goes beyond addressing one aspect of men’s lives (norms), and addresses three aspects: roles, behaviors, and meanings. It also implies that roles, behaviors, and meanings may vary across societies and over time. Using definitions developed by theorists and scholars is a good idea, though you may find that you want to define things your own way.

As you can see, conceptualization isn’t as simple as applying any random definition that we come up with to a term. Defining our terms may involve some brainstorming at the very beginning. But conceptualization must go beyond that, to engage with or critique existing definitions and conceptualizations in the literature. Once we’ve brainstormed about the images associated with a particular word, we should also consult prior work to understand how others define the term in question. After we’ve identified a clear definition that we’re happy with, we should make sure that every term used in our definition will make sense to others. Are there terms used within our definition that also need to be defined? If so, our conceptualization is not yet complete. Our definition includes the concept of "social roles," so we should have a definition for what those mean and become familiar with role theory to help us with our conceptualization. If we don't know what roles are, how can we study them?

Let's say we do all of that. We have a clear definition of the term masculinity with reference to previous literature and we also have a good understanding of the terms in our conceptual definition...then we're done, right? Not so fast. You’ve likely met more than one man in your life, and you’ve probably noticed that they are not the same, even if they live in the same society during the same historical time period. This could mean there are dimensions of masculinity. In terms of social scientific measurement, concepts can be said to have multiple dimensions when there are multiple elements that make up a single concept. With respect to the term masculinity , dimensions could based on gender identity, gender performance, sexual orientation, etc.. In any of these cases, the concept of masculinity would be considered to have multiple dimensions.

While you do not need to spell out every possible dimension of the concepts you wish to measure, it is important to identify whether your concepts are unidimensional (and therefore relatively easy to define and measure) or multidimensional (and therefore require multi-part definitions and measures). In this way, how you conceptualize your variables determines how you will measure them in your study. Unidimensional concepts are those that are expected to have a single underlying dimension. These concepts can be measured using a single measure or test. Examples include simple concepts such as a person’s weight, time spent sleeping, and so forth.

One frustrating this is that there is no clear demarcation between concepts that are inherently unidimensional or multidimensional. Even something as simple as age could be broken down into multiple dimensions including mental age and chronological age, so where does conceptualization stop? How far down the dimensional rabbit hole do we have to go? Researchers should consider two things. First, how important is this variable in your study? If age is not important in your study (maybe it is a control variable), it seems like a waste of time to do a lot of work drawing from developmental theory to conceptualize this variable. A unidimensional measure from zero to dead is all the detail we need. On the other hand, if we were measuring the impact of age on masculinity, conceptualizing our independent variable (age) as multidimensional may provide a richer understanding of its impact on masculinity. Finally, your conceptualization will lead directly to your operationalization of the variable, and once your operationalization is complete, make sure someone reading your study could follow how your conceptual definitions informed the measures you chose for your variables.

Write a conceptual definition for your independent and dependent variables.

Cite and attribute definitions to other scholars, if you use their words.
Describe how your definitions are informed by your theoretical framework.
Place your definition in conversation with other theories and conceptual definitions commonly used in the literature.
Are there multiple dimensions of your variables?
Are any of these dimensions important for you to measure?

Do researchers actually know what we're talking about?

Conceptualization proceeds differently in qualitative research compared to quantitative research. Since qualitative researchers are interested in the understandings and experiences of their participants, it is less important for them to find one fixed definition for a concept before starting to interview or interact with participants. The researcher’s job is to accurately and completely represent how their participants understand a concept, not to test their own definition of that concept.

If you were conducting qualitative research on masculinity, you would likely consult previous literature like Kimmel’s work mentioned above. From your literature review, you may come up with a working definition for the terms you plan to use in your study, which can change over the course of the investigation. However, the definition that matters is the definition that your participants share during data collection. A working definition is merely a place to start, and researchers should take care not to think it is the only or best definition out there.

In qualitative inquiry, your participants are the experts (sound familiar, social workers?) on the concepts that arise during the research study. Your job as the researcher is to accurately and reliably collect and interpret their understanding of the concepts they describe while answering your questions. Conceptualization of concepts is likely to change over the course of qualitative inquiry, as you learn more information from your participants. Indeed, getting participants to comment on, extend, or challenge the definitions and understandings of other participants is a hallmark of qualitative research. This is the opposite of quantitative research, in which definitions must be completely set in stone before the inquiry can begin.

The contrast between qualitative and quantitative conceptualization is instructive for understanding how quantitative methods (and positivist research in general) privilege the knowledge of the researcher over the knowledge of study participants and community members. Positivism holds that the researcher is the "expert," and can define concepts based on their expert knowledge of the scientific literature. This knowledge is in contrast to the lived experience that participants possess from experiencing the topic under examination day-in, day-out. For this reason, it would be wise to remind ourselves not to take our definitions too seriously and be critical about the limitations of our knowledge.

Conceptualization must be open to revisions, even radical revisions, as scientific knowledge progresses. While I’ve suggested consulting prior scholarly definitions of our concepts, you should not assume that prior, scholarly definitions are more real than the definitions we create. Likewise, we should not think that our own made-up definitions are any more real than any other definition. It would also be wrong to assume that just because definitions exist for some concept that the concept itself exists beyond some abstract idea in our heads. Building on the paradigmatic ideas behind interpretivism and the critical paradigm, researchers call the assumption that our abstract concepts exist in some concrete, tangible way is known as reification . It explores the power dynamics behind how we can create reality by how we define it.

Returning again to our example of masculinity. Think about our how our notions of masculinity have developed over the past few decades, and how different and yet so similar they are to patriarchal definitions throughout history. Conceptual definitions become more or less popular based on the power arrangements inside of social science the broader world. Western knowledge systems are privileged, while others are viewed as unscientific and marginal. The historical domination of social science by white men from WEIRD countries meant that definitions of masculinity were imbued their cultural biases and were designed explicitly and implicitly to preserve their power. This has inspired movements for cognitive justice as we seek to use social science to achieve global development.

Measurement is the process by which we describe and ascribe meaning to the key facts, concepts, or other phenomena that we are investigating.
Kaplan identified three categories of things that social scientists measure including observational terms, indirect observables, and constructs.
Some concepts have multiple elements or dimensions.
Researchers often use measures previously developed and studied by other researchers.
Conceptualization is a process that involves coming up with clear, concise definitions.
Conceptual definitions are based on the theoretical framework you are using for your study (and the paradigmatic assumptions underlying those theories).
Whether your conceptual definitions come from your own ideas or the literature, you should be able to situate them in terms of other commonly used conceptual definitions.
Researchers should acknowledge the limited explanatory power of their definitions for concepts and how oppression can shape what explanations are considered true or scientific.

Think historically about the variables in your research question.

How has our conceptual definition of your topic changed over time?
What scholars or social forces were responsible for this change?

Take a critical look at your conceptual definitions.

How participants might define terms for themselves differently, in terms of their daily experience?
On what cultural assumptions are your conceptual definitions based?
Are your conceptual definitions applicable across all cultures that will be represented in your sample?

11.3 Inductive and deductive reasoning

Describe inductive and deductive reasoning and provide examples of each
Identify how inductive and deductive reasoning are complementary

Congratulations! You survived the chapter on theories and paradigms. My experience has been that many students have a difficult time thinking about theories and paradigms because they perceive them as "intangible" and thereby hard to connect to social work research. I even had one student who said she got frustrated just reading the word "philosophy."

Rest assured, you do not need to become a theorist or philosopher to be an effective social worker or researcher. However, you should have a good sense of what theory or theories will be relevant to your project, as well as how this theory, along with your working question, fit within the three broad research paradigms we reviewed. If you don't have a good idea about those at this point, it may be a good opportunity to pause and read more about the theories related to your topic area.

Theories structure and inform social work research. The converse is also true: research can structure and inform theory. The reciprocal relationship between theory and research often becomes evident to students when they consider the relationships between theory and research in inductive and deductive approaches to research. In both cases, theory is crucial. But the relationship between theory and research differs for each approach.

While inductive and deductive approaches to research are quite different, they can also be complementary. Let’s start by looking at each one and how they differ from one another. Then we’ll move on to thinking about how they complement one another.

Inductive reasoning

A researcher using inductive reasoning begins by collecting data that is relevant to their topic of interest. Once a substantial amount of data have been collected, the researcher will then step back from data collection to get a bird’s eye view of their data. At this stage, the researcher looks for patterns in the data, working to develop a theory that could explain those patterns. Thus, when researchers take an inductive approach, they start with a particular set of observations and move to a more general set of propositions about those experiences. In other words, they move from data to theory, or from the specific to the general. Figure 8.1 outlines the steps involved with an inductive approach to research.

A researcher moving from a more particular focus on data to a more general focus on theory by looking for patterns

There are many good examples of inductive research, but we’ll look at just a few here. One fascinating study in which the researchers took an inductive approach is Katherine Allen, Christine Kaestle, and Abbie Goldberg’s (2011) [77] study of how boys and young men learn about menstruation. To understand this process, Allen and her colleagues analyzed the written narratives of 23 young cisgender men in which the men described how they learned about menstruation, what they thought of it when they first learned about it, and what they think of it now. By looking for patterns across all 23 cisgender men’s narratives, the researchers were able to develop a general theory of how boys and young men learn about this aspect of girls’ and women’s biology. They conclude that sisters play an important role in boys’ early understanding of menstruation, that menstruation makes boys feel somewhat separated from girls, and that as they enter young adulthood and form romantic relationships, young men develop more mature attitudes about menstruation. Note how this study began with the data—men’s narratives of learning about menstruation—and worked to develop a theory.

In another inductive study, Kristin Ferguson and colleagues (Ferguson, Kim, & McCoy, 2011) [78] analyzed empirical data to better understand how to meet the needs of young people who are homeless. The authors analyzed focus group data from 20 youth at a homeless shelter. From these data they developed a set of recommendations for those interested in applied interventions that serve homeless youth. The researchers also developed hypotheses for others who might wish to conduct further investigation of the topic. Though Ferguson and her colleagues did not test their hypotheses, their study ends where most deductive investigations begin: with a theory and a hypothesis derived from that theory. Section 8.4 discusses the use of mixed methods research as a way for researchers to test hypotheses created in a previous component of the same research project.

You will notice from both of these examples that inductive reasoning is most commonly found in studies using qualitative methods, such as focus groups and interviews. Because inductive reasoning involves the creation of a new theory, researchers need very nuanced data on how the key concepts in their working question operate in the real world. Qualitative data is often drawn from lengthy interactions and observations with the individuals and phenomena under examination. For this reason, inductive reasoning is most often associated with qualitative methods, though it is used in both quantitative and qualitative research.

Deductive reasoning

If inductive reasoning is about creating theories from raw data, deductive reasoning is about testing theories using data. Researchers using deductive reasoning take the steps described earlier for inductive research and reverse their order. They start with a compelling social theory, create a hypothesis about how the world should work, collect raw data, and analyze whether their hypothesis was confirmed or not. That is, deductive approaches move from a more general level (theory) to a more specific (data); whereas inductive approaches move from the specific (data) to general (theory).

A deductive approach to research is the one that people typically associate with scientific investigation. Students in English-dominant countries that may be confused by inductive vs. deductive research can rest part of the blame on Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, creator of the Sherlock Holmes character. As Craig Vasey points out in his breezy introduction to logic book chapter , Sherlock Holmes more often used inductive rather than deductive reasoning (despite claiming to use the powers of deduction to solve crimes). By noticing subtle details in how people act, behave, and dress, Holmes finds patterns that others miss. Using those patterns, he creates a theory of how the crime occurred, dramatically revealed to the authorities just in time to arrest the suspect. Indeed, it is these flashes of insight into the patterns of data that make Holmes such a keen inductive reasoner. In social work practice, rather than detective work, inductive reasoning is supported by the intuitions and practice wisdom of social workers, just as Holmes' reasoning is sharpened by his experience as a detective.

So, if deductive reasoning isn't Sherlock Holmes' observation and pattern-finding, how does it work? It starts with what you have already done in Chapters 3 and 4, reading and evaluating what others have done to study your topic. It continued with Chapter 5, discovering what theories already try to explain how the concepts in your working question operate in the real world. Tapping into this foundation of knowledge on their topic, the researcher studies what others have done, reads existing theories of whatever phenomenon they are studying, and then tests hypotheses that emerge from those theories. Figure 8.2 outlines the steps involved with a deductive approach to research.

Moving from general to specific using deductive reasoning

While not all researchers follow a deductive approach, many do. We’ll now take a look at a couple excellent recent examples of deductive research.

In a study of US law enforcement responses to hate crimes, Ryan King and colleagues (King, Messner, & Baller, 2009) [79] hypothesized that law enforcement’s response would be less vigorous in areas of the country that had a stronger history of racial violence. The authors developed their hypothesis from prior research and theories on the topic. They tested the hypothesis by analyzing data on states’ lynching histories and hate crime responses. Overall, the authors found support for their hypothesis and illustrated an important application of critical race theory.

In another recent deductive study, Melissa Milkie and Catharine Warner (2011) [80] studied the effects of different classroom environments on first graders’ mental health. Based on prior research and theory, Milkie and Warner hypothesized that negative classroom features, such as a lack of basic supplies and heat, would be associated with emotional and behavioral problems in children. One might associate this research with Maslow's hierarchy of needs or systems theory. The researchers found support for their hypothesis, demonstrating that policymakers should be paying more attention to the mental health outcomes of children’s school experiences, just as they track academic outcomes (American Sociological Association, 2011). [81]

Complementary approaches

While inductive and deductive approaches to research seem quite different, they can actually be rather complementary. In some cases, researchers will plan for their study to include multiple components, one inductive and the other deductive. In other cases, a researcher might begin a study with the plan to conduct either inductive or deductive research, but then discovers along the way that the other approach is needed to help illuminate findings. Here is an example of each such case.

Dr. Amy Blackstone (n.d.), author of Principles of sociological inquiry: Qualitative and quantitative methods , relates a story about her mixed methods research on sexual harassment.

We began the study knowing that we would like to take both a deductive and an inductive approach in our work. We therefore administered a quantitative survey, the responses to which we could analyze in order to test hypotheses, and also conducted qualitative interviews with a number of the survey participants. The survey data were well suited to a deductive approach; we could analyze those data to test hypotheses that were generated based on theories of harassment. The interview data were well suited to an inductive approach; we looked for patterns across the interviews and then tried to make sense of those patterns by theorizing about them. For one paper (Uggen & Blackstone, 2004) [82] , we began with a prominent feminist theory of the sexual harassment of adult women and developed a set of hypotheses outlining how we expected the theory to apply in the case of younger women’s and men’s harassment experiences. We then tested our hypotheses by analyzing the survey data. In general, we found support for the theory that posited that the current gender system, in which heteronormative men wield the most power in the workplace, explained workplace sexual harassment—not just of adult women but of younger women and men as well. In a more recent paper (Blackstone, Houle, & Uggen, 2006), [83] we did not hypothesize about what we might find but instead inductively analyzed interview data, looking for patterns that might tell us something about how or whether workers’ perceptions of harassment change as they age and gain workplace experience. From this analysis, we determined that workers’ perceptions of harassment did indeed shift as they gained experience and that their later definitions of harassment were more stringent than those they held during adolescence. Overall, our desire to understand young workers’ harassment experiences fully—in terms of their objective workplace experiences, their perceptions of those experiences, and their stories of their experiences—led us to adopt both deductive and inductive approaches in the work. (Blackstone, n.d., p. 21) [84]

Researchers may not always set out to employ both approaches in their work but sometimes find that their use of one approach leads them to the other. One such example is described eloquently in Russell Schutt’s Investigating the Social World (2006). [85] As Schutt describes, researchers Sherman and Berk (1984) [86] conducted an experiment to test two competing theories of the effects of punishment on deterring deviance (in this case, domestic violence).Specifically, Sherman and Berk hypothesized that deterrence theory (see Williams, 2005 [87] for more information on that theory) would provide a better explanation of the effects of arresting accused batterers than labeling theory . Deterrence theory predicts that arresting an accused spouse batterer will reduce future incidents of violence. Conversely, labeling theory predicts that arresting accused spouse batterers will increase future incidents (see Policastro & Payne, 2013 [88] for more information on that theory). Figure 8.3 summarizes the two competing theories and the hypotheses Sherman and Berk set out to test.

Deterrence theory predicts arrests lead to lower violence while labeling theory predicts higher violence

Research from these follow-up studies were mixed. In some cases, arrest deterred future incidents of violence. In other cases, it did not. This left the researchers with new data that they needed to explain. The researchers therefore took an inductive approach in an effort to make sense of their latest empirical observations. The new studies revealed that arrest seemed to have a deterrent effect for those who were married and employed, but that it led to increased offenses for those who were unmarried and unemployed. Researchers thus turned to control theory, which posits that having some stake in conformity through the social ties provided by marriage and employment, as the better explanation (see Davis et al., 2000 [90] for more information on this theory).

Predictions of control theory on incidents of domestic violence

What the original Sherman and Berk study, along with the follow-up studies, show us is that we might start with a deductive approach to research, but then, if confronted by new data we must make sense of, we may move to an inductive approach. We will expand on these possibilities in section 8.4 when we discuss mixed methods research.

Ethical and critical considerations

Deductive and inductive reasoning, just like other components of the research process comes with ethical and cultural considerations for researchers. Specifically, deductive research is limited by existing theory. Because scientific inquiry has been shaped by oppressive forces such as sexism, racism, and colonialism, what is considered theory is largely based in Western, white-male-dominant culture. Thus, researchers doing deductive research may artificially limit themselves to ideas that were derived from this context. Non-Western researchers, international social workers, and practitioners working with non-dominant groups may find deductive reasoning of limited help if theories do not adequately describe other cultures.

While these flaws in deductive research may make inductive reasoning seem more appealing, on closer inspection you'll find similar issues apply. A researcher using inductive reasoning applies their intuition and lived experience when analyzing participant data. They will take note of particular themes, conceptualize their definition, and frame the project using their unique psychology. Since everyone's internal world is shaped by their cultural and environmental context, inductive reasoning conducted by Western researchers may unintentionally reinforcing lines of inquiry that derive from cultural oppression.

Inductive reasoning is also shaped by those invited to provide the data to be analyzed. For example, I recently worked with a student who wanted to understand the impact of child welfare supervision on children born dependent on opiates and methamphetamine. Due to the potential harm that could come from interviewing families and children who are in foster care or under child welfare supervision, the researcher decided to use inductive reasoning and to only interview child welfare workers.

Talking to practitioners is a good idea for feasibility, as they are less vulnerable than clients. However, any theory that emerges out of these observations will be substantially limited, as it would be devoid of the perspectives of parents, children, and other community members who could provide a more comprehensive picture of the impact of child welfare involvement on children. Notice that each of these groups has less power than child welfare workers in the service relationship. Attending to which groups were used to inform the creation of a theory and the power of those groups is an important critical consideration for social work researchers.

As you can see, when researchers apply theory to research they must wrestle with the history and hierarchy around knowledge creation in that area. In deductive studies, the researcher is positioned as the expert, similar to the positivist paradigm presented in Chapter 5. We've discussed a few of the limitations on the knowledge of researchers in this subsection, but the position of the "researcher as expert" is inherently problematic. However, it should also not be taken to an extreme. A researcher who approaches inductive inquiry as a naïve learner is also inherently problematic. Just as competence in social work practice requires a baseline of knowledge prior to entering practice, so does competence in social work research. Because a truly naïve intellectual position is impossible—we all have preexisting ways we view the world and are not fully aware of how they may impact our thoughts—researchers should be well-read in the topic area of their research study but humble enough to know that there is always much more to learn.

Inductive reasoning begins with a set of empirical observations, seeking patterns in those observations, and then theorizing about those patterns.
Deductive reasoning begins with a theory, developing hypotheses from that theory, and then collecting and analyzing data to test the truth of those hypotheses.
Inductive and deductive reasoning can be employed together for a more complete understanding of the research topic.
Though researchers don’t always set out to use both inductive and deductive reasoning in their work, they sometimes find that new questions arise in the course of an investigation that can best be answered by employing both approaches.
Identify one theory and how it helps you understand your topic and working question.

I encourage you to find a specific theory from your topic area, rather than relying only on the broad theoretical perspectives like systems theory or the strengths perspective. Those broad theoretical perspectives are okay...but I promise that searching for theories about your topic will help you conceptualize and design your research project.

Using the theory you identified, describe what you expect the answer to be to your working question.
Define and provide an example of idiographic causal relationships
Describe the role of causality in quantitative research as compared to qualitative research
Identify, define, and describe each of the main criteria for nomothetic causal relationships
Describe the difference between and provide examples of independent, dependent, and control variables
Define hypothesis, state a clear hypothesis, and discuss the respective roles of quantitative and qualitative research when it comes to hypotheses

Causality refers to the idea that one event, behavior, or belief will result in the occurrence of another, subsequent event, behavior, or belief. In other words, it is about cause and effect. It seems simple, but you may be surprised to learn there is more than one way to explain how one thing causes another. How can that be? How could there be many ways to understand causality?

Think back to our discussion in Section 5.3 on paradigms [insert chapter link plus link to section 1.2]. You’ll remember the positivist paradigm as the one that believes in objectivity. Positivists look for causal explanations that are universally true for everyone, everywhere because they seek objective truth. Interpretivists, on the other hand, look for causal explanations that are true for individuals or groups in a specific time and place because they seek subjective truths. Remember that for interpretivists, there is not one singular truth that is true for everyone, but many truths created and shared by others.

"Are you trying to generalize or nah?"

One of my favorite classroom moments occurred in the early days of my teaching career. Students were providing peer feedback on their working questions. I overheard one group who was helping someone rephrase their research question. A student asked, “Are you trying to generalize or nah?” Teaching is full of fun moments like that one. Answering that one question can help you understand how to conceptualize and design your research project.

Nomothetic causal explanations are incredibly powerful. They allow scientists to make predictions about what will happen in the future, with a certain margin of error. Moreover, they allow scientists to generalize —that is, make claims about a large population based on a smaller sample of people or items. Generalizing is important. We clearly do not have time to ask everyone their opinion on a topic or test a new intervention on every person. We need a type of causal explanation that helps us predict and estimate truth in all situations.

Generally, nomothetic causal relationships work best for explanatory research projects [INSERT SECTION LINK]. They also tend to use quantitative research: by boiling things down to numbers, one can use the universal language of mathematics to use statistics to explore those relationships. On the other hand, descriptive and exploratory projects often fit better with idiographic causality. These projects do not usually try to generalize, but instead investigate what is true for individuals, small groups, or communities at a specific point in time. You will learn about this type of causality in the next section. Here, we will assume you have an explanatory working question. For example, you may want to know about the risk and protective factors for a specific diagnosis or how a specific therapy impacts client outcomes.

What do nomothetic causal explanations look like?

Nomothetic causal explanations express relationships between variables . The term variable has a scientific definition. This one from Gillespie & Wagner (2018) "a logical grouping of attributes that can be observed and measured and is expected to vary from person to person in a population" (p. 9). [91] More practically, variables are the key concepts in your working question. You know, the things you plan to observe when you actually do your research project, conduct your surveys, complete your interviews, etc. These things have two key properties. First, they vary , as in they do not remain constant. "Age" varies by number. "Gender" varies by category. But they both vary. Second, they have attributes . So the variable "health professions" has attributes or categories, such as social worker, nurse, counselor, etc.

It's also worth reviewing what is not a variable. Well, things that don't change (or vary) aren't variables. If you planned to do a study on how gender impacts earnings but your study only contained women, that concept would not vary . Instead, it would be a constant . Another common mistake I see in students' explanatory questions is mistaking an attribute for a variable. "Men" is not a variable. "Gender" is a variable. "Virginia" is not a variable. The variable is the "state or territory" in which someone or something is physically located.

When one variable causes another, we have what researchers call independent and dependent variables. For example, in a study investigating the impact of spanking on aggressive behavior, spanking would be the independent variable and aggressive behavior would be the dependent variable. An independent variable is the cause, and a dependent variable is the effect. Why are they called that? Dependent variables depend on independent variables. If all of that gets confusing, just remember the graphical relationship in Figure 8.5.

The letters IV on the left side with an arrow pointing to the letters DV on the right

Write out your working question, as it exists now. As we said previously in the subsection, we assume you have an explanatory research question for learning this section.

Write out a diagram similar to Figure 8.5.
Put your independent variable on the left and the dependent variable on the right.
Can your variables vary?
Do they have different attributes or categories that vary from person to person?
How does the theory you identified in section 8.1 help you understand this causal relationship?

If the theory you've identified isn't much help to you or seems unrelated, it's a good indication that you need to read more literature about the theories related to your topic.

For some students, your working question may not be specific enough to list an independent or dependent variable clearly. You may have "risk factors" in place of an independent variable, for example. Or "effects" as a dependent variable. If that applies to your research question, get specific for a minute even if you have to revise this later. Think about which specific risk factors or effects you are interested in. Consider a few options for your independent and dependent variable and create diagrams similar to Figure 8.5.

Finally, you are likely to revisit your working question so you may have to come back to this exercise to clarify the causal relationship you want to investigate.

For a ten-cent word like "nomothetic," these causal relationships should look pretty basic to you. They should look like "x causes y." Indeed, you may be looking at your causal explanation and thinking, "wow, there are so many other things I'm missing in here." In fact, maybe my dependent variable sometimes causes changes in my independent variable! For example, a working question asking about poverty and education might ask how poverty makes it more difficult to graduate college or how high college debt impacts income inequality after graduation. Nomothetic causal relationships are slices of reality. They boil things down to two (or often more) key variables and assert a one-way causal explanation between them. This is by design, as they are trying to generalize across all people to all situations. The more complicated, circular, and often contradictory causal explanations are idiographic, which we will cover in the next section of this chapter.

Developing a hypothesis

A hypothesis is a statement describing a researcher’s expectation regarding what they anticipate finding. Hypotheses in quantitative research are a nomothetic causal relationship that the researcher expects to determine is true or false. A hypothesis is written to describe the expected relationship between the independent and dependent variables. In other words, write the answer to your working question using your variables. That's your hypothesis! Make sure you haven't introduced new variables into your hypothesis that are not in your research question. If you have, write out your hypothesis as in Figure 8.5.

A good hypothesis should be testable using social science research methods. That is, you can use a social science research project (like a survey or experiment) to test whether it is true or not. A good hypothesis is also specific about the relationship it explores. For example, a student project that hypothesizes, "families involved with child welfare agencies will benefit from Early Intervention programs," is not specific about what benefits it plans to investigate. For this student, I advised her to take a look at the empirical literature and theory about Early Intervention and see what outcomes are associated with these programs. This way, she could more clearly state the dependent variable in her hypothesis, perhaps looking at reunification, attachment, or developmental milestone achievement in children and families under child welfare supervision.

Your hypothesis should be an informed prediction based on a theory or model of the social world. For example, you may hypothesize that treating mental health clients with warmth and positive regard is likely to help them achieve their therapeutic goals. That hypothesis would be based on the humanistic practice models of Carl Rogers. Using previous theories to generate hypotheses is an example of deductive research. If Rogers’ theory of unconditional positive regard is accurate, a study comparing clinicians who used it versus those who did not would show more favorable treatment outcomes for clients receiving unconditional positive regard.

Let’s consider a couple of examples. In research on sexual harassment (Uggen & Blackstone, 2004), [92] one might hypothesize, based on feminist theories of sexual harassment, that more females than males will experience specific sexually harassing behaviors. What is the causal relationship being predicted here? Which is the independent and which is the dependent variable? In this case, researchers hypothesized that a person’s sex (independent variable) would predict their likelihood to experience sexual harassment (dependent variable).

Hypothesis describing a causal relationship between sex and sexual harassment

Sometimes researchers will hypothesize that a relationship will take a specific direction. As a result, an increase or decrease in one area might be said to cause an increase or decrease in another. For example, you might choose to study the relationship between age and support for legalization of marijuana. Perhaps you’ve taken a sociology class and, based on the theories you’ve read, you hypothesize that age is negatively related to support for marijuana legalization. [93] What have you just hypothesized?

You have hypothesized that as people get older, the likelihood of their supporting marijuana legalization decreases. Thus, as age (your independent variable) moves in one direction (up), support for marijuana legalization (your dependent variable) moves in another direction (down). So, a direct relationship (or positive correlation) involve two variables going in the same direction and an inverse relationship (or negative correlation) involve two variables going in opposite directions. If writing hypotheses feels tricky, it is sometimes helpful to draw them out and depict each of the two hypotheses we have just discussed.

As age increases, support for marijuana legalization decreases

It’s important to note that once a study starts, it is unethical to change your hypothesis to match the data you find. For example, what happens if you conduct a study to test the hypothesis from Figure 8.7 on support for marijuana legalization, but you find no relationship between age and support for legalization? It means that your hypothesis was incorrect, but that’s still valuable information. It would challenge what the existing literature says on your topic, demonstrating that more research needs to be done to figure out the factors that impact support for marijuana legalization. Don’t be embarrassed by negative results, and definitely don’t change your hypothesis to make it appear correct all along!

Criteria for establishing a nomothetic causal relationship

Let’s say you conduct your study and you find evidence that supports your hypothesis, as age increases, support for marijuana legalization decreases. Success! Causal explanation complete, right? Not quite.

You’ve only established one of the criteria for causality. The criteria for causality must include all of the following: covariation, plausibility, temporality, and nonspuriousness. In our example from Figure 8.7, we have established only one criteria—covariation. When variables covary , they vary together. Both age and support for marijuana legalization vary in our study. Our sample contains people of varying ages and varying levels of support for marijuana legalization. If, for example, we only included 16-year-olds in our study, age would be a constant , not a variable.

Just because there might be some correlation between two variables does not mean that a causal relationship between the two is really plausible. Plausibility means that in order to make the claim that one event, behavior, or belief causes another, the claim has to make sense. It makes sense that people from previous generations would have different attitudes towards marijuana than younger generations. People who grew up in the time of Reefer Madness or the hippies may hold different views than those raised in an era of legalized medicinal and recreational use of marijuana. Plausibility is of course helped by basing your causal explanation in existing theoretical and empirical findings.

Once we’ve established that there is a plausible relationship between the two variables, we also need to establish whether the cause occurred before the effect, the criterion of temporality . A person’s age is a quality that appears long before any opinions on drug policy, so temporally the cause comes before the effect. It wouldn’t make any sense to say that support for marijuana legalization makes a person’s age increase. Even if you could predict someone’s age based on their support for marijuana legalization, you couldn’t say someone’s age was caused by their support for legalization of marijuana.

Finally, scientists must establish nonspuriousness. A spurious relationship is one in which an association between two variables appears to be causal but can in fact be explained by some third variable. This third variable is often called a confound or confounding variable because it clouds and confuses the relationship between your independent and dependent variable, making it difficult to discern the true causal relationship is.

Continuing with our example, we could point to the fact that older adults are less likely to have used marijuana recreationally. Maybe it is actually recreational use of marijuana that leads people to be more open to legalization, not their age. In this case, our confounding variable would be recreational marijuana use. Perhaps the relationship between age and attitudes towards legalization is a spurious relationship that is accounted for by previous use. This is also referred to as the third variable problem , where a seemingly true causal relationship is actually caused by a third variable not in the hypothesis. In this example, the relationship between age and support for legalization could be more about having tried marijuana than the age of the person.

Quantitative researchers are sensitive to the effects of potentially spurious relationships. As a result, they will often measure these third variables in their study, so they can control for their effects in their statistical analysis. These are called control variables , and they refer to potentially confounding variables whose effects are controlled for mathematically in the data analysis process. Control variables can be a bit confusing, and we will discuss them more in Chapter 10, but think about it as an argument between you, the researcher, and a critic.

Researcher: “The older a person is, the less likely they are to support marijuana legalization.” Critic: “Actually, it’s more about whether a person has used marijuana before. That is what truly determines whether someone supports marijuana legalization.” Researcher: “Well, I measured previous marijuana use in my study and mathematically controlled for its effects in my analysis. Age explains most of the variation in attitudes towards marijuana legalization.”

Let’s consider a few additional, real-world examples of spuriousness. Did you know, for example, that high rates of ice cream sales have been shown to cause drowning? Of course, that’s not really true, but there is a positive relationship between the two. In this case, the third variable that causes both high ice cream sales and increased deaths by drowning is time of year, as the summer season sees increases in both (Babbie, 2010). [94]

Here’s another good one: it is true that as the salaries of Presbyterian ministers in Massachusetts rise, so too does the price of rum in Havana, Cuba. Well, duh, you might be saying to yourself. Everyone knows how much ministers in Massachusetts love their rum, right? Not so fast. Both salaries and rum prices have increased, true, but so has the price of just about everything else (Huff & Geis, 1993). [95]

Finally, research shows that the more firefighters present at a fire, the more damage is done at the scene. What this statement leaves out, of course, is that as the size of a fire increases so too does the amount of damage caused as does the number of firefighters called on to help (Frankfort-Nachmias & Leon-Guerrero, 2011). [96] In each of these examples, it is the presence of a confounding variable that explains the apparent relationship between the two original variables.

In sum, the following criteria must be met for a nomothetic causal relationship:

The two variables must vary together.
The relationship must be plausible.
The cause must precede the effect in time.
The relationship must be nonspurious (not due to a confounding variable).

The hypothetico-dedutive method

The primary way that researchers in the positivist paradigm use theories is sometimes called the hypothetico-deductive method (although this term is much more likely to be used by philosophers of science than by scientists themselves). Researchers choose an existing theory. Then, they make a prediction about some new phenomenon that should be observed if the theory is correct. Again, this prediction is called a hypothesis. The researchers then conduct an empirical study to test the hypothesis. Finally, they reevaluate the theory in light of the new results and revise it if necessary.

This process is usually conceptualized as a cycle because the researchers can then derive a new hypothesis from the revised theory, conduct a new empirical study to test the hypothesis, and so on. As Figure 8.8 shows, this approach meshes nicely with the process of conducting a research project—creating a more detailed model of “theoretically motivated” or “theory-driven” research. Together, they form a model of theoretically motivated research.

Keep in mind the hypothetico-deductive method is only one way of using social theory to inform social science research. It starts with describing one or more existing theories, deriving a hypothesis from one of those theories, testing your hypothesis in a new study, and finally reevaluating the theory based on the results data analyses. This format works well when there is an existing theory that addresses the research question—especially if the resulting hypothesis is surprising or conflicts with a hypothesis derived from a different theory.

But what if your research question is more interpretive? What if it is less about theory-testing and more about theory-building? This is what our next chapters will cover: the process of inductively deriving theory from people's stories and experiences. This process looks different than that depicted in Figure 8.8. It still starts with your research question and answering that question by conducting a research study. But instead of testing a hypothesis you created based on a theory, you will create a theory of your own that explain the data you collected. This format works well for qualitative research questions and for research questions that existing theories do not address.

In positivist and quantitative studies, the goal is often to understand the more general causes of some phenomenon rather than the idiosyncrasies of one particular instance, as in an idiographic causal relationship.
Nomothetic causal explanations focus on objectivity, prediction, and generalization.
Criteria for nomothetic causal relationships require the relationship be plausible and nonspurious; and that the cause must precede the effect in time.
In a nomothetic causal relationship, the independent variable causes changes in the dependent variable.
Hypotheses are statements, drawn from theory, which describe a researcher’s expectation about a relationship between two or more variables.
Write out your working question and hypothesis.
Defend your hypothesis in a short paragraph, using arguments based on the theory you identified in section 8.1.
Review the criteria for a nomothetic causal relationship. Critique your short paragraph about your hypothesis using these criteria.
Are there potentially confounding variables, issues with time order, or other problems you can identify in your reasoning?

Inductive & deductive (deductive focus)

9. Writing your research question Copyright © 2020 by Matthew DeCarlo is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Search Close search
Find a journal
Search calls for papers
Journal Suggester
Open access publishing

Logistical challenges of CAR T-cell therapy in non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a survey of healthcare professionals

Cite this article
https://doi.org/10.1080/14796694.2024.2393566

Plain Language Summary

Infographic, 1. introduction, 4. discussion, 5. conclusion, supplemental material.

Acknowledgements

Additional information

Full Article
Figures & data
Supplemental
Reprints & Permissions
View PDF PDF View EPUB EPUB

Aim: Characterize the logistical challenges faced by healthcare professionals (HCPs), patients and caregivers during the chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR T) treatment process for non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients.

Materials & methods: HCPs in the US and UK experienced with CAR T administration participated in interviews and completed a web-based survey.

Results: A total of 133 (80 US, 53 UK) HCPs participated. Two or more logistical challenges were identified by ≥60% of respondents across all stages of the CAR T process. Commonly reported challenges were lengthy waiting periods, administrative and payer-related barriers, limited healthcare capacity, caregiver support and (particularly in the US) patient out-of-pocket costs.

Conclusion: The CAR T treatment process presents numerous challenges, highlighting an unmet need for more convenient therapies.

Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR T) therapy is a new treatment for patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma that have not responded to other types of treatment. CAR T therapy uses a person's own immune cells (T cells), which are modified in a laboratory to attack cancer cells. While CAR T therapy has the potential to be effective, there are challenges associated with the treatment process. In this study, we surveyed 133 healthcare professionals (HCPs) in the United States and United Kingdom to understand their experiences with logistical challenges involved in navigating the CAR T process. More than 60% of participants identified two or more logistical challenges at every stage of the CAR T treatment process. The most commonly reported challenges included long waiting periods, limited room at hospitals, availability of caregivers to support patients and issues related to out-of-pocket costs, travel and lodging for patients who are treated at specialized centers. In the United States, challenges related to insurance coverage and out-of-pocket costs for patients were highlighted. More than half of HCPs reported that patients' cancer getting worse while waiting to receive CAR T was a reason why patients may not proceed to treatment. While operational improvements might address some challenges in the CAR T treatment process, these findings highlight the need for more convenient, readily available and easily administered therapies for patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

While chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR T) therapy represents an advancement in the treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, it is associated with a number of logistical challenges for patients, caregivers and healthcare professionals (HCPs).

We surveyed physicians, nurses and other HCPs involved in the various stages of CAR T therapy administration in the US and UK to characterize logistical challenges at each stage of the CAR T process.

Initial in-depth qualitative interviews (n = 25) of HCPs highlighted lack of caregiver support, time and administration, travel and accommodations and payer access as key themes.

In a subsequent quantitative survey of HCPs (n = 133), more than 60% of respondents identified at least two logistical challenges faced at every stage of CAR T administration.

Respondents most commonly reported challenges related to lengthy waiting periods, slow approval processes, limited capacity and availability of caregiver support.

More than half of respondents reported rapid disease progression as a common reason why eligible patients do not proceed to CAR T infusion.

The availability of caregiver support was selected as a logistical challenge present at every stage of the CAR T treatment process.

Respondents highlighted out-of-pocket costs, travel and lodging challenges throughout the CAR T process, although out-of-pocket costs and insurance-related challenges were more pronounced in the US than in the UK.

This study adds to the growing body of literature addressing the logistical challenges associated with CAR T therapy.

Infographic: A PDF version of this infographic is available as supplemental material.

Keywords: :

access to care
CAR T cell therapy
clinical decision-making
logistical challenges
non-Hodgkin lymphoma

Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR T) therapy has emerged as a promising treatment option for patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) that is relapsed or refractory (R/R) to other therapies [ Citation 1 ]. Four CAR T therapies are currently available for the treatment of various subtypes of R/R NHL [ Citation 1 ], including tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah ® ) for R/R large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) and R/R follicular lymphoma (FL) [ Citation 2 , Citation 3 ], axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta ® ) for R/R LBCL and R/R FL [ Citation 4 , Citation 5 ], lisocabtagene maraleucel (Breyanzi ® ) for R/R LBCL and R/R FL [ Citation 6 ], and brexucabtagene autoleucel (Tecartus ® ) for R/R mantle cell lymphoma [ Citation 7 ]. The approval of these CAR T therapies was based on demonstrated efficacy and safety across these different NHL indications in clinical trials [ Citation 1 , Citation 4 , Citation 5 , Citation 8 ].

CAR T therapies represent a significant advancement in R/R NHL treatment. However, the fact that all treated patients incur full upfront treatment costs (often exceeding $400,000 per patient), but a fraction experience long-lasting remission, raises concerns regarding the treatment value [ Citation 9–11 ]. In addition, the specialized management protocols require treatment to occur at certified centers, typically a large academic institution or cancer center [ Citation 12 ]. The patient advocacy group Blood & Marrow Transplant Information Network reports that CAR T for lymphoma is offered at fewer than 150 centers of excellence in the United States (US) [ Citation 13 ]. This further reduces the number of patients who may benefit from treatment, as patients without a treatment center near to them may need to travel and lodge near these centers. Patients and their caregivers also may incur out-of-pocket costs and work productivity loss due to these geographical constraints [ Citation 10 ].

The CAR T treatment process entails various stages: the referral process, determination of CAR T eligibility, review and approval for CAR T treatment, leukapheresis (often followed by a waiting period as the patient's cells are being manufactured), potential treatments and procedures preceding CAR T infusion (e.g., bridging therapy and conditioning regimens) and subsequent post-infusion monitoring (with decreasing frequency if a patient experiences remission). The complexities of this process have been well documented among healthcare stakeholders [ Citation 11 , Citation 14–16 ]. Still, efforts to characterize specific challenges from the perspective of HCPs have been limited. The aim of this study was to identify and quantify the logistical challenges experienced throughout the CAR T administration process as reported by HCPs in the US and United Kingdom (UK).

2.1. Study design & population

This was a cross-sectional, mixed-methods study comprising two phases: an initial set of qualitative interviews and a larger quantitative survey. The participants in both research components included HCPs in the US and UK experienced in the coordination and administration of CAR T for patients with R/R NHL. Eligibility criteria for all participants included a requisite of more than 2 years of clinical experience treating patients with R/R NHL and having provided care to a minimum of three patients eligible for CAR T therapy within the past 2 years. Physicians were deemed eligible if they had experience in the referral of patients to CAR T therapy or if they worked within a CAR T therapy team supporting any part of the treatment process. Nurses, social workers and physician assistants were required to have experience in at least one aspect of the CAR T therapy process. If one reported aspect was a direct CAR T treatment administration process, such as leukapheresis, bridging therapy, or lymphodepletion, experience in a second aspect was then required to ensure respondents were familiar with the patient pathway.

The participants included academic and community-based physicians (hematologist/oncologists), physician assistants, cell therapy coordinators/navigators, social workers, nurses and nurse practitioners working at CAR T therapy centers. Recruitment of study participants was undertaken via panel-based sampling and all participants were required to provide informed consent prior to participation.

Ethics approval for this study was obtained prior to data collection from the Western Institutional Review Board-Copernicus Group (study #1346939).

2.2. Survey development

2.2.1. qualitative interviews.

A semi-structured interview guide was created to aid the research team in carrying out the qualitative interviews. Specialists with expertise in CAR T therapy were consulted to inform development of the interview guide. Interviews were conducted via teleconference and audio recorded. At the onset of each interview, participants were briefed on the study and asked to provide verbal consent to participate. Immediately after the interview, brief notes were taken by the interviewer and uploaded into an Excel spreadsheet. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and uploaded into an open-source qualitative analysis software. Themes identified during the qualitative interviews informed the development of the quantitative survey to further investigate the logistical challenges associated with CAR T therapy administration and treatment process.

2.2.2. Quantitative survey

The quantitative survey was administered using a customized online survey platform and was divided into six main sections. The first five sections corresponded to the chronological stages in the CAR T therapy administration process: referral processes, eligibility determination, pre-infusion procedures (e.g., leukapheresis, bridging therapy, lymphodepletion), infusion and immediate post-infusion monitoring and long-term follow-up. The sixth and final section of the survey addressed other general logistical components of the CAR T therapy process.

Survey participants were asked to identify the logistical challenges encountered at each stage, to select reasons why a patient may not progress to the subsequent treatment stage (e.g., from leukapheresis to infusion), and to provide estimates for relevant measures (e.g., days between leukapheresis and infusion, duration of inpatient stay). After selecting a logistical challenge, respondents were required to indicate the degree of impact of the challenge in determining whether a patient would successfully undergo CAR T therapy using a scale of one to five, ranging from “Not at all impactful” to “Extremely impactful.” Respondents were also asked to assess how frequently the challenge affects patients, caregivers, or HCPs using a scale of one to five, ranging from “Never” to “Very often.” The full survey instrument is available in the Supplementary Material.

2.3. Statistical analysis

2.3.1. qualitative interviews.

The qualitative interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, de-identified and reviewed by interviewers for accuracy. Data were analyzed inductively using reflexive thematic analysis, in accordance with the guidelines described by Braun and Clarke [ Citation 17 ]. The researchers first familiarized themselves with the qualitative data by reading interview transcripts and making notes of key observations. An initial codebook was developed, and labels were applied to data excerpts that were germane to the research questions. Codes were iteratively refined and themes were generated, reviewed and finalized by the researchers.

2.3.2. Quantitative survey

The analysis of quantitative survey data was descriptive. Means, medians, interquartile ranges and maximum/minimum values were calculated for continuous variables and frequencies and percentages were calculated for categorical variables. For the questions on the impact of each logistical challenge on patients successfully receiving CAR T therapy, the mean and median impact (on a scale of one to five) were calculated.

3.1. Qualitative interviews

Twenty-five HCPs were interviewed (21 US, four UK). Twenty (80%) were physicians and five (20%) were other HCPs. Participants had been treating patients for a median of 18 years and had referred or prescribed CAR T therapy to a median of 12 patients in the past 24 months.

Analysis of interview data revealed a generally positive outlook on the efficacy and safety of CAR T therapy; however, several logistical challenges associated with the treatment process were discussed. Four key themes relating to logistical challenges in the CAR T treatment process were identified: time and administration issues, caregiver support, access to insurance and travel and accommodation challenges. Interview excerpts relating to each key theme are shown below, with further excerpts shown in Table 1 .

Table 1. Qualitative interview excerpts relating to CAR T therapy logistical challenges.

3.1.1. time & administration.

HCPs reported time and administration-related issues as major logistical challenges during the CAR T treatment process. HCPs identified that several elements of the CAR T process required waiting, which could hamper patient outcomes.

“I think it's more consuming this one [the referral to CAR T] because you have to put all the patient file together, have to put together a letter why the patient needs this therapy and what's the expected result, outcome of this therapy. But also, everything related to the patient from financial or insurance coverages.” – US HCP

“So patient is waiting, waiting, waiting. It is not like bone marrow transplant, you go for transplant and the chances of getting a transplant is north of like 90%. On the other hand, CAR T, it's hard to get. Even if I refer eight patients in a year, very probably at best, two or three will get the CAR T. So it is logistically getting a slot is very important.” – US HCP

3.1.2. Caregiver support

HCPs indicated that having a caregiver to support the patient throughout the CAR T process and post treatment was non-negotiable, and that without this support patients would not be able to proceed with treatment.

“I mean, if I really felt that I had a patient that really had no support whatsoever, I might be hesitant to refer them.” – UK HCP

“We always make sure that somebody has a caregiver before we proceed with CAR T…sometimes, some patients could hire a caregiver, but not everybody has the financial means to do so.” – US HCP

3.1.3. Access to insurance

HCPs reported access to insurance as a logistical challenge for patients seeking CAR T therapy. Some participants mentioned having patients who could not proceed due to financial barriers, while others noted that the process of applying for coverage can be tedious and time-consuming.

“I mean, definitely insurance plays a big role, and we did have a couple of patients who were […] to get it, but despite us trying and case management getting involved, it never worked out because they were… I don't remember what type of insurance they had, or I think one of them was uninsured.” – US HCP

“ The insurance approval goes through three steps. One is you first have to get the insurance approval to test the patient for CAR T, and once the testing is complete, then you have to wait for the insurance to approve the CAR T based on a review of the records of the patient. And then once approval is granted, then there is the third step, fairly unique to CAR T in that you have to have a single patient agreement negotiated with the insurance carrier for each and every patient independently. And that adds to delays. And from the time you see the patient to the time you can actually schedule for a CAR T, if the patient has private insurance, it can take up to six weeks or so to then schedule.” – US HCP

3.1.4. Travel & accommodations

Patient travel and accommodations were mentioned by many HCPs as logistical challenges in the CAR T therapy process. HCPs stated that they will not recommend a patient for CAR T therapy if the patient lives too far from the treatment center and would not be able to handle the travel. This would be decided together with the patient and their family.

“Yeah, I mean, some patients really don't want to do it because it's not readily available in their surrounding location, in our office, our clinic. They don't want to go the distance.” – US HCP

In summary, four distinct themes characterizing the logistical burden of the CAR T therapy process on several stakeholder groups (HCPs, patients, and caregivers) emerged from the qualitative interviews. These findings underscore the need for a readily available therapeutic option that can potentially alleviate these burdens. These themes and insights guided the creation of a survey which assessed the logistical challenges associated with CAR T therapy in greater detail using a quantitative approach.

3.2. Quantitative survey

3.2.1. respondent characteristics.

Of 222 respondents screened for eligibility, 133 were included in the final sample. Of these 133 HCPs, 80 (60%) were from the US and 53 (40%) were from the UK. Of the 80 US HCPs, 67 (84%) were physicians, 7 (9%) were physician assistants and 6 (8%) were nurse practitioners; additionally, 33 (41%) reported affiliation with an academic/teaching certified CAR T center, 22 (28%) with a community-based referring institution, 23 (29%) with a community-based certified CAR T center and 2 (3%) with an academic/teaching referring institution. Of the 53 UK HCPs, 43 (81%) were physicians, 7 (13.2%) were nurses, 2 (4%) were nurse practitioners and 1 (2%) was a cell therapy coordinator/navigator; additionally, 29 (55%) reported affiliation with an academic/teaching certified CAR T center, 8 (15%) with a community-based referring institution, 5 (9%) with a community-based certified CAR T center and 11 (21%) with an academic/teaching referring institution.

In both the US and UK, physicians had referred a median of 15 patients to CAR T therapy in the past 24 months. Nurses had worked with a median of 45 (US) and 30 (UK) patients during the CAR T therapy administration process in the past 24 months. Respondents were also highly experienced across the stages of CAR T therapy administration: 100% (n = 67) of US and 98% (n = 42) of UK physicians had experience with referrals and eligibility assessments; 75% (n = 50) of US and 51% (n = 22) of UK physicians had experience with infusion and post-infusion care; and 69% (n = 9) of US and 70% (n = 7) of UK nurses/coordinators had experience coordinating CAR T therapy logistics ( Figure 1 ).

Figure 1. Respondent experience with CAR T therapy, by country and profession*.

*Non-physicians included nurses, nurse practitioners, physician assistants and a cell therapy coordinator/navigator.

CAR T: Chimeric antigen receptor T cell; UK: United Kingdom; US: United States.

Figure 1. Respondent experience with CAR T therapy, by country and profession*.*Non-physicians included nurses, nurse practitioners, physician assistants and a cell therapy coordinator/navigator.CAR T: Chimeric antigen receptor T cell; UK: United Kingdom; US: United States.

3.2.2. Logistical challenges along the patient journey

Two or more logistical challenges were identified by ≥60% of the US and UK respondents across all stages of CAR T administration. Specifically, 86% (US) and 92% (UK) respondents reported ≥2 referral process challenges; 81% (US) and 78% (UK) respondents reported ≥2 CAR T eligibility determination challenges; 75% (US) and 60% (UK) respondents reported ≥2 challenges with procedures before infusion; 72% (US) and 63% (UK) respondents reported ≥2 CAR T infusion and monitoring challenges; and 82% (US) and 64% (UK) respondents reported ≥2 challenges during long-term follow-up processes ( Figure 2 ). Further findings within each stage are described in the subsequent sections.

Figure 2. Percentage of respondents selecting 2 or more logistical challenges at each stage of CAR T therapy administration.

3.2.3. Referral process

The most commonly reported challenges impacting the decision to refer patients for CAR T therapy were: manufacturing wait time (reported by 42% of US and 60% of UK respondents), limited capacity at a CAR T therapy center (reported by 40% of US and 58% of UK respondents), lengthy referral process (reported by 45% of US and 37% of UK respondents), travel distance (reported by 36% of US and 38% of UK respondents), slow/complex processes for insurance (US) or National Health Service (NHS; UK) approvals (reported by 36% of US and 31% of UK respondents) and availability of caregiver support (reported by 36% of US and 27% of UK respondents). Additionally, 40% of US respondents reported absence of insurance as impacting the decision to refer a patient for CAR T therapy ( Table 2 ). In terms of impact, in the US, most referral process challenges had a median impact rating of four (very impactful), with the exception of coordinating and providing bridging therapy while waiting for CAR T therapy (median impact rating: five [extremely impactful]) and lack of clarity on the eligibility criteria and/or referral process (median impact rating: three [somewhat impactful]). In the UK, all challenges had a median impact rating of three (somewhat impactful), except for the availability of caregiver support, which had a median impact rating of four (very impactful) ( Table 2 ).

Table 2. Challenges impacting the CAR T therapy patient referral process Table Footnote a .

Respondents in the US estimated that a mean of 25% of patients who are deemed eligible for CAR T therapy are not referred due to absence of insurance to cover treatment. Respondents in both the US and UK also reported that more than 20% of their potentially eligible patients were not referred due to lack of clarity over eligibility criteria and/or referral processes (US mean, 25%; UK mean, 23%) and availability of caregiver support (US mean, 24%; UK mean, 20%).

3.2.4. Eligibility determination

The most commonly reported challenges experienced while determining patient eligibility were: complex processes for applying for insurance approvals (US) or obtaining NHS approval (UK) (reported by 50% of US respondents and 41% of UK respondents), complex work-ups to determine clinical eligibility (reported by 44% of US and 55% of UK respondents), need for transportation/lodging (reported by 41% of US and 35% of UK respondents) and availability of caregiver support (reported by 34% of US and 41% of UK respondents). While 57% of UK respondents indicated that time required for communication between the referring center and CAR T therapy center was a challenge with determining eligibility, only 27% of US respondents selected this challenge ( Table 3 ). In terms of impact, most eligibility determination challenges selected by HCPs had a median impact rating of four (very impactful) in the US. Exceptions were the time required for communication between a referral center and CAR T treatment center, patient loss of productivity/source of income and lack of clarity on eligibility criteria, all of which had a median impact rating of three (somewhat impactful). In the UK, slow or complex processes for obtaining NHS approval had a median impact rating of four (very impactful) while all other challenges had a median impact rating of three (somewhat impactful) ( Table 3 ). In terms of frequency, most selected challenges during the eligibility determination process had a median frequency rating of four (often) in the US. Exceptions were the time required for communication between a referral center and CAR T treatment center, patient loss of productivity/source of income and lack of clarity on eligibility criteria, all of which had a median frequency rating of three (sometimes). In the UK, most challenges had a median frequency rating of three (sometimes), with the exception of patient loss of productivity/source of income, which had a median frequency rating of two (rarely) ( Table 3 ).

Table 3. Challenges associated with the CAR T therapy eligibility determination process.

3.2.5. treatments & procedures before infusion.

After a patient has been deemed officially eligible for CAR T therapy, logistical challenges may emerge during the procedures (i.e., leukapheresis, bridging therapy, lymphodepletion) leading up to infusion. The most common logistical challenges faced at this stage were: waiting time for healthcare capacity (reported by 57% of US and 71% of UK respondents), communication between the referral center and CAR T therapy center to coordinate treatments (reported by 25% of US and 49% of UK respondents), availability of funding/insurance to cover pre-infusion procedures (reported by 49% of US and 24% of UK respondents) and availability of caregiver support (reported by 34% of US and 29% of UK respondents) ( Table 4 ). In terms of impact, most challenges selected by HCPs had a median impact rating of four (very impactful) in the US. Exceptions were transportation/lodging/meals for patient travel and communications between the referring center and CAR T treatment center, both of which had a median impact rating of three (somewhat impactful). In the UK, HCPs reported that transportation/lodging/meals for patient travel, availability of funding for pre-infusion procedures and patient out-of-pocket costs all had median impact ratings of four (very impactful). Waiting time for healthcare capacity to complete pre-infusion procedures, communication between referral center and CAR T center to coordinate pre-infusion procedures, and availability of caregiver support had median frequency ratings of three (somewhat impactful) ( Table 4 ). In terms of frequency, HCPs in both the US and UK reported that patient out-of-pocket costs or patient loss of productivity/source of income had median frequency ratings of four (often) in the procedures before infusion stage. All other challenges selected by HCPs in both regions had median impact ratings of three (sometimes) ( Table 4 ).

Table 4. Challenges associated with treatments and procedures before CAR T infusion.

3.2.6. infusion & immediate post-infusion monitoring.

The most commonly reported logistical challenges experienced in the infusion and immediate post-infusion monitoring stage were: availability of caregiver support (reported by 44% of US and 53% of UK respondents), waiting time for healthcare capacity (e.g., an open inpatient bed) (reported by 40% of US and 50% of UK respondents), transportation, lodging and meals for patients/caregivers (reported by 37% of US and 32% of UK respondents), and patient out-of-pocket costs (reported by 47% of US and 5% of UK respondents) ( Table 5 ). In terms of impact, in the US, patient out-of-pocket costs, requirements for treatment centers to have medicines on-site for managing adverse events and availability of caregiver support had median impact ratings of four (very impactful). Wait time for healthcare capacity, transportation, lodging and meals for patients/caregivers and patient/caregiver productivity or income loss had median impact ratings of three (somewhat impactful). In the UK, all challenges selected by HCPs had median impact ratings of three (somewhat impactful) ( Table 5 ). In terms of frequency, in both the US and UK, most challenges reported during the infusion and immediate post-infusion monitoring stage had median frequency ratings of three (sometimes). Requirements for treatment centers to have medicines on-site for managing adverse events had a median frequency rating of four (often) among US HCPs. Some differences also emerged between regions: patient out-of-pocket costs for treatment had a median frequency rating of four (often) in the US and two (rarely) in the UK ( Table 5 ).

Table 5. Challenges associated with CAR T infusion and post-infusion monitoring procedures.

3.2.7. long-term follow-up care.

The most common logistical challenges reported during the long-term follow-up stage of the CAR T treatment process were: the availability of caregiver/social support (reported by 55% of US and 72% of UK respondents), transportation/lodging/meals for traveling for follow-up appointments (reported by 39% of US and 38% of UK respondents), availability of funding/insurance for long-term follow-up care (reported by 52% of US and 21% of UK respondents) and patient/caregiver work productivity/income loss (reported by 31% of US and 38% of UK respondents) ( Table 6 ). In terms of impact, in the UK, all challenges reported by HCPs in the long-term follow-up stage had median impact ratings of three (somewhat impactful). In the US, the following challenges had median impact ratings of four (often): patient out-of-pocket costs for long-term follow-up care, availability of funding/insurance for long-term follow-up care and transportation/lodging/meals for traveling for follow-up appointments; the availability of caregiver support and patient or caregiver productivity/income loss both had median impact ratings of three (somewhat impactful) ( Table 6 ). In terms of frequency, the availability of funding/insurance for long-term follow-up care had a median frequency rating of four (often) among US respondents; all other challenges selected by HCPs in both the US and UK had a median frequency rating of three (sometimes) ( Table 6 ).

Table 6. Challenges associated with long-term follow-up care after CAR T therapy.

3.2.8. general car t treatment logistics.

HCPs in both the US and UK estimated that the mean time between leukapheresis and infusion was 21 days (US mean, 21 days; UK mean, 22 days). They also estimated that patients spend 5 days (US mean, 5 days; UK mean, 6 days) in nearby accommodations prior to infusion, and 12 days during and immediately after infusion (US mean, 13 days; UK mean, 12 days). HCPs estimated that a mean of 21% of patients (US mean, 22%; UK mean, 20%) require intensive care admission during infusion and a mean of 24% (US mean, 25%; UK mean, 24%) were estimated to require re-admission to the hospital during the post-infusion monitoring period ( Table 7 ).

Table 7. CAR T therapy logistical aspects and caregiver considerations.

Across the US and UK, the mean estimated percentage of patients having an informal/unpaid caregiver (e.g., family member or friend) to support them during treatment was 67%. When asked to consider patients without an informal/unpaid caregiver, HCPs estimated that about one-quarter (US mean, 22%; UK mean, 31%) remained without any caregiver support while others secured a hired caregiver funded by insurance, the NHS, the CAR T manufacturer, or paid out-of-pocket. Respondents also reported that the CAR T therapy process impacts caregivers by disrupting daily activities, negatively impacting their quality of life/mental health and causing lost productivity and income ( Table 7 ).

3.2.9. Estimated proportion of patients impacted by CAR T challenges

3.2.9.1. patient drop-off between car t referral & leukapheresis.

On average, HCPs estimated that 32% of patients in the US and 27% of patients in the UK who are initially referred for CAR T therapy do not proceed to leukapheresis. Reasons for not proceeding to leukapheresis included rapid disease progression (reported by 58% of US and 74% of UK respondents), a work-up showing clinical ineligibility (reported by 39% of US and 67% of UK respondents) and insurance (US) or NHS (UK) applications not being approved (reported by 34% of US and 31% of UK respondents) ( Table 8 ).

Table 8. Percentage of respondents reporting reasons that eligible CAR T therapy patients do not proceed to leukapheresis or infusion.

3.2.9.2. patient drop-off between leukapheresis & infusion.

On average, an estimated 19% of US patients and 20% of UK patients who undergo leukapheresis do not proceed to infusion. Reasons for not proceeding to infusion included rapid disease progression (reported by 57% of US and 68% of UK respondents), CAR T manufacturing failure (reported by 34% of US and 48% of UK respondents) and long wait time for manufacturing (reported by 14% of US and 29% of UK respondents) ( Table 8 ).

In summary, based on the estimated proportion of patients not proceeding to leukapheresis or infusion, an estimated 45% of patients referred to CAR T in the US and 42% in the UK do not make it to CAR T infusion due to several logistical challenges including rapid disease progression, manufacturing failure, wait time for manufacturing and access to insurance.

CAR T therapy has the potential to provide durable response and survival benefits for patients with R/R NHL. However, the treatment administration process is lengthy and resource-intensive, presenting numerous logistical challenges. In this mixed-methods study, we surveyed HCPs in the US and UK to characterize the challenges that arise during the CAR T therapy process – from initial referral to post-infusion care. The most commonly reported barriers centered around prolonged waiting periods (e.g., manufacturing time, awaiting healthcare capacity, slow approvals), travel and accommodations for patients, the availability of caregiver support and – particularly in the US – out-of-pocket costs. Several challenges were reported to be very impactful on patients, caregivers, or HCPs during the CAR T treatment process.

Little previous research has quantified the logistical barriers experienced by patients, caregivers and HCPs during the administration of CAR T therapy. Still, our findings are largely consistent with those of previous studies and suggest that lengthy and complex processes may limit the benefits of CAR T therapy. Gajra et al. (2020) surveyed US community hematologists/oncologists, finding that more than half of respondents felt that the logistics of CAR T therapy administration and follow-up were cumbersome. Further, 27% identified slow approval processes as a challenge [ Citation 16 ]. Similarly, 36% of US and 31% of UK participants in this study felt that slow approval processes would impact their decision to refer a patient for CAR T therapy. These treatment delays may be compounded by long manufacturing times – 42% of US and 60% of UK respondents in our study reported that wait time for manufacturing would impact their decision to refer a patient.

After a patient has been successfully referred and deemed eligible, further delays may arise that diminish the potential benefits of CAR T therapy. Respondents in this study estimated that manufacturing time (i.e., time between leukapheresis and infusion) was 21 days and more than half of respondents felt that rapid disease progression while awaiting treatment was a reason why patients do not proceed with treatment. Nearly two-thirds of respondents in Gajra et al. had also encountered the challenge of patients' disease becoming worse before treatment could be administered [ Citation 16 ]. Another survey evaluating physician preferences for attributes of different CAR T therapies found that physicians preferred to avoid long wait times and were willing to accept increases in adverse event risks to gain reductions in time spent waiting for an infusion [ Citation 18 ]. Further, the required inpatient stay associated with CAR T therapy administration may pose a challenge; we found that waiting time for healthcare capacity was a frequently noted logistical challenge during CAR T therapy pre-infusion and infusion procedures.

Cost and reimbursement challenges have also been at the center of the conversation, as the high cost of CAR T therapy raises affordability concerns for patients, payers and healthcare systems globally. While drug acquisition is the largest component of the cost, other elements of care such as facility and procedure costs can increase healthcare expenditures [ Citation 10 ]. Indeed, absence of insurance coverage to cover treatment costs was noted by 40% of US respondents in our study as “very impactful” in the decision to refer a patient and 49% selected availability of funds or insurance to cover pre-infusion procedures such as leukapheresis and bridging therapy as a challenge. The high costs of treatment may be compounded by travel and lodging expenses as well as loss of work productivity or income. Total annual national costs associated with traveling for CAR T therapy have been estimated to be between $14.7 and $21.1 million [ Citation 12 ]. Respondents in our study also frequently noted cost, travel and lodging challenges throughout the treatment process, although cost-related barriers were more often experienced and noted as impactful by US than UK participants.

Presence of a caregiver during CAR T therapy is essential, although caregivers of patients undergoing treatment report numerous psychological and logistical burdens associated with CAR T therapy [ Citation 19 ]. This topic also emerged as a key theme from our initial qualitative interviews and survey respondents in both the US and UK frequently selected the availability of caregiver support as a logistical challenge throughout the CAR T therapy process. They also reported that caregivers were affected by disruptions to daily activities, loss of work productivity/income and diminished quality of life or mental health. The unique challenges presented by CAR T therapy necessitate further research into the caregiver experience to inform more holistic and patient-centered service models.

Some of the logistical challenges associated with CAR T therapy may be alleviated through enhancing patient services, streamlining operational processes, adopting readily available treatment alternatives and considering outpatient administrations [ Citation 10 , Citation 20 , Citation 21 ]. Additionally, bridging therapies can help control the disease during the manufacturing period [ Citation 22 , Citation 23 ]. More convenient and readily available treatment alternatives such as T-cell–directed bispecific antibodies (eg, epcoritamab, glofitamab) may also address some of the logistical challenges associated with CAR T therapy.

Our findings should be interpreted considering some limitations. The panel-based sampling nature of recruitment limits the generalizability of these results to the broader HCP populations in the US and UK. We also did not directly solicit the perspectives of patients, caregivers, payers, or other stakeholders and their views on the logistical challenges of CAR T therapy may differ from that of HCPs. Still, we aimed to gain broad healthcare perspectives by surveying physicians, nurses, physician assistants, coordinators and other HCPs in the US and UK. In addition, the potential for recall bias cannot be ruled out as responses were based on HCP recollection of their experiences. Further, although four CAR T products are currently available for the treatment of R/R NHL, this study did not examine differences in the logistical challenges across different CAR T products. Overall, our study adds to the small but growing body of literature addressing the logistical challenges of implementing CAR T therapy in real-world clinical practice.

These study findings characterize the logistical burdens and challenges associated with the stages of the CAR T therapy process from the perspective of HCPs in the US and UK. Reported challenges include lengthy waiting periods, complex administrative hurdles, limited treatment center capacity, travel and lodging for patients, the availability of caregiver support and – particularly in the US – patient out-of-pocket costs. While operational improvements might address some of the logistical barriers, these findings highlight the need for more convenient, readily available and easily administered therapies for patients with NHL.

Author contributions

A Sureda: Takeda, BMS, Novartis, Janssen, MSD, Amgen, GSK, Sanofi, Kite, Mundipharma: Consultancy; Takeda, BMS, Novartis, Janssen, MSD, Amgen, GSK, Sanofi, Kite: Honoraria; Takeda, BMS, Novartis, Janssen, Amgen, Bluebird, Sanofi, Kite: Membership on an Entity's Board of Directors or Advisory Committees; Takeda, BMS, Roche: Travel Expenses; Takeda: Research Funding; Takeda, BMS, Novartis, Janssen, MSD, Amgen, GSK, Sanofi, Kite: Speakers Bureau. K Johnston: Broadstreet HEOR and Memorial University School of Pharmacy, Newfoundland, Canada: Current Employment. S El Adam, E Griffin and J Baker: Broadstreet HEOR: Current Employment. S Yang: Genmab: Former Employment. A Wang: AbbVie: Current Employment. A Chhibber and Alex Mutebi: Genmab: stockholder and current employment.

Author roles

Study design: All authors. Study investigator: A Sureda, S El Adam, K Johnston, E Griffin. Enrolled subjects: S El Adam, K Johnston, E Griffin, J Baker. Collection and assembly of data: S El Adam, K Johnston, E Griffin, J Baker. Data analysis: S El Adam, K Johnston, E Griffin, J Baker. Data interpretation: All authors. Manuscript preparation: All authors. Manuscript review and revisions: All authors. Final approval of manuscript: All authors.

Ethical conduct of research

Ethics approval for this study was obtained prior to data collection from the Western Institutional Review Board-Copernicus Group (study #1346939). All participants in both the interview and survey components of the study were required to provide written informed consent prior to participation. Participants acknowledged that the results of the study may be published, interview transcripts could be used for research/publications and that all identifying information would be kept confidential.

Supplementary Material

Supplementary infographic, social media summary, acknowledgments.

Writing and editorial support were provided by Peloton Advantage, LLC, an OPEN Health company and funded by Genmab. Genmab A/S and AbbVie funded this study and participated in the study design, research, analysis, data collection, interpretation of data, reviewing and approval of this article. All authors had access to relevant data and participated in the drafting, review and approval of this article. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship.

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed at https://doi.org/10.1080/14796694.2024.2393566

Data availability statement

De-identified individual participant data collected during the study will not be available upon request for further analyses by external independent researchers.

St-Pierre F, Gordon LI. CAR T-cell therapy for relapsed/refractory non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: a comprehensive review. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol. 2022;20(5):309–318. PubMed Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Schuster SJ, Bishop MR, Tam CS, et al. Tisagenlecleucel in adult relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2019; 380 ( 1 ):45–56. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1804980 PubMed Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Fowler NH, Dickinson M, Dreyling M, et al. Tisagenlecleucel in adult relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma: the Phase II ELARA trial. Nat Med. 2022; 28 ( 2 ):325–332. doi:10.1038/s41591-021-01622-0 PubMed Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Neelapu SS, Locke FL, Bartlett NL, et al. Axicabtagene ciloleucel CAR T-cell therapy in refractory large B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2017; 377 ( 26 ):2531–2544. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1707447 PubMed Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Jacobson CA, Chavez JC, Sehgal AR, et al. Axicabtagene ciloleucel in relapsed or refractory indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (ZUMA-5): a single-arm, multicentre, Phase II trial. Lancet Oncol. 2022; 23 ( 1 ):91–103. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00591-X PubMed Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Abramson JS, Palomba ML, Gordon LI, et al. Lisocabtagene maraleucel for patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphomas (TRANSCEND NHL 001): a multicentre seamless design study. Lancet. 2020; 396 ( 10254 ):839–852. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31366-0 PubMed Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Wang M, Munoz J, Goy A, et al. KTE-X19 CAR T-cell therapy in relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2020; 382 ( 14 ):1331–1342. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1914347 PubMed Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Al-Mansour M, Al-Foheidi M, Ibrahim E. Efficacy and safety of second-generation CAR T-cell therapy in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a meta-analysis. Mol Clin Oncol. 2020; 13 ( 4 ):33. doi:10.3892/mco.2020.2103 PubMed Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Cliff ERS, Kelkar AH, Russler-Germain DA, et al. High cost of chimeric antigen receptor t-cells: challenges and solutions. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2023; 43 :e397912. doi:10.1200/EDBK_397912 PubMed Google Scholar
Borgert R. Improving outcomes and mitigating costs associated with CAR T-cell therapy. Am J Manag Care. 2021; 27 ( Suppl. 13 ):S253–S261. doi:10.37765/ajmc.2021.88737 PubMed Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Narkhede M, Mehta A, Ansell SM, et al. CAR T-cell therapy in mature lymphoid malignancies: clinical opportunities and challenges. Annal Translat Med. 2021; 9 ( 12 ):1036. doi:10.21037/atm-20-5546 PubMed Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Snyder S, Albertson T, Garcia J, et al. Travel-related economic burden of chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy administration by site of care. Adv Ther. 2021; 38 ( 8 ):4541–4555. doi:10.1007/s12325-021-01839-y PubMed Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Directory of CAR T-cell therapy centers: Blood & Marrow Transplant Information Network. 2023 [ 6 November 2023]. Available from: https://www.bmtinfonet.org/car-t-cell-therapy-center-directory Accessed August 9, 2024. Google Scholar
Ellis K, Grindrod K, Tully S, et al. Understanding the feasibility of implementing CAR T-cell therapies from a Canadian perspective. Healthcare Policy. 2021; 16 ( 3 ):89–105. doi:10.12927/hcpol.2021.26430 PubMed Google Scholar
Ulrich A, Massó B, Sathi C, et al. Logistical and financial challenges in the adoption of CAR-T therapies: a narrative review [abstract HPR63]. Value Health. 2022; 25 ( 7 ):S477–S478. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2022.04.989 Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Gajra A, Jeune-Smith Y, Kish J, et al. Perceptions of community hematologists/oncologists on barriers to chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy for the treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Immunotherapy. 2020; 12 ( 10 ):725–732. doi:10.2217/imt-2020-0118 PubMed Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006; 3 ( 2 ):77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Google Scholar
Boeri M, Purdum AG, Sutphin J, et al. CAR T-cell therapy in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: physician preferences trading off benefits, risks and time to infusion. Future Oncol. 2021; 17 ( 34 ):4697–4709. doi:10.2217/fon-2021-0160 PubMed Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Barata A, Hoogland AI, Hyland KA, et al. Quality of life in caregivers of patients receiving chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy. Psychooncology. 2021; 30 ( 8 ):1294–1301. doi:10.1002/pon.5674 PubMed Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Lyman GH, Nguyen A, Snyder S, et al. Economic evaluation of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy by site of care among patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma. JAMA Network Open. 2020; 3 ( 4 ):e202072. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.2072 PubMed Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Mikhael J, Fowler J, Shah N. Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies: barriers and solutions to access. JCO Oncol Pract. 2022; 18 ( 12 ):800–807. doi:10.1200/OP.22.00315 PubMed Google Scholar
Saifi O, Lester SC, Breen WG, et al. Incorporating radiation with anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy for relapsed/refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a multicenter consensus approach. Am J Hematol. 2024; 99 ( 1 ):124–134. doi:10.1002/ajh.27155 PubMed Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Roddie C, Neill L, Osborne W, et al. Effective bridging therapy can improve CD19 CAR-T outcomes while maintaining safety in patients with large B-cell lymphoma. Blood Adv. 2023; 7 ( 12 ):2872–2883. doi:10.1182/bloodadvances.2022009019 PubMed Web of Science ® Google Scholar
Back to Top

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations. Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.

People also read
Recommended articles

To cite this article:

Download citation, your download is now in progress and you may close this window.

Choose new content alerts to be informed about new research of interest to you
Easy remote access to your institution's subscriptions on any device, from any location
Save your searches and schedule alerts to send you new results
Export your search results into a .csv file to support your research

Login or register to access this feature

IMAGES

Descriptive Research Design Methodology
Quantitative Descriptive Research Design Example
PPT
Quantitative Research Design, Descriptive, Correlational, Quasi experiment, 5Minutes Info. Ch Ep# 46
Descriptive Research Design
Research Design: Descriptive Research

VIDEO

Quantitative Descriptive
Descriptive Research Design: Key Concepts and Features
Quantitative Techniques: Descriptive Statistics
Why to use Descriptive Research? #descriptiveresearch
Descriptive Research, Its Types, Methods and Examples
Research Design

COMMENTS

Descriptive Research
Descriptive research methods. Descriptive research is usually defined as a type of quantitative research, though qualitative research can also be used for descriptive purposes. The research design should be carefully developed to ensure that the results are valid and reliable.. Surveys. Survey research allows you to gather large volumes of data that can be analyzed for frequencies, averages ...
(PDF) Quantitative Research Designs
The designs. in this chapter are survey design, descriptive design, correlational design, ex-. perimental design, and causal-comparative design. As we address each research. design, we will learn ...
(PDF) Descriptive Research Designs
Descriptive design involves observing and scientifically describing individual behavior in relation to situational variables (Sharma, 2019). Correlational research, on the other hand, is a non ...
Descriptive Research Design
Quantitative: Descriptive research design is quantitative in nature, which means that it involves collecting numerical data that can be analyzed using statistical techniques. This helps to provide a more precise and accurate description of the population or phenomenon. ... About the author. Muhammad Hassan. Researcher, Academic Writer, Web ...
Understanding Descriptive Research Designs and Methods
The study is quantitative in nature and adopted the descriptive research design. Non-probability sampling was used, and a total of 314 respondents completed the questionnaire.
Study designs: Part 2
INTRODUCTION. In our previous article in this series, [1] we introduced the concept of "study designs"- as "the set of methods and procedures used to collect and analyze data on variables specified in a particular research question.". Study designs are primarily of two types - observational and interventional, with the former being ...
Descriptive Research Design
Descriptive research methods. Descriptive research is usually defined as a type of quantitative research, though qualitative research can also be used for descriptive purposes. The research design should be carefully developed to ensure that the results are valid and reliable.. Surveys. Survey research allows you to gather large volumes of data that can be analysed for frequencies, averages ...
Understanding Descriptive Research Designs and Methods
Author Affiliation: Senior Nurse Scientist and Clinical Nurse Specialist, Office of Nursing Research & Innovation, Nursing Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Ohio. The author reports no conflicts of interest. Correspondence: Sandra L. Siedlecki, PhD, RN, APRN-CNS, 3271 Stillwater Dr, Medina, OH 44256 ([email protected]).
Descriptive Research: Design, Methods, Examples, and FAQs
As the name suggests, descriptive research describes the characteristics of the group, situation, or phenomenon being studied without manipulating variables or testing hypotheses. This can be reported using surveys, observational studies, and case studies. You can use both quantitative and qualitative methods to compile the data.
12 Quantitative Descriptive and Correlational Research
AbstractThis chapter presents research designs for descriptive and correlational quantitative research. Descriptive research designs are used to address th. Skip to Main Content. ... In addition, we encourage you to explore the methodological texts we have listed in Box 12.2 for more information about descriptive research design.
Understanding Descriptive Research Designs and Methods
Understanding Descriptive Research Designs and Methods. ... 2020 Jan/Feb;34(1):8-12. doi: 10.1097/NUR.0000000000000493. Author Sandra L Siedlecki 1 Affiliation 1 Author Affiliation: Senior Nurse Scientist and Clinical Nurse Specialist, Office of Nursing Research ... Research Design* ...
Research Design: Descriptive Research
Changes in Body Image Experienced by Adolescents With Cancer. Experiences of Pregnant African American Adolescents: Meanings, Perception, Appraisal, and Coping. Book Reviews : Sweeney, M.A. and Olivieri, P. An Introduction to Nursing Research: Research, Measurement and Computers in Nursing.
Descriptive Research Designs: Types, Examples & Methods
Some characteristics of descriptive research are: Quantitativeness. Descriptive research uses a quantitative research method by collecting quantifiable information to be used for statistical analysis of the population sample. This is very common when dealing with research in the physical sciences. Qualitativeness.
Demystifying the research process: understanding a descriptive ...
A research design is the overall plan for answering research questions and hypotheses. The design spells out strategies the researcher adopts to gather accurate, objective, and interpretable information (Polit & Beck, 2007). Tourigny et al. (2011) used a non-experimental, quantitative research design known as a descriptive, comparative design.
Descriptive Research
1. Purpose. The primary purpose of descriptive research is to describe the characteristics, behaviors, and attributes of a particular population or phenomenon. 2. Participants and Sampling. Descriptive research studies a particular population or sample that is representative of the larger population being studied.
Descriptive research: What it is and how to use it
Descriptive research design. Descriptive research design uses a range of both qualitative research and quantitative data (although quantitative research is the primary research method) to gather information to make accurate predictions about a particular problem or hypothesis. As a survey method, descriptive research designs will help ...
What is Descriptive Research? Definition, Methods, Types and Examples
Descriptive research is a methodological approach that seeks to depict the characteristics of a phenomenon or subject under investigation. In scientific inquiry, it serves as a foundational tool for researchers aiming to observe, record, and analyze the intricate details of a particular topic. This method provides a rich and detailed account ...
Quantitative Research
Quantitative research methods are concerned with the planning, design, and implementation of strategies to collect and analyze data. Descartes, the seventeenth-century philosopher, suggested that how the results are achieved is often more important than the results themselves, as the journey taken along the research path is a journey of discovery. . High-quality quantitative research is ...
Descriptive Research Design
Abstract. This chapter presents two of the most prominent approaches to the design of descriptive research in music education. Simply creating depictions of music teaching and learning experiences that are organized and illustrative of the variation that can exist in any given setting is a worthwhile scientific endeavor in and of itself.
Descriptive Research Design and Its Myriad Uses
As such, descriptive design is great for¹: Case reports and surveys: Descriptive research is a valuable tool for in-depth examination of uncommon diseases and other unique occurrences. In the context of surveys, it can help researchers meticulously analyse extensive datasets. A survey conducted to measure the changes in the levels of customer ...
Demystifying the research process: understanding a descriptive
Descriptive-comparative research is a quantitative research design that aims to describe the differences between groups in a population without manipulating the independent variable (Mary Ann ...
Types of Quantitative Research Methods and Designs
However, the quantitative descriptive research design cannot establish causal relationships between variables. ... The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author's and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Grand Canyon University. Any sources cited were accurate as of the publish date.
PDF CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 Design of the Study
2007). First, the research must be in a natur. l setting. Second is the key instrument of the research. The research becomes the key instrument of the rese. rch, in which the researcher collects the data directly. Third, the research is written in descriptive form. and the data is in the form of words rather than number. Fourth.
9. Writing your research question
Chapter Outline. Empirical vs. ethical questions (4 minute read); Characteristics of a good research question (4 minute read); Quantitative research questions (7 minute read); Qualitative research questions (3 minute read); Evaluating and updating your research questions (4 minute read); Content warning: examples in this chapter include references to sexual violence, sexism, substance use ...
Full article: Logistical challenges of CAR T-cell therapy in non
2.1. Study design & population. This was a cross-sectional, mixed-methods study comprising two phases: an initial set of qualitative interviews and a larger quantitative survey. The participants in both research components included HCPs in the US and UK experienced in the coordination and administration of CAR T for patients with R/R NHL.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Descriptive Research | Definition, Types, Methods & Examples

Table of contents

Descriptive research question examples

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Observations

Case studies

Cite this Scribbr article

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Descriptive Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Descriptive Research Design

Types of Descriptive Research Design

Cross-sectional Study

Longitudinal Study

Survey Research

Observational Research

Correlational Research

Data Analysis Methods

Descriptive Statistics

Cross-tabulation

Content Analysis

Qualitative Coding

Visualization

Comparative Analysis

Applications of Descriptive Research Design

Descriptive Research Design Examples

How to Conduct Descriptive Research Design

When to Use Descriptive Research Design

Purpose of Descriptive Research Design

Characteristics of Descriptive Research Design

Advantages of Descriptive Research Design

Limitation of Descriptive Research Design

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

You may also like

Phenomenology – Methods, Examples and Guide

Mixed Methods Research – Types & Analysis

Questionnaire – Definition, Types, and Examples

Survey Research – Types, Methods, Examples

Explanatory Research – Types, Methods, Guide

Qualitative Research Methods

Study designs: Part 2 – Descriptive studies

Priya Ranganathan

INTRODUCTION

WHAT IS A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY?

TYPES OF DESCRIPTIVE STUDIES

Case reports and case series

Cross-sectional studies

Ecological studies

DISADVANTAGES

Financial support and sponsorship

Have a language expert improve your writing

Descriptive Research Design | Definition, Methods & Examples

Table of contents

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Observations

Case studies

Cite this Scribbr article

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Secondary Logo

Understanding Descriptive Research Designs and Methods

Full Text Access for Subscribers:

Institutional Users

Readers Of this Article Also Read

Analyze your descriptive research

Quantitativeness

Qualitativeness

Uncontrolled variables

Cross-sectional studies

Carried out in a natural environment

Basis for further research

Observation

Case studies

Case reports and case series

Descriptive survey

Correlative survey

Comparative studies

Determining consumer perception and behavior