delimitation of a study in research

Community Blog

Keep up-to-date on postgraduate related issues with our quick reads written by students, postdocs, professors and industry leaders.

Scope and Delimitations – Explained & Example

• By DiscoverPhDs
• October 2, 2020

What Is Scope and Delimitation in Research?

The scope and delimitations of a thesis, dissertation or research paper define the topic and boundaries of the research problem to be investigated.

The scope details how in-depth your study is to explore the research question and the parameters in which it will operate in relation to the population and timeframe.

The delimitations of a study are the factors and variables not to be included in the investigation. In other words, they are the boundaries the researcher sets in terms of study duration, population size and type of participants, etc.

Difference Between Delimitations and Limitations

Delimitations refer to the boundaries of the research study, based on the researcher’s decision of what to include and what to exclude. They narrow your study to make it more manageable and relevant to what you are trying to prove.

Limitations relate to the validity and reliability of the study. They are characteristics of the research design or methodology that are out of your control but influence your research findings. Because of this, they determine the internal and external validity of your study and are considered potential weaknesses.

In other words, limitations are what the researcher cannot do (elements outside of their control) and delimitations are what the researcher will not do (elements outside of the boundaries they have set). Both are important because they help to put the research findings into context, and although they explain how the study is limited, they increase the credibility and validity of a research project.

Guidelines on How to Write a Scope

A good scope statement will answer the following six questions:

• Why – the general aims and objectives (purpose) of the research.
• What – the subject to be investigated, and the included variables.
• Where – the location or setting of the study, i.e. where the data will be gathered and to which entity the data will belong.
• When – the timeframe within which the data is to be collected.
• Who – the subject matter of the study and the population from which they will be selected. This population needs to be large enough to be able to make generalisations.
• How – how the research is to be conducted, including a description of the research design (e.g. whether it is experimental research, qualitative research or a case study), methodology, research tools and analysis techniques.

To make things as clear as possible, you should also state why specific variables were omitted from the research scope, and whether this was because it was a delimitation or a limitation. You should also explain why they could not be overcome with standard research methods backed up by scientific evidence.

How to Start Writing Your Study Scope

Use the below prompts as an effective way to start writing your scope:

• This study is to focus on…
• This study covers the…
• This study aims to…

Guidelines on How to Write Delimitations

Since the delimitation parameters are within the researcher’s control, readers need to know why they were set, what alternative options were available, and why these alternatives were rejected. For example, if you are collecting data that can be derived from three different but similar experiments, the reader needs to understand how and why you decided to select the one you have.

Your reasons should always be linked back to your research question, as all delimitations should result from trying to make your study more relevant to your scope. Therefore, the scope and delimitations are usually considered together when writing a paper.

How to Start Writing Your Study Delimitations

Use the below prompts as an effective way to start writing your study delimitations:

• This study does not cover…
• This study is limited to…
• The following has been excluded from this study…

Examples of Delimitation in Research

Examples of delimitations include:

• research objectives,
• research questions,
• research variables,
• target populations,
• statistical analysis techniques .

Examples of Limitations in Research

Examples of limitations include:

• Issues with sample and selection,
• Insufficient sample size, population traits or specific participants for statistical significance,
• Lack of previous research studies on the topic which has allowed for further analysis,
• Limitations in the technology/instruments used to collect your data,
• Limited financial resources and/or funding constraints.

Thinking about applying to a PhD? Then don’t miss out on these 4 tips on how to best prepare your application.

This article will answer common questions about the PhD synopsis, give guidance on how to write one, and provide my thoughts on samples.

Find out how you can use Scrivener for PhD Thesis & Dissertation writing to streamline your workflow and make academic writing fun again!

Join thousands of other students and stay up to date with the latest PhD programmes, funding opportunities and advice.

Browse PhDs Now

Need to write a list of abbreviations for a thesis or dissertation? Read our post to find out where they go, what to include and how to format them.

Find out the differences between a Literature Review and an Annotated Bibliography, whey they should be used and how to write them.

Aaron’s now writing up his PhD thesis at the University of Birmingham. His research has investigated the Impact and Mitigation of Wavefront Distortions in Precision Interferometry.

Chris is a third (and final) year PhD student at Ulster University. His project aims to develop a novel method of delivering antibiofilm compounds directly to an infected wound bed in patients.

Join Thousands of Students

Setting Limits and Focusing Your Study: Exploring scope and delimitation

As a researcher, it can be easy to get lost in the vast expanse of information and data available. Thus, when starting a research project, one of the most important things to consider is the scope and delimitation of the study. Setting limits and focusing your study is essential to ensure that the research project is manageable, relevant, and able to produce useful results. In this article, we will explore the importance of setting limits and focusing your study through an in-depth analysis of scope and delimitation.

Company Name 123

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, cu usu cibo vituperata, id ius probo maiestatis inciderint, sit eu vide volutpat.

Sign Up for More Insights

Table of Contents

Scope and Delimitation – Definition and difference

Scope refers to the range of the research project and the study limitations set in place to define the boundaries of the project and delimitation refers to the specific aspects of the research project that the study will focus on.

In simpler words, scope is the breadth of your study, while delimitation is the depth of your study.

Scope and delimitation are both essential components of a research project, and they are often confused with one another. The scope defines the parameters of the study, while delimitation sets the boundaries within those parameters. The scope and delimitation of a study are usually established early on in the research process and guide the rest of the project.

Types of Scope and Delimitation

Significance of Scope and Delimitation

Setting limits and focusing your study through scope and delimitation is crucial for the following reasons:

• It allows researchers to define the research project’s boundaries, enabling them to focus on specific aspects of the project. This focus makes it easier to gather relevant data and avoid unnecessary information that might complicate the study’s results.
• Setting limits and focusing your study through scope and delimitation enables the researcher to stay within the parameters of the project’s resources.
• A well-defined scope and delimitation ensure that the research project can be completed within the available resources, such as time and budget, while still achieving the project’s objectives.

5 Steps to Setting Limits and Defining the Scope and Delimitation of Your Study

There are a few steps that you can take to set limits and focus your study.

1. Identify your research question or topic

The first step is to identify what you are interested in learning about. The research question should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART). Once you have a research question or topic, you can start to narrow your focus.

2. Consider the key terms or concepts related to your topic

What are the important terms or concepts that you need to understand in order to answer your research question? Consider all available resources, such as time, budget, and data availability, when setting scope and delimitation.

The scope and delimitation should be established within the parameters of the available resources. Once you have identified the key terms or concepts, you can start to develop a glossary or list of definitions.

3. Consider the different perspectives on your topic

There are often different perspectives on any given topic. Get feedback on the proposed scope and delimitation. Advisors can provide guidance on the feasibility of the study and offer suggestions for improvement.

It is important to consider all of the different perspectives in order to get a well-rounded understanding of your topic.

4. Narrow your focus

Be specific and concise when setting scope and delimitation. The parameters of the study should be clearly defined to avoid ambiguity and ensure that the study is focused on relevant aspects of the research question.

This means deciding which aspects of your topic you will focus on and which aspects you will eliminate.

5. Develop the final research plan

Revisit and revise the scope and delimitation as needed. As the research project progresses, the scope and delimitation may need to be adjusted to ensure that the study remains focused on the research question and can produce useful results. This plan should include your research goals, methods, and timeline.

Examples of Scope and Delimitation

To better understand scope and delimitation, let us consider two examples of research questions and how scope and delimitation would apply to them.

Research question: What are the effects of social media on mental health?

Scope: The scope of the study will focus on the impact of social media on the mental health of young adults aged 18-24 in the United States.

Delimitation: The study will specifically examine the following aspects of social media: frequency of use, types of social media platforms used, and the impact of social media on self-esteem and body image.

Research question: What are the factors that influence employee job satisfaction in the healthcare industry?

Scope: The scope of the study will focus on employee job satisfaction in the healthcare industry in the United States.

Delimitation: The study will specifically examine the following factors that influence employee job satisfaction: salary, work-life balance, job security, and opportunities for career growth.

Setting limits and defining the scope and delimitation of a research study is essential to conducting effective research. By doing so, researchers can ensure that their study is focused, manageable, and feasible within the given time frame and resources. It can also help to identify areas that require further study, providing a foundation for future research.

So, the next time you embark on a research project, don’t forget to set clear limits and define the scope and delimitation of your study. It may seem like a tedious task, but it can ultimately lead to more meaningful and impactful research. And if you still can’t find a solution, reach out to Enago Academy using #AskEnago and tag @EnagoAcademy on Twitter , Facebook , and Quora .

Frequently Asked Questions

The scope in research refers to the boundaries and extent of a study, defining its specific objectives, target population, variables, methods, and limitations, which helps researchers focus and provide a clear understanding of what will be investigated.

Delimitation in research defines the specific boundaries and limitations of a study, such as geographical, temporal, or conceptual constraints, outlining what will be excluded or not within the scope of investigation, providing clarity and ensuring the study remains focused and manageable.

To write a scope; 1. Clearly define research objectives. 2. Identify specific research questions. 3. Determine the target population for the study. 4. Outline the variables to be investigated. 5. Establish limitations and constraints. 6. Set boundaries and extent of the investigation. 7. Ensure focus, clarity, and manageability. 8. Provide context for the research project.

To write delimitations; 1. Identify geographical boundaries or constraints. 2. Define the specific time period or timeframe of the study. 3. Specify the sample size or selection criteria. 4. Clarify any demographic limitations (e.g., age, gender, occupation). 5. Address any limitations related to data collection methods. 6. Consider limitations regarding the availability of resources or data. 7. Exclude specific variables or factors from the scope of the study. 8. Clearly state any conceptual boundaries or theoretical frameworks. 9. Acknowledge any potential biases or constraints in the research design. 10. Ensure that the delimitations provide a clear focus and scope for the study.

What is an example of delimitation of the study?

Thank you 💕

Thank You very simplified🩷

Thanks, I find this article very helpful

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Publishing Research
• 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…

• Industry News
• Trending Now

Breaking Barriers: Sony and Nature unveil “Women in Technology Award”

Sony Group Corporation and the prestigious scientific journal Nature have collaborated to launch the inaugural…

Achieving Research Excellence: Checklist for good research practices

Academia is built on the foundation of trustworthy and high-quality research, supported by the pillars…

• Promoting Research

Plain Language Summary — Communicating your research to bridge the academic-lay gap

Science can be complex, but does that mean it should not be accessible to the…

Science under Surveillance: Journals adopt advanced AI to uncover image manipulation

Journals are increasingly turning to cutting-edge AI tools to uncover deceitful images published in manuscripts.…

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

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

Demystifying the Role of Confounding Variables in Research

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.

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

What should universities' stance be on AI tools in research and academic writing?

• Translators
• Graphic Designers
• Editing Services
• Academic Editing Services
• Admissions Editing Services
• Admissions Essay Editing Services
• AI Content Editing Services
• APA Style Editing Services
• Application Essay Editing Services
• Book Editing Services
• Business Editing Services
• Capstone Paper Editing Services
• Children's Book Editing Services
• College Application Editing Services
• College Essay Editing Services
• Copy Editing Services
• Developmental Editing Services
• Dissertation Editing Services
• eBook Editing Services
• English Editing Services
• Horror Story Editing Services
• Legal Editing Services
• Line Editing Services
• Manuscript Editing Services
• MLA Style Editing Services
• Novel Editing Services
• Paper Editing Services
• Personal Statement Editing Services
• Research Paper Editing Services
• Résumé Editing Services
• Scientific Editing Services
• Short Story Editing Services
• Statement of Purpose Editing Services
• Substantive Editing Services
• Thesis Editing Services

Proofreading

• Proofreading Services
• Admissions Essay Proofreading Services
• Children's Book Proofreading Services
• Legal Proofreading Services
• Novel Proofreading Services
• Personal Statement Proofreading Services
• Research Proposal Proofreading Services
• Statement of Purpose Proofreading Services

Translation

• Translation Services

Graphic Design

• Graphic Design Services
• Dungeons & Dragons Design Services
• Sticker Design Services
• Writing Services

Please enter the email address you used for your account. Your sign in information will be sent to your email address after it has been verified.

Exploring Scope and Delimitation in Academic Research

Academic research is a meticulous process that requires precise planning and clear boundaries. Two pivotal components in this process are the scope and delimitations of the study. The definitions and establishment of these parameters are instrumental in ensuring that the research is effective, manageable, and yields relevant results.

The "scope" of a research project refers to the areas that the study will cover. It is the breadth and depth of the investigation. It defines the subject matter, the geographical location, the time frame, and the issues that the study will explore. Essentially, the scope delineates what the researcher aims to cover in the study.

On the other hand, "delimitations" are the boundaries or limitations set by the researcher. They define what the study will not include. Delimitations could involve the choice of research methodology , the selection of respondents, the duration of the study, and more. They help in confining the study to a manageable size while excluding peripheral elements.

Understanding and correctly implementing scope and delimitations are vital to ensuring your research is well-defined and focused, facilitating higher accuracy and relevancy in your findings.

Importance of scope in research

"Scope" in research refers to the comprehensive extent of study—it outlines the parameters of what will be explored and addressed. It defines the topic of the research , the geographical region under study, the timeframe considered, and the issues that the study will address. The scope of a research project is vital because it determines the depth and breadth of your investigation.

Defining the scope of research is a fundamental step in the research process for several reasons. First, it provides a roadmap for the study, giving the researcher clear guidelines about what to include and exclude. Without a well-defined scope, research can become unmanageably vast or lose its focus.

Second, the scope ensures the research's relevance and applicability. It helps the researcher maintain a tight focus on the study's central question , ensuring that all aspects of the research contribute to answering this question. This focus aids in avoiding irrelevant diversions that could dilute the final conclusions.

Finally, a well-defined scope can help ensure the efficient use of resources. Research involves considerable time, effort, and often financial resources. By providing clear boundaries, the scope ensures these resources are utilized effectively without wasted effort on peripheral issues.

Suppose a research study is looking at the impacts of social media usage on mental health. If the scope is too broad—like examining all social media platforms' effects on all demographic groups worldwide—then the research can quickly become unwieldy and hard to manage. It would involve vast amounts of data, requiring considerable time, resources, and computational power to analyze effectively.

However, if the scope is narrowed down—such as investigating the impact of Instagram usage on the mental health of teenagers in a specific city over the past five years—the research becomes far more manageable. This specific focus allows for a more in-depth analysis and likely will provide more meaningful, actionable results. This example illustrates the importance of appropriately defining the scope of research for its successful execution.

Determining the scope of your research

Setting the scope of your research project is a critical and delicate task. Below are steps, tips, and common mistakes to avoid when determining the scope of your research:

Steps to define the scope

• Identify Your Topic: The first step involves identifying and understanding your research topic. This knowledge will serve as a basis for determining the breadth and depth of your study.
• Define Your Research Questions: The research questions are the heart of your study. They will help you determine the specific areas your research should cover.
• Establish Boundaries: Clearly establish the geographical, temporal, and topical boundaries of your research. These boundaries will guide the range of your study.
• Choose Your Methodology: Decide on the research methods you will use as these will directly impact the scope of your study.

Tips for a manageable scope

• Stay Focused: Stay concentrated on your research questions. Do not stray into areas that aren't directly relevant.
• Be Realistic: Consider the resources (time, money, manpower) available. Ensure your scope is feasible given these resources.
• Seek Guidance: Consult with your academic advisor or peers for feedback on your proposed scope.

Common mistakes to avoid

• Overly Broad Scope: Avoid setting an overly broad scope which could result in an unmanageable and unfocused study.
• Too Narrow Scope: Conversely, a scope that is too narrow may miss important aspects of the research topic.
• Ignoring Resources: Not taking into account available resources when setting the scope can lead to a project that is impossible to complete.

Defining the scope of your research is a delicate balance, requiring careful consideration of your research questions, resources, and the depth and breadth of investigation needed to answer these questions effectively.

Importance of delimitations in research

In the context of academic research, "delimitations" refers to the choices made by the researcher which define the boundaries of the study. These are the variables that lead the researcher to narrow the scope of the study from its potential vastness to a manageable size.

Delimitations might include the geographic area where the study is confined, the participants involved in the study, the methodology used, the time period considered, or the specific incidents or aspects the study will focus on. Essentially, delimitations are the self-imposed limitations on the scope of the study.

Defining the delimitations of a research project is crucial for several reasons. Firstly, they establish the context or setting in which the study occurs. This, in turn, allows for the work to be reproduced in a similar context for verification or refutation in future studies.

Secondly, delimitations provide a way to narrow the scope of the research to a manageable size, thus avoiding the pitfall of an overly ambitious project. They help researchers to stay focused on the main research questions and prevent diversion into irrelevant aspects.

Finally, clearly defined delimitations enhance the credibility of the research. They offer transparency about the research design and methodology, which adds to the validity of the results.

For instance, in a research study examining the impact of technology on student achievement in a certain district, examples of delimitations might include focusing only on public schools, considering only high school students, and confining the study to a particular school year. These choices help to focus the research and ensure its manageability. Therefore, delimitations play a pivotal role in structuring and guiding an effective and efficient research study.

Setting delimitations for your research

Establishing appropriate delimitations for your research project is an important part of research design. Here are some steps, guidelines, and common mistakes to consider when setting your research delimitations:

Steps to establish delimitations

• Identify the boundaries: Begin by deciding the geographical region, time period, and subject matter your research will cover.
• Determine Your Research Population: Identify the specific population your study will focus on. This could be based on age, profession, geographical location, etc.
• Choose Your Research Methods: Decide the specific methods you will use to collect and analyze data, as these decisions will also set limitations on your study.

Guidelines for choosing delimitations

• Align with Your Research Objectives: The delimitations should be in line with your research questions and objectives. They should help focus your study without detracting from its goals.
• Be Practical: Consider the resources available, including time, funds, and access to data. Your delimitations should be feasible given these constraints.
• Seek Input: Consult with your research advisor or peers. Their feedback can help ensure your delimitations are appropriate and well thought out.

Common errors to avoid:

• Unrealistic Delimitations: Be wary of setting delimitations that are too stringent or ambitious to be feasible given your resources and timeframe.
• Undefined Delimitations: Avoid leaving your delimitations vague or undefined. This can lead to scope creep, where your project expands beyond its initial plan, making it unmanageable.
• Ignoring Delimitations: Once set, stick to your delimitations. Deviating from them can lead to a loss of focus and can compromise the integrity of your results.

Setting delimitations is a crucial step in research planning. Properly defined delimitations can make your research project more manageable, maintain your focus, and ensure the effective use of your resources.

The interplay between scope and delimitations

The relationship between scope and delimitations in academic research is a dynamic and interdependent one. Each aspect serves to shape and refine the other, ultimately leading to a focused, feasible, and effective research design.

The scope of a research project describes the breadth and depth of the investigation—what it aims to cover and how far it intends to delve into the subject matter. The delimitations, on the other hand, identify the boundaries and constraints of the study—what it will not cover.

As such, the scope and delimitations of a research study are intimately connected. When the scope of a study is broad, the delimitations must be carefully considered to ensure the project remains manageable and focused. Conversely, when the scope is narrow, the delimitations might be less constraining, but they still play a critical role in defining the specificity of the research.

Balancing the scope and delimitations is crucial for an efficient research design. Too broad a scope without carefully defined delimitations can lead to a study that is unwieldy and lacks depth. On the other hand, a very narrow scope with overly rigid delimitations might result in a study that overlooks important aspects of the research topic.

Thus, researchers must strive to maintain a balance—establishing a scope that is wide enough to fully explore the research topic, but also setting appropriate delimitations to ensure the study remains feasible and focused. In doing so, the research will be well-structured and yield meaningful, relevant findings.

Role of scope and delimitations in research validity

Scope and delimitations are fundamental aspects of research design that directly influence the validity, reliability, and replicability of a study.

Research validity refers to the degree to which a study accurately reflects or measures the concept that the researcher intends to investigate. A well-defined scope is critical to research validity because it clearly delineates what the study will cover. This clear definition ensures that the research focuses on relevant aspects of the topic and that the findings accurately reflect the concept under investigation.

Similarly, carefully thought-out delimitations contribute to research validity by identifying what the study will not cover. This clarity helps to prevent the study from straying into irrelevant areas, ensuring that the research stays focused and relevant.

In addition to contributing to research validity, scope and delimitations also influence the reliability and replicability of a study. Reliability refers to the consistency of a study's results, while replicability refers to the ability of other researchers to repeat the study and obtain similar results.

A clearly defined scope makes a study more reliable by providing a detailed outline of the areas covered by the research. This clarity makes it more likely that the study will produce consistent results. Moreover, clearly defined delimitations enhance the replicability of a study by providing explicit boundaries for the research, which makes it easier for other researchers to repeat the study in a similar context.

In summary, a well-defined scope and carefully thought-out delimitations contribute significantly to the validity, reliability, and replicability of academic research. They ensure that the research is focused, that the findings are relevant and accurate, and that the study can be reliably repeated by other researchers.

Examples of scope and delimitation in well-known research

• The Milgram Experiment: Stanley Milgram's famous psychology experiment sought to understand obedience to authority figures. The scope of this study was clearly defined—it focused on how far individuals would go in obeying an instruction if it involved harming another person. However, delimitations were set to ensure manageability. Participants were delimited to male individuals, and the experiment was confined to a controlled laboratory setting. These delimitations allowed Milgram to manage the research effectively while maintaining the depth of his study on human behavior.
• The Framingham Heart Study: This ongoing cardiovascular study began in 1948 and is aimed at identifying common factors that contribute to cardiovascular disease. The scope of the research is broad, covering many aspects of lifestyle, medical history, and physical characteristics. However, the study set clear delimitations: it initially only involved adult residents of Framingham, Massachusetts. This geographical delimitation made this broad-scope study manageable and eventually yielded influential results that shaped our understanding of heart disease.
• The Marshmallow Test: This well-known study by Walter Mischel explored delayed gratification in children. The scope was clearly defined: the study aimed to understand the ability of children to delay gratification and how it related to future success. The delimitations of the study included the age of the participants (preschool children), the setting (a controlled experiment with a treat), and the measure of future success (academic achievement, ability to cope with stress, etc.). These delimitations helped keep the study focused and manageable.

In all these examples, the researchers set a clear scope to outline the focus of their studies and used delimitations to restrict the boundaries. This balance between scope and delimitation was key in conducting successful and influential research.

In academic research, defining the scope and delimitations is a pivotal step in designing a robust and effective study. The scope outlines the breadth and depth of the investigation, offering a clear direction for the research. Meanwhile, delimitations set the boundaries of the study, ensuring that the research remains focused and manageable. Together, they play a crucial role in enhancing the validity, reliability, and replicability of a study.

Understanding the interplay between scope and delimitations is key to conducting efficient research. A well-defined scope paired with thoughtfully set delimitations contribute to a study's feasibility and its potential to yield meaningful and applicable results. Mistakes in setting the scope and delimitations can lead to unwieldy, unfocused research or a study that overlooks important aspects of a research question.

Reviewing famous studies, like the Milgram Experiment, the Framingham Heart Study, and the Marshmallow Test, we observe how a balanced approach to setting scope and delimitations can result in influential and valuable findings. Therefore, researchers should give careful thought to defining the scope and delimitations of their studies, keeping in mind their research questions, available resources, and the need for balance between breadth and focus. By doing so, they pave the way for successful and impactful research outcomes.

Header image by Kübra Arslaner .

Related Posts

100 Sociology Research Topics You Can Use Right Now

55 Research Paper Topics to Jumpstart Your Writing

• Academic Writing Advice
• All Blog Posts
• Writing Advice
• Admissions Writing Advice
• Book Writing Advice
• Short Story Advice
• Employment Writing Advice
• Business Writing Advice
• Web Content Advice
• Article Writing Advice
• Magazine Writing Advice
• Grammar Advice
• Dialect Advice
• Editing Advice
• Freelance Advice
• Legal Writing Advice
• Poetry Advice
• Graphic Design Advice
• Logo Design Advice
• Translation Advice
• Blog Reviews
• Short Story Award Winners
• Scholarship Winners

Need an academic editor before submitting your work?

Research Limitations & Delimitations

What they are and how they’re different (with examples)

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Expert Reviewed By: David Phair (PhD) | September 2022

If you’re new to the world of research, you’ve probably heard the terms “ research limitations ” and “ research delimitations ” being thrown around, often quite loosely. In this post, we’ll unpack what both of these mean, how they’re similar and how they’re different – so that you can write up these sections the right way.

Overview: Limitations vs Delimitations

• Are they the same?
• What are research limitations
• What are research delimitations
• Limitations vs delimitations

First things first…

Let’s start with the most important takeaway point of this post – research limitations and research delimitations are not the same – but they are related to each other (we’ll unpack that a little later). So, if you hear someone using these two words interchangeably, be sure to share this post with them!

Research Limitations

Research limitations are, at the simplest level, the weaknesses of the study, based on factors that are often outside of your control as the researcher. These factors could include things like time , access to funding, equipment , data or participants . For example, if you weren’t able to access a random sample of participants for your study and had to adopt a convenience sampling strategy instead, that would impact the generalizability of your findings and therefore reflect a limitation of your study.

Research limitations can also emerge from the research design itself . For example, if you were undertaking a correlational study, you wouldn’t be able to infer causality (since correlation doesn’t mean certain causation). Similarly, if you utilised online surveys to collect data from your participants, you naturally wouldn’t be able to get the same degree of rich data that you would from in-person interviews .

Simply put, research limitations reflect the shortcomings of a study , based on practical (or theoretical) constraints that the researcher faced. These shortcomings limit what you can conclude from a study, but at the same time, present a foundation for future research . Importantly, all research has limitations , so there’s no need to hide anything here – as long as you discuss how the limitations might affect your findings, it’s all good.

Research Delimitations

Alright, now that we’ve unpacked the limitations, let’s move on to the delimitations .

Research delimitations are similar to limitations in that they also “ limit ” the study, but their focus is entirely different. Specifically, the delimitations of a study refer to the scope of the research aims and research questions . In other words, delimitations reflect the choices you, as the researcher, intentionally make in terms of what you will and won’t try to achieve with your study. In other words, what your research aims and research questions will and won’t include.

As we’ve spoken about many times before, it’s important to have a tight, narrow focus for your research, so that you can dive deeply into your topic, apply your energy to one specific area and develop meaningful insights. If you have an overly broad scope or unfocused topic, your research will often pull in multiple, even opposing directions, and you’ll just land up with a muddy mess of findings .

So, the delimitations section is where you’ll clearly state what your research aims and research questions will focus on – and just as importantly, what they will exclude . For example, you might investigate a widespread phenomenon, but choose to focus your study on a specific age group, ethnicity or gender. Similarly, your study may focus exclusively on one country, city or even organization. As long as the scope is well justified (in other words, it represents a novel, valuable research topic), this is perfectly acceptable – in fact, it’s essential. Remember, focus is your friend.

Need a helping hand?

Conclusion: Limitations vs Delimitations

Ok, so let’s recap.

Research limitations and research delimitations are related in that they both refer to “limits” within a study. But, they are distinctly different. Limitations reflect the shortcomings of your study, based on practical or theoretical constraints that you faced.

Contrasted to that, delimitations reflect the choices that you made in terms of the focus and scope of your research aims and research questions. If you want to learn more about research aims and questions, you can check out this video post , where we unpack those concepts in detail.

Psst… there’s more (for free)

This post is part of our dissertation mini-course, which covers everything you need to get started with your dissertation, thesis or research project. 

You Might Also Like:

17 Comments

Good clarification of ideas on how a researcher ought to do during Process of choice

Thank you so much for this very simple but explicit explanation on limitation and delimitation. It has so helped me to develop my masters proposal. hope to recieve more from your site as time progresses

Thank you for this explanation – very clear.

Thanks for the explanation, really got it well.

This website is really helpful for my masters proposal

Thank you very much for helping to explain these two terms

I spent almost the whole day trying to figure out the differences

when I came across your notes everything became very clear

thanks for the clearly outlined explanation on the two terms, limitation and delimitation.

Very helpful Many thanks 🙏

Excellent it resolved my conflict .

I would like you to assist me please. If in my Research, I interviewed some participants and I submitted Questionnaires to other participants to answered to the questions, in the same organization, Is this a Qualitative methodology , a Quantitative Methodology or is it a Mixture Methodology I have used in my research? Please help me

How do I cite this article in APA format

Really so great ,finally have understood it’s difference now

Getting more clear regarding Limitations and Delimitation and concepts

I really appreciate your apt and precise explanation of the two concepts namely ; Limitations and Delimitations.

thank you for this, very helpful to researchers

Very good explained

Great and clear explanation, after a long confusion period on the two words, i can now explain to someone with ease.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

• Print Friendly

How To Write Scope and Delimitation of a Research Paper (With Examples)

An effective research paper or thesis has a well-written Scope and Delimitation.  This portion specifies your study’s coverage and boundaries.

Not yet sure about how to write your research’s Scope and Delimitation? Fret not, as we’ll guide you through the entire writing process through this article.

Related: How To Write Significance of the Study (With Examples)

Table of Contents

What is the scope and delimitation of a research paper.

The “Scope and Delimitation” section states the concepts and variables your study covered. It tells readers which things you have included and excluded in your analysis.

This portion tells two things: 1

• The study’s “Scope” – concepts and variables you have explored in your research and;
• The study’s “Delimitation” – the “boundaries” of your study’s scope. It sets apart the things included in your analysis from those excluded.

For example, your scope might be the effectiveness of plant leaves in lowering blood sugar levels. You can “delimit” your study only to the effect of gabi leaves on the blood glucose of Swiss mice.

Where Should I Put the Scope and Delimitation?

This portion is in Chapter 1, usually after the “Background of the Study.”

Why Should I Write the Scope and Delimitation of My Research Paper?

There’s a lot to discover in a research paper or thesis. However, your resources and time dedicated to it are scarce. Thus, given these constraints, you have to narrow down your study. You do this in the Scope and Delimitation.

Suppose you’re studying the correlation between the quantity of organic fertilizer and plant growth . Experimenting with several types of plants is impossible because of several limitations. So, you’ve decided to use one plant type only. 

Informing your readers about this decision is a must. So, you have to state it in your Scope and Delimitation. It also acts as a “disclaimer” that your results are inapplicable to the entire plant kingdom.

What Is the Difference Between Delimitation and Limitation?

People often use the terms “Delimitation” and “Limitation” interchangeably. However, these words differ 2 .

Delimitation refers to factors you set to limit your analysis. It delineates those that are included in your research and those that are excluded. Remember, delimitations are within your control. 

Meanwhile, limitations are factors beyond your control that may affect your research’s results.  You can think of limitations as the “weaknesses” of your study. 

Let’s go back to our previous example. Due to some constraints, you’ve only decided to examine one plant type: dandelions. This is an example of a delimitation since it limits your analysis to dandelions only and not other plant types. Note that the number of plant types used is within your control. 

Meanwhile, your study cannot state that a higher quantity of organic fertilizer is the sole reason for plant growth. That’s because your research’s focus is only on correlation. Since this is already beyond your control, then this is a limitation. 

How To Write Scope and Delimitation: Step-by-Step Guide

To write your research’s Scope and Delimitation section, follow these steps:

1. Review Your Study’s Objectives and Problem Statement

Your study’s coverage relies on its objectives. Thus, you can only write this section if you know what you’re researching. Furthermore, ensure that you understand the problems you ought to answer. 

Once you understand the abovementioned things, you may start writing your study’s Scope and Delimitation.

2. State the Key Information To Explain Your Study’s Coverage and Boundaries

a. The Main Objective of the Research

This refers to the concept that you’re focusing on in your research. Some examples are the following:

• level of awareness or satisfaction of a particular group of people
• correlation between two variables
• effectiveness of a new product
• comparison between two methods/approaches
• lived experiences of several individuals

It’s helpful to consult your study’s Objectives or Statement of the Problem section to determine your research’s primary goal.

b. Independent and Dependent Variables Included

Your study’s independent variable is the variable that you manipulate. Meanwhile, the dependent variable is the variable whose result depends upon the independent variable. Both of these variables must be clear and specific when indicated. 

Suppose you study the relationship between social media usage and students’ language skills. These are the possible variables for the study:

• Independent Variable: Number of hours per day spent on using Facebook
• Dependent Variable: Grade 10 students’ scores in Quarterly Examination in English. 

Note how specific the variables stated above are. For the independent variable, we narrow it down to Facebook only. Since there are many ways to assess “language skills,” we zero in on the students’ English exam scores as our dependent variable. 

c. Subject of the Study

This refers to your study’s respondents or participants. 

In our previous example, the research participants are Grade 10 students. However, there are a lot of Grade 10 students in the Philippines. Thus, we have to select from a specific school only—for instance, Grade 10 students from a national high school in Manila. 

d. Timeframe and Location of the Study

Specify the month(s), quarter(s), or year(s) as the duration of your study. Also, indicate where you will gather the data required for your research. 

e. Brief Description of the Study’s Research Design and Methodology

You may also include whether your research is quantitative or qualitative, the sampling method (cluster, stratified, purposive) applied, and how you conducted the experiment.

Using our previous example, the Grade 10 students can be selected using stratified sampling. Afterward, the researchers may obtain their English quarterly exam scores from their respective teachers. You can add these things to your study’s Scope and Delimitation. 

3. Indicate Which Variables or Factors Are Not Covered by Your Research

Although you’ve already set your study’s coverage and boundaries in Step 2, you may also explicitly mention things you’ve excluded from your research. 

Returning to our previous example, you can state that your assessment will not include the vocabulary and oral aspects of the English proficiency skill. 

Examples of Scope and Delimitation of a Research Paper

1. scope and delimitation examples for quantitative research.

a. Example 1

Research Title

    A Study on the Relationship of the Extent of Facebook Usage on the English Proficiency Level of Grade 10 Students of Matagumpay High School

Scope and Delimitation

(Main Objective)

This study assessed the correlation between the respondents’ duration of Facebook usage and their English proficiency level. 

(Variables used)

The researchers used the number of hours per day of using Facebook and the activities usually performed on the platform to assess the respondents’ extent of Facebook usage. Meanwhile, the respondents’ English proficiency level is limited to their quarterly English exam scores. 

(Subject of the study)

A sample of fifty (50) Grade 10 students of Matagumpay High School served as the study’s respondents. 

(Timeframe and location)

This study was conducted during the Second Semester of the School Year 2018 – 2019 on the premises of Matagumpay High School in Metro Manila. 

(Methodology)

The respondents are selected by performing stratified random sampling to ensure that there will be ten respondents from five Grade 10 classes of the school mentioned above. The researchers administered a 20-item questionnaire to assess the extent of Facebook usage of the selected respondents. Meanwhile, the data for the respondents’ quarterly exam scores were acquired from their English teachers. The collected data are handled with the utmost confidentiality. Spearman’s Rank Order Correlation was applied to quantitatively assess the correlation between the variables.

(Exclusions)

This study didn’t assess other aspects of the respondents’ English proficiency, such as English vocabulary and oral skills. 

Note: The words inside the parentheses in the example above are guides only. They are not included in the actual text.

b. Example 2

  Level of Satisfaction of Grade 11 Students on the Implementation of the Online Learning Setup of Matagumpay High School for SY 2020 – 2021

This study aims to identify students’ satisfaction levels with implementing online learning setups during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Students’ satisfaction was assessed according to teachers’ pedagogy, school policies, and learning materials used in the online learning setup. The respondents included sixty (60) Grade 11 students of Matagumpay High School who were randomly picked. The researchers conducted the study from October 2020 to February 2021. 

Online platforms such as email and social media applications were used to reach the respondents. The researchers administered a 15-item online questionnaire to measure the respondents’ satisfaction levels. Each response was assessed using a Likert Scale to provide a descriptive interpretation of their answers. A weighted mean was applied to determine the respondents’ general satisfaction. 

This study did not cover other factors related to the online learning setup, such as the learning platform used, the schedule of synchronous learning, and channels for information dissemination.

2. Scope and Delimitation Examples for Qualitative Research

  Lived Experiences of Public Utility Vehicle (PUV) Drivers of Antipolo City Amidst the Continuous June 2022 Oil Price Hikes

This research focused on the presentation and discussion of the lived experiences of PUV drivers during the constant oil price hike in June 2022.

The respondents involved are five (5) jeepney drivers from Antipolo City who agreed to be interviewed. The researchers assessed their experiences in terms of the following: (1) daily net income; (2) duration and extent of working; (3) alternative employment opportunity considerations; and (4) mental and emotional status. The respondents were interviewed daily at their stations on June 6 – 10, 2022. 

In-depth one-on-one interviews were used for data collection.  Afterward, the respondents’ first-hand experiences were drafted and annotated with the researchers’ insights. 

The researchers excluded some factors in determining the respondents’ experiences, such as physical and health conditions and current family relationship status. 

 A Study on the Perception of the Residents of Mayamot, Antipolo City on the Political and Socioeconomic Conditions During the Post-EDSA Period (1986 – 1996)

This research aims to discuss the perception of Filipinos regarding the political and socioeconomic economic conditions during the post-EDSA period, specifically during the years 1986 – 1996. 

Ten (10) residents of Mayamot, Antipolo City, who belonged to Generation X (currently 40 – 62 years old), were purposively selected as the study’s respondents. The researchers asked them about their perception of the following aspects during the period mentioned above (1) performance of national and local government; (2) bureaucracy and government services; (3) personal economic and financial status; and (4) wage purchasing power. 

The researchers conducted face-to-face interviews in the respondents’ residences during the second semester of AY 2018 – 2019. The responses were written and corroborated with the literature on the post-EDSA period. 

The following factors were not included in the research analysis: political conflicts and turmoils, the status of the legislative and judicial departments, and other macroeconomic indicators. 

Tips and Warnings

1. use the “5ws and 1h” as your guide in understanding your study’s coverage.

• Why did you write your study?  
• What variables are included?
• Who are your study’s subject
• Where did you conduct the study?
• When did your study start and end?
• How did you conduct the study?

2. Use key phrases when writing your research’s scope

• This study aims to … 
• This study primarily focuses on …
• This study deals with … 
• This study will cover …
• This study will be confined…

3. Use key phrases when writing factors beyond your research’s delimitations

• The researcher(s) decided to exclude …
• This study did not cover….
• This study excluded … 
• These variables/factors were excluded from the study…

4. Don’t forget to ask for help

Your research adviser can assist you in selecting specific concepts and variables suitable to your study. Make sure to consult him/her regularly. 

5. Make it brief

No need to make this section wordy. You’re good to go if you meet the “5Ws and 1Hs”. 

Frequently Asked Questions

1. what are scope and delimitation in tagalog.

In a Filipino research ( pananaliksik ), Scope and Delimitation is called “ Saklaw at Delimitasyon”. 

Here’s an example of Scope and Delimitation in Filipino:

Pamagat ng Pananaliksik

Epekto Ng Paggamit Ng Mga Digital Learning Tools Sa Pag-Aaral Ng Mga Mag-Aaral Ng Mataas Na Paaralan Ng Matagumpay Sa General Mathematics

Sakop at Delimitasyon ng Pag-aaral

Nakatuon ang pananaliksik na ito sa epekto ng paggamit ng mga digital learning aids sa pag-aaral ng mga mag-aaral.

Ang mga digital learning tools na kinonsidera sa pag-aaral na ito ay Google Classroom, Edmodo, Kahoot, at mga piling bidyo mula YouTube. Samantala, ang epekto sa pag-aaral ng mga mag-aaral ng mga nabanggit na digital learning tools ay natukoy sa pamamagitan ng kanilang (1) mga pananaw hinggil sa benepisyo nito sa kanilang pag-aaral sa General Mathematics at (2) kanilang average grade sa asignaturang ito.

Dalawampu’t-limang (25) mag-aaral mula sa Senior High School ng Mataas na Paaralan ng Matagumpay ang pinili para sa pananaliksik na ito. Sila ay na-interbyu at binigyan ng questionnaire noong Enero 2022 sa nasabing paaralan. Sinuri ang resulta ng pananaliksik sa pamamagitan ng mga instrumentong estadistikal na weighted mean at Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). Hindi saklaw ng pananaliksik na ito ang ibang mga aspeto hinggil sa epekto ng online learning aids sa pag-aaral gaya ng lebel ng pag-unawa sa aralin at kakayahang iugnay ito sa araw-araw na buhay. 

2. The Scope and Delimitation should consist of how many paragraphs?

Three or more paragraphs will suffice for your study’s Scope and Delimitation. Here’s our suggestion on what you should write for each paragraph:

Paragraph 1: Introduction (state research objective) Paragraph 2: Coverage and boundaries of the research (you may divide this section into 2-3 paragraphs) Paragraph 3 : Factors excluded from the study

• University of St. La Salle. Unit 3: Lesson 3 Setting the Scope and Limitation of a Qualitative Research [Ebook] (p. 12). Retrieved from https://www.studocu.com/ph/document/university-of-st-la-salle/senior-high-school/final-sg-pr1-11-12-unit-3-lesson-3-setting-the-scope-and-limitation-of-a-qualitative-research/24341582
• Theofanidis, D., & Fountouki, A. (2018). Limitations and Delimitations in the Research Process. Perioperative Nursing (GORNA), 7(3), 155–162. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.2552022

Written by Jewel Kyle Fabula

in Career and Education , Juander How

Last Updated May 6, 2023 09:59 AM

Jewel Kyle Fabula

Jewel Kyle Fabula is a Bachelor of Science in Economics student at the University of the Philippines Diliman. His passion for learning mathematics developed as he competed in some mathematics competitions during his Junior High School years. He loves cats, playing video games, and listening to music.

Browse all articles written by Jewel Kyle Fabula

Copyright Notice

All materials contained on this site are protected by the Republic of the Philippines copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published, or broadcast without the prior written permission of filipiknow.net or in the case of third party materials, the owner of that content. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright, or other notice from copies of the content. Be warned that we have already reported and helped terminate several websites and YouTube channels for blatantly stealing our content. If you wish to use filipiknow.net content for commercial purposes, such as for content syndication, etc., please contact us at legal(at)filipiknow(dot)net

Diving Deeper into Limitations and Delimitations

If you are working on a thesis, dissertation, or other formal research project, chances are your advisor or committee will ask you to address the delimitations of your study. When faced with this request, many students respond with a puzzled look and then go on to address what are actually the study’s limitations.

In a previous article , we covered what goes into the limitations, delimitations, and assumptions sections of your thesis or dissertation. Here, we will dive a bit deeper into the differences between limitations and delimitations and provide some helpful tips for addressing them in your research project—whether you are working on a quantitative or qualitative study.

Acknowledging Weaknesses vs. Defining Boundaries

These concepts are easy to get confused because both limitations and delimitations restrict (or limit) the questions you’ll be able to answer with your study, most notably in terms of generalizability.

However, the biggest difference between limitations and delimitations is the degree of control you have over them—that is, how much they are based in conscious, intentional choices you made in designing your study.

Limitations occur in all types of research and are, for the most part, outside the researcher’s control (given practical constraints, such as time, funding, and access to populations of interest). They are threats to the study’s internal or external validity.

Limitations may include things such as participant drop-out, a sample that isn’t entirely representative of the desired population, violations to the assumptions of parametric analysis (e.g., normality, homogeneity of variance), the limits of self-report, or the absence of reliability and validity data for some of your survey measures.

Limitations can get in the way of your being able to answer certain questions or draw certain types of inferences from your findings. Therefore, it’s important to acknowledge them upfront and make note of how they restrict the conclusions you’ll be able to draw from your study. Frequently, limitations can get in the way of our ability to generalize our findings to the larger populations or to draw causal conclusions, so be sure to consider these issues when you’re thinking about the potential limitations of your study.

Delimitations are also factors that can restrict the questions you can answer or the inferences you can draw from your findings. However, they are based on intentional choices you make a priori (i.e., as you’re designing the study) about where you’re going to draw the boundaries of your project. In other words, they define the project’s scope.

Like limitations, delimitations are a part of every research project, and this is not a bad thing. In fact, it’s very important! You can’t study everything at once. If you try to do so, your project is bound to get huge and unwieldy, and it will become a lot more difficult to interpret your results or come to meaningful conclusions with so many moving parts. You have to draw the line somewhere, and the delimitations are where you choose to draw these lines.

One of the clearest examples of a delimitation that applies to almost every research project is participant exclusion criteria. In conducting either a quantitative or a qualitative study, you will have to define your population of interest. Defining this population of interest means that you will need to articulate the boundaries of that population (i.e., who is not included). Those boundaries are delimitations.

For example, if you’re interested in understanding the experiences of elementary school teachers who have been implementing a new curriculum into their classrooms, you probably won’t be interviewing or sending a survey to any of the following people: non-teachers, high-school teachers, college professors, principals, parents of elementary school children, or the children themselves. Furthermore, you probably won’t be talking to elementary school teachers who have not yet had the experience of implementing the curriculum in question. You would probably only choose to gather data from elementary school teachers who have had this experience because that is who you’re interested in for the purposes of your study. Perhaps you’ll narrow your focus even more to elementary school teachers in a particular school district who have been teaching for a particular length of time. The possibilities can go on. These are choices you will need to make, both for practical reasons (i.e., the population you have access to) and for the questions you are trying to answer.

Of course, for this particular example, this does not mean that it wouldn’t be interesting to also know what principals think about the new curriculum. Or parents. Or elementary school children. It just means that, for the purposes of your project and your research questions, you’re interested in the experience of the teachers, so you’re excluding anyone who does not meet those criteria. Having delimitations to your population of interest also means that you won’t be able to answer any questions about the experiences of those other populations; this is ok because those populations are outside of the scope of your project . As interesting as their experiences might be, you can save these questions for another study. That is the part of the beauty of research: there will always be more studies to do, more questions to ask. You don’t have to (and can’t) do it all in one project.

Continuing with the previous example, for instance, let’s suppose that the problem you are most interested in addressing is the fact that we know relatively little about elementary school teachers’ experiences of implementing a new curriculum. Perhaps you believe that knowing more about teachers’ experiences could inform their training or help administrators know more about how to support their teachers. If the identified problem is our lack of knowledge about teachers’ experiences, and your research questions focus on better understanding these experiences, that means that you are choosing not to focus on other problems or questions, even those that may seem closely related. For instance, you are not asking how effective the new curriculum is in improving student test scores or graduation rates. You might think that would be a very interesting question, but it will have to wait for another study. In narrowing the focus of your research questions, you limit your ability to answer other questions, and again, that’s ok. These other questions may be interesting and important, but, again, they are beyond the scope of your project .

Common Examples of Limitations

While each study will have its own unique set of limitations, some limitations are more common in quantitative research, and others are more common in qualitative research.

In quantitative research, common limitations include the following:

– Participant dropout

– Small sample size, low power

– Non-representative sample

– Violations of statistical assumptions

– Non-experimental design, lack of manipulation of variables, lack of controls

– Potential confounding variables

– Measures with low (or unknown) reliability or validity

– Limits of an instrument to measure the construct of interest

– Data collection methods (e.g., self-report)

– Anything else that might limit the study’s internal or external validity

In qualitative research, common limitations include the following:

– Lack of generalizability of findings (not the goal of qualitative research, but still worth mentioning as a limitation)

– Inability to draw causal conclusions (again, not the goal of qualitative research, but still worth mentioning)

– Researcher bias/subjectivity (especially if there is only one coder)

– Limitations in participants’ ability/willingness to share or describe their experiences

– Any factors that might limit the rigor of data collection or analysis procedures

Common Examples of Delimitations

As noted above, the two most common sources of delimitations in both quantitative and qualitative research include the following:

– Inclusion/exclusion criteria (or how you define your population of interest)

– Research questions or problems you’ve chosen to examine

Several other common sources of delimitations include the following:

– Theoretical framework or perspective adopted

– Methodological framework or paradigm chosen (e.g., quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods)

– In quantitative research, the variables you’ve chosen to measure or manipulate (as opposed to others)

Whether you’re conducting a quantitative or qualitative study, you will (hopefully!) have chosen your research design because it is well suited to the questions you’re hoping to answer. Because these questions define the boundaries or scope of your project and thus point to its delimitations, your research design itself will also be related to these delimitations.

Questions to Ask Yourself

As you are considering the limitations and delimitations of your project, it can be helpful to ask yourself a few different questions.

Questions to help point out your study’s limitations :

1. If I had an unlimited budget, unlimited amounts of time, access to all possible populations, and the ability to manipulate as many variables as I wanted, how would I design my study differently to be better able to answer the questions I want to answer? (The ways in which your study falls short of this will point to its limitations.)

2. Are there design issues that get in the way of my being able to draw causal conclusions?

3. Are there sampling issues that get in the way of my being able to generalize my findings?

4. Are there issues related to the measures I’m using or the methods I’m using to collect data? Do I have concerns about participants telling the truth or being able to provide accurate responses to my questions?

5. Are there any other factors that might limit my study’s internal or external validity?

Questions that help point out your study’s delimitations :

1. What are my exclusion criteria? Who did I not include in my study, and why did I make this choice?

2. What questions did I choose not to address in my study? (Of course, the possibilities are endless here, but consider related questions that you chose not to address.)

3. In what ways did I narrow the scope of my study in order to hone in on a particular issue or question?

4. What other methodologies did I not use that might have allowed me to answer slightly different questions about the same topic?

How to Write About Limitations and Delimitations

Remember, having limitations and delimitations is not a bad thing. They’re present in even the most rigorous research. The important thing is to be aware of them and to acknowledge how they may impact your findings or the conclusions you can draw.

In fact, writing about them and acknowledging them gives you an opportunity to demonstrate that you can think critically about these aspects of your study and how they impact your findings, even if they were out of your control.

Keep in mind that your study’s limitations will likely point to important directions for future research. Therefore, when you’re getting ready to write about your recommendations for future research in your discussion, remember to refer back to your limitations section!

As you write about your delimitations in particular, remember that they are not weaknesses, and you don’t have to apologize for them. Good, strong research projects have clear boundaries. Also, keep in mind that you are the researcher and you can choose whatever delimitations you want for your study. You’re in control of the delimitations. You just have to be prepared—both in your discussion section and in your dissertation defense itself—to justify the choices you make and acknowledge how these choices impact your findings.

Browse More on PhDStudent

Everything You Need to Know About References and Citations: Part 1

When you conduct your research, it is important to record the details of all the information you find to provide accurate references, …

How to Write a Proposal: For a Master’s Thesis or Dissertation

Note: Many thanks to fellow PhDStudent blogger Ryan Krone for his contributions and insight to this post. Your thesis/dissertation proposal provides an …

How to Find Free Money for Graduate School Part 2

Getting into graduate school is already a challenge on its own, and funding the program once admitted is even harder. Graduate studies …

How to Find Free Money for Graduate School

You’ve finally earned your Bachelor’s degree and have made it into graduate school. Whether you already have massive student loans from undergrad …

Part 3 of How to Pick Your Defense Committee

  What strategies can a doctoral student employ to maneuver the trials and tribulations of a dissertation committee? In Part 2, we …

Best Dissertation Proofreading and Editing Tips to Make Your Work Spotless

You’ve heard this statement many times before: “the dissertation is the most important project you’ve ever worked on.” That may sound like …

Part 2 of How to Pick Your Defense Committee

Choosing a committee can be a daunting task for a doctoral student.  We’ve already covered two strategies that can help you through this …

Part 1 of How to Pick Your Defense Committee

So you’re ready to pick your committee members; there are a few things to keep in mind first—after all, it is a …

Intro To Series on How to Pick Your Defense Committee

Choosing the right defense committee can potentially be the difference between a smooth transition of receiving your doctoral degree or dodging bullets …

On Babies and Dissertations: Part 3

I recently had the experience of expecting my first baby a month before I graduated. Throughout the process, I accidentally learned several …

On Babies and Dissertations: Part 2

On Babies and Dissertations: Part 1

I recently had the experience of expecting my first baby a month before I graduated and accidentally learned tips on graduating on time with a …

Click here to cancel reply.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Copyright © 2024 PhDStudent.com. All rights reserved. Designed by Divergent Web Solutions, LLC .

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 Med Educ
• v.8(4); 2019 Aug

Limited by our limitations

Paula t. ross.

Medical School, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI USA

Nikki L. Bibler Zaidi

Study limitations represent weaknesses within a research design that may influence outcomes and conclusions of the research. Researchers have an obligation to the academic community to present complete and honest limitations of a presented study. Too often, authors use generic descriptions to describe study limitations. Including redundant or irrelevant limitations is an ineffective use of the already limited word count. A meaningful presentation of study limitations should describe the potential limitation, explain the implication of the limitation, provide possible alternative approaches, and describe steps taken to mitigate the limitation. This includes placing research findings within their proper context to ensure readers do not overemphasize or minimize findings. A more complete presentation will enrich the readers’ understanding of the study’s limitations and support future investigation.

Introduction

Regardless of the format scholarship assumes, from qualitative research to clinical trials, all studies have limitations. Limitations represent weaknesses within the study that may influence outcomes and conclusions of the research. The goal of presenting limitations is to provide meaningful information to the reader; however, too often, limitations in medical education articles are overlooked or reduced to simplistic and minimally relevant themes (e.g., single institution study, use of self-reported data, or small sample size) [ 1 ]. This issue is prominent in other fields of inquiry in medicine as well. For example, despite the clinical implications, medical studies often fail to discuss how limitations could have affected the study findings and interpretations [ 2 ]. Further, observational research often fails to remind readers of the fundamental limitation inherent in the study design, which is the inability to attribute causation [ 3 ]. By reporting generic limitations or omitting them altogether, researchers miss opportunities to fully communicate the relevance of their work, illustrate how their work advances a larger field under study, and suggest potential areas for further investigation.

Goals of presenting limitations

Medical education scholarship should provide empirical evidence that deepens our knowledge and understanding of education [ 4 , 5 ], informs educational practice and process, [ 6 , 7 ] and serves as a forum for educating other researchers [ 8 ]. Providing study limitations is indeed an important part of this scholarly process. Without them, research consumers are pressed to fully grasp the potential exclusion areas or other biases that may affect the results and conclusions provided [ 9 ]. Study limitations should leave the reader thinking about opportunities to engage in prospective improvements [ 9 – 11 ] by presenting gaps in the current research and extant literature, thereby cultivating other researchers’ curiosity and interest in expanding the line of scholarly inquiry [ 9 ].

Presenting study limitations is also an ethical element of scientific inquiry [ 12 ]. It ensures transparency of both the research and the researchers [ 10 , 13 , 14 ], as well as provides transferability [ 15 ] and reproducibility of methods. Presenting limitations also supports proper interpretation and validity of the findings [ 16 ]. A study’s limitations should place research findings within their proper context to ensure readers are fully able to discern the credibility of a study’s conclusion, and can generalize findings appropriately [ 16 ].

Why some authors may fail to present limitations

As Price and Murnan [ 8 ] note, there may be overriding reasons why researchers do not sufficiently report the limitations of their study. For example, authors may not fully understand the importance and implications of their study’s limitations or assume that not discussing them may increase the likelihood of publication. Word limits imposed by journals may also prevent authors from providing thorough descriptions of their study’s limitations [ 17 ]. Still another possible reason for excluding limitations is a diffusion of responsibility in which some authors may incorrectly assume that the journal editor is responsible for identifying limitations. Regardless of reason or intent, researchers have an obligation to the academic community to present complete and honest study limitations.

A guide to presenting limitations

The presentation of limitations should describe the potential limitations, explain the implication of the limitations, provide possible alternative approaches, and describe steps taken to mitigate the limitations. Too often, authors only list the potential limitations, without including these other important elements.

Describe the limitations

When describing limitations authors should identify the limitation type to clearly introduce the limitation and specify the origin of the limitation. This helps to ensure readers are able to interpret and generalize findings appropriately. Here we outline various limitation types that can occur at different stages of the research process.

Study design

Some study limitations originate from conscious choices made by the researcher (also known as delimitations) to narrow the scope of the study [ 1 , 8 , 18 ]. For example, the researcher may have designed the study for a particular age group, sex, race, ethnicity, geographically defined region, or some other attribute that would limit to whom the findings can be generalized. Such delimitations involve conscious exclusionary and inclusionary decisions made during the development of the study plan, which may represent a systematic bias intentionally introduced into the study design or instrument by the researcher [ 8 ]. The clear description and delineation of delimitations and limitations will assist editors and reviewers in understanding any methodological issues.

Data collection

Study limitations can also be introduced during data collection. An unintentional consequence of human subjects research is the potential of the researcher to influence how participants respond to their questions. Even when appropriate methods for sampling have been employed, some studies remain limited by the use of data collected only from participants who decided to enrol in the study (self-selection bias) [ 11 , 19 ]. In some cases, participants may provide biased input by responding to questions they believe are favourable to the researcher rather than their authentic response (social desirability bias) [ 20 – 22 ]. Participants may influence the data collected by changing their behaviour when they are knowingly being observed (Hawthorne effect) [ 23 ]. Researchers—in their role as an observer—may also bias the data they collect by allowing a first impression of the participant to be influenced by a single characteristic or impression of another characteristic either unfavourably (horns effect) or favourably (halo effort) [ 24 ].

Data analysis

Study limitations may arise as a consequence of the type of statistical analysis performed. Some studies may not follow the basic tenets of inferential statistical analyses when they use convenience sampling (i.e. non-probability sampling) rather than employing probability sampling from a target population [ 19 ]. Another limitation that can arise during statistical analyses occurs when studies employ unplanned post-hoc data analyses that were not specified before the initial analysis [ 25 ]. Unplanned post-hoc analysis may lead to statistical relationships that suggest associations but are no more than coincidental findings [ 23 ]. Therefore, when unplanned post-hoc analyses are conducted, this should be clearly stated to allow the reader to make proper interpretation and conclusions—especially when only a subset of the original sample is investigated [ 23 ].

Study results

The limitations of any research study will be rooted in the validity of its results—specifically threats to internal or external validity [ 8 ]. Internal validity refers to reliability or accuracy of the study results [ 26 ], while external validity pertains to the generalizability of results from the study’s sample to the larger, target population [ 8 ].

Examples of threats to internal validity include: effects of events external to the study (history), changes in participants due to time instead of the studied effect (maturation), systematic reduction in participants related to a feature of the study (attrition), changes in participant responses due to repeatedly measuring participants (testing effect), modifications to the instrument (instrumentality) and selecting participants based on extreme scores that will regress towards the mean in repeat tests (regression to the mean) [ 27 ].

Threats to external validity include factors that might inhibit generalizability of results from the study’s sample to the larger, target population [ 8 , 27 ]. External validity is challenged when results from a study cannot be generalized to its larger population or to similar populations in terms of the context, setting, participants and time [ 18 ]. Therefore, limitations should be made transparent in the results to inform research consumers of any known or potentially hidden biases that may have affected the study and prevent generalization beyond the study parameters.

Explain the implication(s) of each limitation

Authors should include the potential impact of the limitations (e.g., likelihood, magnitude) [ 13 ] as well as address specific validity implications of the results and subsequent conclusions [ 16 , 28 ]. For example, self-reported data may lead to inaccuracies (e.g. due to social desirability bias) which threatens internal validity [ 19 ]. Even a researcher’s inappropriate attribution to a characteristic or outcome (e.g., stereotyping) can overemphasize (either positively or negatively) unrelated characteristics or outcomes (halo or horns effect) and impact the internal validity [ 24 ]. Participants’ awareness that they are part of a research study can also influence outcomes (Hawthorne effect) and limit external validity of findings [ 23 ]. External validity may also be threatened should the respondents’ propensity for participation be correlated with the substantive topic of study, as data will be biased and not represent the population of interest (self-selection bias) [ 29 ]. Having this explanation helps readers interpret the results and generalize the applicability of the results for their own setting.

Provide potential alternative approaches and explanations

Often, researchers use other studies’ limitations as the first step in formulating new research questions and shaping the next phase of research. Therefore, it is important for readers to understand why potential alternative approaches (e.g. approaches taken by others exploring similar topics) were not taken. In addition to alternative approaches, authors can also present alternative explanations for their own study’s findings [ 13 ]. This information is valuable coming from the researcher because of the direct, relevant experience and insight gained as they conducted the study. The presentation of alternative approaches represents a major contribution to the scholarly community.

Describe steps taken to minimize each limitation

No research design is perfect and free from explicit and implicit biases; however various methods can be employed to minimize the impact of study limitations. Some suggested steps to mitigate or minimize the limitations mentioned above include using neutral questions, randomized response technique, force choice items, or self-administered questionnaires to reduce respondents’ discomfort when answering sensitive questions (social desirability bias) [ 21 ]; using unobtrusive data collection measures (e.g., use of secondary data) that do not require the researcher to be present (Hawthorne effect) [ 11 , 30 ]; using standardized rubrics and objective assessment forms with clearly defined scoring instructions to minimize researcher bias, or making rater adjustments to assessment scores to account for rater tendencies (halo or horns effect) [ 24 ]; or using existing data or control groups (self-selection bias) [ 11 , 30 ]. When appropriate, researchers should provide sufficient evidence that demonstrates the steps taken to mitigate limitations as part of their study design [ 13 ].

In conclusion, authors may be limiting the impact of their research by neglecting or providing abbreviated and generic limitations. We present several examples of limitations to consider; however, this should not be considered an exhaustive list nor should these examples be added to the growing list of generic and overused limitations. Instead, careful thought should go into presenting limitations after research has concluded and the major findings have been described. Limitations help focus the reader on key findings, therefore it is important to only address the most salient limitations of the study [ 17 , 28 ] related to the specific research problem, not general limitations of most studies [ 1 ]. It is important not to minimize the limitations of study design or results. Rather, results, including their limitations, must help readers draw connections between current research and the extant literature.

The quality and rigor of our research is largely defined by our limitations [ 31 ]. In fact, one of the top reasons reviewers report recommending acceptance of medical education research manuscripts involves limitations—specifically how the study’s interpretation accounts for its limitations [ 32 ]. Therefore, it is not only best for authors to acknowledge their study’s limitations rather than to have them identified by an editor or reviewer, but proper framing and presentation of limitations can actually increase the likelihood of acceptance. Perhaps, these issues could be ameliorated if academic and research organizations adopted policies and/or expectations to guide authors in proper description of limitations.

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

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

The limitations of the study are those characteristics of design or methodology that impacted or influenced the interpretation of the findings from your research. Study limitations are the constraints placed on the ability to generalize from the results, to further describe applications to practice, and/or related to the utility of findings that are the result of the ways in which you initially chose to design the study or the method used to establish internal and external validity or the result of unanticipated challenges that emerged during the study.

Price, James H. and Judy Murnan. “Research Limitations and the Necessity of Reporting Them.” American Journal of Health Education 35 (2004): 66-67; Theofanidis, Dimitrios and Antigoni Fountouki. "Limitations and Delimitations in the Research Process." Perioperative Nursing 7 (September-December 2018): 155-163. .

Importance of...

Always acknowledge a study's limitations. It is far better that you identify and acknowledge your study’s limitations than to have them pointed out by your professor and have your grade lowered because you appeared to have ignored them or didn't realize they existed.

Keep in mind that acknowledgment of a study's limitations is an opportunity to make suggestions for further research. If you do connect your study's limitations to suggestions for further research, be sure to explain the ways in which these unanswered questions may become more focused because of your study.

Acknowledgment of a study's limitations also provides you with opportunities to demonstrate that you have thought critically about the research problem, understood the relevant literature published about it, and correctly assessed the methods chosen for studying the problem. A key objective of the research process is not only discovering new knowledge but also to confront assumptions and explore what we don't know.

Claiming limitations is a subjective process because you must evaluate the impact of those limitations . Don't just list key weaknesses and the magnitude of a study's limitations. To do so diminishes the validity of your research because it leaves the reader wondering whether, or in what ways, limitation(s) in your study may have impacted the results and conclusions. Limitations require a critical, overall appraisal and interpretation of their impact. You should answer the question: do these problems with errors, methods, validity, etc. eventually matter and, if so, to what extent?

Price, James H. and Judy Murnan. “Research Limitations and the Necessity of Reporting Them.” American Journal of Health Education 35 (2004): 66-67; Structure: How to Structure the Research Limitations Section of Your Dissertation. Dissertations and Theses: An Online Textbook. Laerd.com.

Descriptions of Possible Limitations

All studies have limitations . However, it is important that you restrict your discussion to limitations related to the research problem under investigation. For example, if a meta-analysis of existing literature is not a stated purpose of your research, it should not be discussed as a limitation. Do not apologize for not addressing issues that you did not promise to investigate in the introduction of your paper.

Here are examples of limitations related to methodology and the research process you may need to describe and discuss how they possibly impacted your results. Note that descriptions of limitations should be stated in the past tense because they were discovered after you completed your research.

Possible Methodological Limitations

• Sample size -- the number of the units of analysis you use in your study is dictated by the type of research problem you are investigating. Note that, if your sample size is too small, it will be difficult to find significant relationships from the data, as statistical tests normally require a larger sample size to ensure a representative distribution of the population and to be considered representative of groups of people to whom results will be generalized or transferred. Note that sample size is generally less relevant in qualitative research if explained in the context of the research problem.
• Lack of available and/or reliable data -- a lack of data or of reliable data will likely require you to limit the scope of your analysis, the size of your sample, or it can be a significant obstacle in finding a trend and a meaningful relationship. You need to not only describe these limitations but provide cogent reasons why you believe data is missing or is unreliable. However, don’t just throw up your hands in frustration; use this as an opportunity to describe a need for future research based on designing a different method for gathering data.
• Lack of prior research studies on the topic -- citing prior research studies forms the basis of your literature review and helps lay a foundation for understanding the research problem you are investigating. Depending on the currency or scope of your research topic, there may be little, if any, prior research on your topic. Before assuming this to be true, though, consult with a librarian! In cases when a librarian has confirmed that there is little or no prior research, you may be required to develop an entirely new research typology [for example, using an exploratory rather than an explanatory research design ]. Note again that discovering a limitation can serve as an important opportunity to identify new gaps in the literature and to describe the need for further research.
• Measure used to collect the data -- sometimes it is the case that, after completing your interpretation of the findings, you discover that the way in which you gathered data inhibited your ability to conduct a thorough analysis of the results. For example, you regret not including a specific question in a survey that, in retrospect, could have helped address a particular issue that emerged later in the study. Acknowledge the deficiency by stating a need for future researchers to revise the specific method for gathering data.
• Self-reported data -- whether you are relying on pre-existing data or you are conducting a qualitative research study and gathering the data yourself, self-reported data is limited by the fact that it rarely can be independently verified. In other words, you have to the accuracy of what people say, whether in interviews, focus groups, or on questionnaires, at face value. However, self-reported data can contain several potential sources of bias that you should be alert to and note as limitations. These biases become apparent if they are incongruent with data from other sources. These are: (1) selective memory [remembering or not remembering experiences or events that occurred at some point in the past]; (2) telescoping [recalling events that occurred at one time as if they occurred at another time]; (3) attribution [the act of attributing positive events and outcomes to one's own agency, but attributing negative events and outcomes to external forces]; and, (4) exaggeration [the act of representing outcomes or embellishing events as more significant than is actually suggested from other data].

Possible Limitations of the Researcher

• Access -- if your study depends on having access to people, organizations, data, or documents and, for whatever reason, access is denied or limited in some way, the reasons for this needs to be described. Also, include an explanation why being denied or limited access did not prevent you from following through on your study.
• Longitudinal effects -- unlike your professor, who can literally devote years [even a lifetime] to studying a single topic, the time available to investigate a research problem and to measure change or stability over time is constrained by the due date of your assignment. Be sure to choose a research problem that does not require an excessive amount of time to complete the literature review, apply the methodology, and gather and interpret the results. If you're unsure whether you can complete your research within the confines of the assignment's due date, talk to your professor.
• Cultural and other type of bias -- we all have biases, whether we are conscience of them or not. Bias is when a person, place, event, or thing is viewed or shown in a consistently inaccurate way. Bias is usually negative, though one can have a positive bias as well, especially if that bias reflects your reliance on research that only support your hypothesis. When proof-reading your paper, be especially critical in reviewing how you have stated a problem, selected the data to be studied, what may have been omitted, the manner in which you have ordered events, people, or places, how you have chosen to represent a person, place, or thing, to name a phenomenon, or to use possible words with a positive or negative connotation. NOTE :   If you detect bias in prior research, it must be acknowledged and you should explain what measures were taken to avoid perpetuating that bias. For example, if a previous study only used boys to examine how music education supports effective math skills, describe how your research expands the study to include girls.
• Fluency in a language -- if your research focuses , for example, on measuring the perceived value of after-school tutoring among Mexican-American ESL [English as a Second Language] students and you are not fluent in Spanish, you are limited in being able to read and interpret Spanish language research studies on the topic or to speak with these students in their primary language. This deficiency should be acknowledged.

Aguinis, Hermam and Jeffrey R. Edwards. “Methodological Wishes for the Next Decade and How to Make Wishes Come True.” Journal of Management Studies 51 (January 2014): 143-174; Brutus, Stéphane et al. "Self-Reported Limitations and Future Directions in Scholarly Reports: Analysis and Recommendations." Journal of Management 39 (January 2013): 48-75; Senunyeme, Emmanuel K. Business Research Methods. Powerpoint Presentation. Regent University of Science and Technology; ter Riet, Gerben et al. “All That Glitters Isn't Gold: A Survey on Acknowledgment of Limitations in Biomedical Studies.” PLOS One 8 (November 2013): 1-6.

Structure and Writing Style

Information about the limitations of your study are generally placed either at the beginning of the discussion section of your paper so the reader knows and understands the limitations before reading the rest of your analysis of the findings, or, the limitations are outlined at the conclusion of the discussion section as an acknowledgement of the need for further study. Statements about a study's limitations should not be buried in the body [middle] of the discussion section unless a limitation is specific to something covered in that part of the paper. If this is the case, though, the limitation should be reiterated at the conclusion of the section.

If you determine that your study is seriously flawed due to important limitations , such as, an inability to acquire critical data, consider reframing it as an exploratory study intended to lay the groundwork for a more complete research study in the future. Be sure, though, to specifically explain the ways that these flaws can be successfully overcome in a new study.

But, do not use this as an excuse for not developing a thorough research paper! Review the tab in this guide for developing a research topic . If serious limitations exist, it generally indicates a likelihood that your research problem is too narrowly defined or that the issue or event under study is too recent and, thus, very little research has been written about it. If serious limitations do emerge, consult with your professor about possible ways to overcome them or how to revise your study.

When discussing the limitations of your research, be sure to:

• Describe each limitation in detailed but concise terms;
• Explain why each limitation exists;
• Provide the reasons why each limitation could not be overcome using the method(s) chosen to acquire or gather the data [cite to other studies that had similar problems when possible];
• Assess the impact of each limitation in relation to the overall findings and conclusions of your study; and,
• If appropriate, describe how these limitations could point to the need for further research.

Remember that the method you chose may be the source of a significant limitation that has emerged during your interpretation of the results [for example, you didn't interview a group of people that you later wish you had]. If this is the case, don't panic. Acknowledge it, and explain how applying a different or more robust methodology might address the research problem more effectively in a future study. A underlying goal of scholarly research is not only to show what works, but to demonstrate what doesn't work or what needs further clarification.

Aguinis, Hermam and Jeffrey R. Edwards. “Methodological Wishes for the Next Decade and How to Make Wishes Come True.” Journal of Management Studies 51 (January 2014): 143-174; Brutus, Stéphane et al. "Self-Reported Limitations and Future Directions in Scholarly Reports: Analysis and Recommendations." Journal of Management 39 (January 2013): 48-75; Ioannidis, John P.A. "Limitations are not Properly Acknowledged in the Scientific Literature." Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 60 (2007): 324-329; Pasek, Josh. Writing the Empirical Social Science Research Paper: A Guide for the Perplexed. January 24, 2012. Academia.edu; Structure: How to Structure the Research Limitations Section of Your Dissertation. Dissertations and Theses: An Online Textbook. Laerd.com; What Is an Academic Paper? Institute for Writing Rhetoric. Dartmouth College; Writing the Experimental Report: Methods, Results, and Discussion. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University.

Writing Tip

Don't Inflate the Importance of Your Findings!

After all the hard work and long hours devoted to writing your research paper, it is easy to get carried away with attributing unwarranted importance to what you’ve done. We all want our academic work to be viewed as excellent and worthy of a good grade, but it is important that you understand and openly acknowledge the limitations of your study. Inflating the importance of your study's findings could be perceived by your readers as an attempt hide its flaws or encourage a biased interpretation of the results. A small measure of humility goes a long way!

Another Writing Tip

Negative Results are Not a Limitation!

Negative evidence refers to findings that unexpectedly challenge rather than support your hypothesis. If you didn't get the results you anticipated, it may mean your hypothesis was incorrect and needs to be reformulated. Or, perhaps you have stumbled onto something unexpected that warrants further study. Moreover, the absence of an effect may be very telling in many situations, particularly in experimental research designs. In any case, your results may very well be of importance to others even though they did not support your hypothesis. Do not fall into the trap of thinking that results contrary to what you expected is a limitation to your study. If you carried out the research well, they are simply your results and only require additional interpretation.

Lewis, George H. and Jonathan F. Lewis. “The Dog in the Night-Time: Negative Evidence in Social Research.” The British Journal of Sociology 31 (December 1980): 544-558.

Yet Another Writing Tip

Sample Size Limitations in Qualitative Research

Sample sizes are typically smaller in qualitative research because, as the study goes on, acquiring more data does not necessarily lead to more information. This is because one occurrence of a piece of data, or a code, is all that is necessary to ensure that it becomes part of the analysis framework. However, it remains true that sample sizes that are too small cannot adequately support claims of having achieved valid conclusions and sample sizes that are too large do not permit the deep, naturalistic, and inductive analysis that defines qualitative inquiry. Determining adequate sample size in qualitative research is ultimately a matter of judgment and experience in evaluating the quality of the information collected against the uses to which it will be applied and the particular research method and purposeful sampling strategy employed. If the sample size is found to be a limitation, it may reflect your judgment about the methodological technique chosen [e.g., single life history study versus focus group interviews] rather than the number of respondents used.

Boddy, Clive Roland. "Sample Size for Qualitative Research." Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 19 (2016): 426-432; Huberman, A. Michael and Matthew B. Miles. "Data Management and Analysis Methods." In Handbook of Qualitative Research . Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln, eds. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994), pp. 428-444; Blaikie, Norman. "Confounding Issues Related to Determining Sample Size in Qualitative Research." International Journal of Social Research Methodology 21 (2018): 635-641; Oppong, Steward Harrison. "The Problem of Sampling in qualitative Research." Asian Journal of Management Sciences and Education 2 (2013): 202-210.

• << Previous: 8. The Discussion
• Next: 9. The Conclusion >>
• Last Updated: Apr 5, 2024 1:38 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

404 Not found

How to Write Limitations of the Study (with examples)

This blog emphasizes the importance of recognizing and effectively writing about limitations in research. It discusses the types of limitations, their significance, and provides guidelines for writing about them, highlighting their role in advancing scholarly research.

Updated on August 24, 2023

No matter how well thought out, every research endeavor encounters challenges. There is simply no way to predict all possible variances throughout the process.

These uncharted boundaries and abrupt constraints are known as limitations in research . Identifying and acknowledging limitations is crucial for conducting rigorous studies. Limitations provide context and shed light on gaps in the prevailing inquiry and literature.

This article explores the importance of recognizing limitations and discusses how to write them effectively. By interpreting limitations in research and considering prevalent examples, we aim to reframe the perception from shameful mistakes to respectable revelations.

What are limitations in research?

In the clearest terms, research limitations are the practical or theoretical shortcomings of a study that are often outside of the researcher’s control . While these weaknesses limit the generalizability of a study’s conclusions, they also present a foundation for future research.

Sometimes limitations arise from tangible circumstances like time and funding constraints, or equipment and participant availability. Other times the rationale is more obscure and buried within the research design. Common types of limitations and their ramifications include:

• Theoretical: limits the scope, depth, or applicability of a study.
• Methodological: limits the quality, quantity, or diversity of the data.
• Empirical: limits the representativeness, validity, or reliability of the data.
• Analytical: limits the accuracy, completeness, or significance of the findings.
• Ethical: limits the access, consent, or confidentiality of the data.

Regardless of how, when, or why they arise, limitations are a natural part of the research process and should never be ignored . Like all other aspects, they are vital in their own purpose.

Why is identifying limitations important?

Whether to seek acceptance or avoid struggle, humans often instinctively hide flaws and mistakes. Merging this thought process into research by attempting to hide limitations, however, is a bad idea. It has the potential to negate the validity of outcomes and damage the reputation of scholars.

By identifying and addressing limitations throughout a project, researchers strengthen their arguments and curtail the chance of peer censure based on overlooked mistakes. Pointing out these flaws shows an understanding of variable limits and a scrupulous research process.

Showing awareness of and taking responsibility for a project’s boundaries and challenges validates the integrity and transparency of a researcher. It further demonstrates the researchers understand the applicable literature and have thoroughly evaluated their chosen research methods.

Presenting limitations also benefits the readers by providing context for research findings. It guides them to interpret the project’s conclusions only within the scope of very specific conditions. By allowing for an appropriate generalization of the findings that is accurately confined by research boundaries and is not too broad, limitations boost a study’s credibility .

Limitations are true assets to the research process. They highlight opportunities for future research. When researchers identify the limitations of their particular approach to a study question, they enable precise transferability and improve chances for reproducibility. 

Simply stating a project’s limitations is not adequate for spurring further research, though. To spark the interest of other researchers, these acknowledgements must come with thorough explanations regarding how the limitations affected the current study and how they can potentially be overcome with amended methods.

How to write limitations

Typically, the information about a study’s limitations is situated either at the beginning of the discussion section to provide context for readers or at the conclusion of the discussion section to acknowledge the need for further research. However, it varies depending upon the target journal or publication guidelines. 

Don’t hide your limitations

It is also important to not bury a limitation in the body of the paper unless it has a unique connection to a topic in that section. If so, it needs to be reiterated with the other limitations or at the conclusion of the discussion section. Wherever it is included in the manuscript, ensure that the limitations section is prominently positioned and clearly introduced.

While maintaining transparency by disclosing limitations means taking a comprehensive approach, it is not necessary to discuss everything that could have potentially gone wrong during the research study. If there is no commitment to investigation in the introduction, it is unnecessary to consider the issue a limitation to the research. Wholly consider the term ‘limitations’ and ask, “Did it significantly change or limit the possible outcomes?” Then, qualify the occurrence as either a limitation to include in the current manuscript or as an idea to note for other projects. 

Writing limitations

Once the limitations are concretely identified and it is decided where they will be included in the paper, researchers are ready for the writing task. Including only what is pertinent, keeping explanations detailed but concise, and employing the following guidelines is key for crafting valuable limitations:

1) Identify and describe the limitations : Clearly introduce the limitation by classifying its form and specifying its origin. For example:

• An unintentional bias encountered during data collection
• An intentional use of unplanned post-hoc data analysis

2) Explain the implications : Describe how the limitation potentially influences the study’s findings and how the validity and generalizability are subsequently impacted. Provide examples and evidence to support claims of the limitations’ effects without making excuses or exaggerating their impact. Overall, be transparent and objective in presenting the limitations, without undermining the significance of the research. 

3) Provide alternative approaches for future studies : Offer specific suggestions for potential improvements or avenues for further investigation. Demonstrate a proactive approach by encouraging future research that addresses the identified gaps and, therefore, expands the knowledge base.

Whether presenting limitations as an individual section within the manuscript or as a subtopic in the discussion area, authors should use clear headings and straightforward language to facilitate readability. There is no need to complicate limitations with jargon, computations, or complex datasets.

Examples of common limitations

Limitations are generally grouped into two categories , methodology and research process .

Methodology limitations

Methodology may include limitations due to:

• Sample size
• Lack of available or reliable data
• Lack of prior research studies on the topic
• Measure used to collect the data
• Self-reported data

The researcher is addressing how the large sample size requires a reassessment of the measures used to collect and analyze the data.

Research process limitations

Limitations during the research process may arise from:

• Access to information
• Longitudinal effects
• Cultural and other biases
• Language fluency
• Time constraints

The author is pointing out that the model’s estimates are based on potentially biased observational studies.

Final thoughts

Successfully proving theories and touting great achievements are only two very narrow goals of scholarly research. The true passion and greatest efforts of researchers comes more in the form of confronting assumptions and exploring the obscure.

In many ways, recognizing and sharing the limitations of a research study both allows for and encourages this type of discovery that continuously pushes research forward. By using limitations to provide a transparent account of the project's boundaries and to contextualize the findings, researchers pave the way for even more robust and impactful research in the future.

Charla Viera, MS

See our "Privacy Policy"

Ensure your structure and ideas are consistent and clearly communicated

Pair your Premium Editing with our add-on service Presubmission Review for an overall assessment of your manuscript.

Work Abroad

Study abroad.

• Citizenship

Inspiration

Three things to look forward to at Insight Out

Tips and tricks

Make magic with your customer data in Dovetail

Four ways Dovetail helps Product Managers master continuous product discovery

Events and videos

© Dovetail Research Pty. Ltd.

How to present limitations in research

Last updated

30 January 2024

Reviewed by

Limitations don’t invalidate or diminish your results, but it’s best to acknowledge them. This will enable you to address any questions your study failed to answer because of them.

In this guide, learn how to recognize, present, and overcome limitations in research.

• What is a research limitation?

Research limitations are weaknesses in your research design or execution that may have impacted outcomes and conclusions. Uncovering limitations doesn’t necessarily indicate poor research design—it just means you encountered challenges you couldn’t have anticipated that limited your research efforts.

Does basic research have limitations?

Basic research aims to provide more information about your research topic. It requires the same standard research methodology and data collection efforts as any other research type, and it can also have limitations.

• Common research limitations

Researchers encounter common limitations when embarking on a study. Limitations can occur in relation to the methods you apply or the research process you design. They could also be connected to you as the researcher.

Methodology limitations

Not having access to data or reliable information can impact the methods used to facilitate your research. A lack of data or reliability may limit the parameters of your study area and the extent of your exploration.

Your sample size may also be affected because you won’t have any direction on how big or small it should be and who or what you should include. Having too few participants won’t adequately represent the population or groups of people needed to draw meaningful conclusions.

Research process limitations

The study’s design can impose constraints on the process. For example, as you’re conducting the research, issues may arise that don’t conform to the data collection methodology you developed. You may not realize until well into the process that you should have incorporated more specific questions or comprehensive experiments to generate the data you need to have confidence in your results.

Constraints on resources can also have an impact. Being limited on participants or participation incentives may limit your sample sizes. Insufficient tools, equipment, and materials to conduct a thorough study may also be a factor.

Common researcher limitations

Here are some of the common researcher limitations you may encounter:

Time: some research areas require multi-year longitudinal approaches, but you might not be able to dedicate that much time. Imagine you want to measure how much memory a person loses as they age. This may involve conducting multiple tests on a sample of participants over 20–30 years, which may be impossible.

Bias: researchers can consciously or unconsciously apply bias to their research. Biases can contribute to relying on research sources and methodologies that will only support your beliefs about the research you’re embarking on. You might also omit relevant issues or participants from the scope of your study because of your biases.

Limited access to data : you may need to pay to access specific databases or journals that would be helpful to your research process. You might also need to gain information from certain people or organizations but have limited access to them. These cases require readjusting your process and explaining why your findings are still reliable.

• Why is it important to identify limitations?

Identifying limitations adds credibility to research and provides a deeper understanding of how you arrived at your conclusions.

Constraints may have prevented you from collecting specific data or information you hoped would prove or disprove your hypothesis or provide a more comprehensive understanding of your research topic.

However, identifying the limitations contributing to your conclusions can inspire further research efforts that help gather more substantial information and data.

• Where to put limitations in a research paper

A research paper is broken up into different sections that appear in the following order:

Introduction

Methodology

The discussion portion of your paper explores your findings and puts them in the context of the overall research. Either place research limitations at the beginning of the discussion section before the analysis of your findings or at the end of the section to indicate that further research needs to be pursued.

What not to include in the limitations section

Evidence that doesn’t support your hypothesis is not a limitation, so you shouldn’t include it in the limitation section. Don’t just list limitations and their degree of severity without further explanation.

• How to present limitations

You’ll want to present the limitations of your study in a way that doesn’t diminish the validity of your research and leave the reader wondering if your results and conclusions have been compromised.

Include only the limitations that directly relate to and impact how you addressed your research questions. Following a specific format enables the reader to develop an understanding of the weaknesses within the context of your findings without doubting the quality and integrity of your research.

Identify the limitations specific to your study

You don’t have to identify every possible limitation that might have occurred during your research process. Only identify those that may have influenced the quality of your findings and your ability to answer your research question.

Explain study limitations in detail

This explanation should be the most significant portion of your limitation section.

Link each limitation with an interpretation and appraisal of their impact on the study. You’ll have to evaluate and explain whether the error, method, or validity issues influenced the study’s outcome and how.

Propose a direction for future studies and present alternatives

In this section, suggest how researchers can avoid the pitfalls you experienced during your research process.

If an issue with methodology was a limitation, propose alternate methods that may help with a smoother and more conclusive research project. Discuss the pros and cons of your alternate recommendation.

Describe steps taken to minimize each limitation

You probably took steps to try to address or mitigate limitations when you noticed them throughout the course of your research project. Describe these steps in the limitation section.

• Limitation example

“Approaches like stem cell transplantation and vaccination in AD [Alzheimer’s disease] work on a cellular or molecular level in the laboratory. However, translation into clinical settings will remain a challenge for the next decade.”

The authors are saying that even though these methods showed promise in helping people with memory loss when conducted in the lab (in other words, using animal studies), more studies are needed. These may be controlled clinical trials, for example. 

However, the short life span of stem cells outside the lab and the vaccination’s severe inflammatory side effects are limitations. Researchers won’t be able to conduct clinical trials until these issues are overcome.

• How to overcome limitations in research

You’ve already started on the road to overcoming limitations in research by acknowledging that they exist. However, you need to ensure readers don’t mistake weaknesses for errors within your research design.

To do this, you’ll need to justify and explain your rationale for the methods, research design, and analysis tools you chose and how you noticed they may have presented limitations.

Your readers need to know that even when limitations presented themselves, you followed best practices and the ethical standards of your field. You didn’t violate any rules and regulations during your research process.

You’ll also want to reinforce the validity of your conclusions and results with multiple sources, methods, and perspectives. This prevents readers from assuming your findings were derived from a single or biased source.

• Learning and improving starts with limitations in research

Dealing with limitations with transparency and integrity helps identify areas for future improvements and developments. It’s a learning process, providing valuable insights into how you can improve methodologies, expand sample sizes, or explore alternate approaches to further support the validity of your findings.

Get started today

Go from raw data to valuable insights with a flexible research platform

Editor’s picks

Last updated: 21 December 2023

Last updated: 16 December 2023

Last updated: 6 October 2023

Last updated: 17 February 2024

Last updated: 5 March 2024

Last updated: 19 November 2023

Last updated: 15 February 2024

Last updated: 11 March 2024

Last updated: 12 December 2023

Last updated: 6 March 2024

Last updated: 10 April 2023

Last updated: 20 December 2023

Latest articles

Related topics, log in or sign up.

Get started for free

‘It’s the greatest living experiment’: Pitt Men’s Study marks 40 years of AIDS research

PITTSBURGH — In a Pittsburgh hospital in the early 1980s, Charles Rinaldo saw a young, previously healthy gay man critically ill with a virus usually only seen in weakened immune systems.

Around the same time, Jeffrey Toth was hearing terms like “the gay cancer” and “gay related immune deficiency” — and watching players in his gay softball league get mysteriously ill.

“People were dying and we didn’t know why,” said Marc C. E. Wagner. “I knew it was a devastating condition, even early on.”

Through gay bars and picnics, word began to spread about a study at the University of Pittsburgh investigating the disease, and on April 1, 1984, the study officially began recruiting its first participants.

Forty years later, the Pitt Men’s Study is one of the longest-running studies on HIV and AIDS in the country. About 2,000 men have participated since the beginning, coming every six months to give blood samples and answer questionnaires, building a scientific goldmine in the process.

“It’s the greatest living experiment,” said Wagner, an AIDS researcher at Pitt and one of the original study participants. “As one of my mentors, who is no longer with us, once told me, ‘You start in ignorance and you grow in knowledge, and that’s the basis of science.’”

Overall, 1,811 people have participated in the Pitt Men’s Study over the last 40 years, with 438 still-active participants — 201 of those who joined in 1985 or before. Of those who have ever participated in the study, 539 have died from AIDS or other causes.

In 1978, Rinaldo came to Pittsburgh, fresh from completing postdoctoral studies at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston. His focus was an “opportunistic virus” called cytomegalovirus that attacked people with weakened immune systems, such as organ transplant recipients. Pittsburgh was growing as a transplant center by 1981, boosted by the arrival of transplant pioneer Thomas Starzl.

That same year, Rinaldo remembers seeing a “perplexing case” of a critically ill gay man in his mid-20s with CMV and Pneumocystis pneumonia, another opportunistic virus. Unlike most of the patients that Rinaldo saw with CMV, he had no previous health problems and had not received an organ transplant. Though the disease didn’t have a name yet, the man is now recognized as Pittsburgh’s first known AIDS patient, and later died of the disease.

Shortly afterward, Rinaldo met David Lyter, a Pitt medical student who had recently come out as gay. Lyter had seen the new disease affecting the gay community and approached Rinaldo about putting together a study to investigate it. With no official funding, and with Lyter doing most of the recruiting, they put together a pilot study of about 70 gay men.

At the same time, the country was starting to recognize the virus as well. In June of 1981, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control reported on a cluster of five cases in Los Angeles — all gay men with no known contact with each other, sick with Pneumocystis pneumonia and CMV infections. In September 1982, the CDC used the term AIDS, or acquired immune deficiency syndrome, for the first time. A few months later, the National Institutes of Health put out a request for research proposals for a large study of the new disease.

The study was looking to include one research site in a city that didn’t have as high of an incidence of AIDS as major population centers such as L.A. or New York City. “They thought maybe there was a different cause,” said Rinaldo. “That was one of the hypotheses at the time.”

Rinaldo was decades younger than most of the academic heavyweights vying for funding. But with the support of leaders at the university, he applied.

In the summer of 1983, he received a grant for $4.2 million — which equates to more than $13 million in 2024 — over four years. The study, called the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study, also included sites in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Baltimore and Chicago, and all except San Francisco are still involved today.

“We were to define the natural history of what was just then being called AIDS,” said Rinaldo. “We did not know the virus that was the cause of this. Part of our intent was to help discover what was causing this mysterious disease.”

But first, Rinaldo needed to find more than 1,000 gay men to come to Pittsburgh to participate in the study — at a time of great fear of the virus and stigma toward homosexuality.

Building the study

“I’m a straight male scientist, never having dealt with the LGBTQ community,” he said. “This is Pittsburgh; it wasn’t San Francisco. That community was not as prominent and accepted as it was in some of the larger cities at the time.”

With Lyter’s help, he enlisted the Tavern Guild — a group of gay bar and bathhouse owners — to spread the word. They recruited at gay bars, putting up posters and handing out napkins with the study’s name and address. Sometimes they took blood specimens right in the bars, using an office or coat check room. Many bars at the time had switched to using plastic utensils, unsure how the virus could spread.

The study also hired Tony Silvestre, a prominent gay leader from Philadelphia, to lead recruiting. An instrumental part of the history of the Pitt Men’s Study, Silvestre died in 2022.

The recruitment was effective, in part because some viewed it as their chance to do something positive about a terrible situation.

Toth heard about the study from a former boss. “HIV was affecting the community — nobody knew what it was, but it was quite scary back then,” he said. “We were younger back then, and we saw some older people just getting very sick. We thought, ‘Oh, we have to do something. It may affect us eventually.’ And it did.”

Because of the fear at the time, the study took immense precautions on secrecy. The clinic was in the Oakland neighborhood of Pittsburgh, not in a university building. Participants were identified only by an ID number; information about their names was kept in a different office in a different building.

Even outside of the building, employees of the study practiced strict confidentiality.

“If you were walking down the street and saw someone and you knew they were part of the study, you just walked right past them,” said Bill Buchanan, who worked for the study from 1988 until he retired in 2022. “Unless you talked to me first, it would be like I never saw you in my life. You have to play that game.”

Even the door to the clinic didn’t fully identify what was going on. “There were no signs on the door that said Pitt Men’s Study. It just said PMS Clinic,” said Buchanan. “Once in a blue moon, you’d get a woman that came in. When she found out that wasn’t what PMS meant, she’d get a little upset.”

Take the news everywhere you go.

At first, visits to the clinic would involve taking all sorts of specimens — blood, saliva, feces, semen — and questionnaires about sexual practices.

“Back then, we took everything,” said Rinaldo. “We didn’t know what we were looking for.”

Evolving testing

In 1985, the FDA approved a test to determine whether antibodies for the virus that caused AIDS were present in a blood test.

All these men who had submitted blood samples could now find out — if they chose to — whether or not they had the virus now known as HIV.

The researchers carefully developed a protocol for how they would let the participants know: They would tell them in person, whether they were positive or negative.

Wagner remembers going in for his session. Though he had no symptoms, he was told that his blood did have the antibodies. Sometime in between his first and second visit to the study, he contracted HIV.

“It was devastating,” he said. “Back then, there were literally no medications. All you were hearing was that it was a death sentence — that in some course of time that you didn’t know yet, you would die.”

In Pittsburgh, about 22% of the participants had antibodies indicating HIV. In some of the other sites in the study, that figure was closer to 50%.

Testing for HIV and AIDS improved further with viral load testing, which not only showed antibodies but also the presence of the virus itself.

One of the Pitt Men’s Study’s most important findings was research on viral loads in the mid-1990s, showing that people who had higher levels of the virus in their blood were much more likely to develop AIDS than people who had lower levels.

“Common sense would dictate it, but we were the first to actually prove it,” said Rinaldo. “To this day, it’s one of the most cited papers in the field.”

Forging community

With so many gay men — both with AIDS and without — regularly visiting the Pitt Men’s Study office, it started to become a de facto clearinghouse of information. Pittsburgh’s gay infrastructure wasn’t as developed as in cities with larger populations, such as San Francisco, and people weren’t sure where else to turn.

“Ultimately, people would turn to the study for all kinds of help — medical help, legal help, I’ve been evicted from my apartment,” said Buchanan. “We were a study, we didn’t have those kinds of resources, and that was the impetus behind creating the Pittsburgh AIDS Task Force.”

The study frequently referred those with AIDS to Jerry Rabinowitz, who was killed in the Squirrel Hill synagogue shooting in 2018. Rabinowitz was one of the first doctors in Pittsburgh willing to treat AIDS patients.

Contributing to the study’s legacy are the larger AIDS services that developed from it. Education programs that stemmed from the study likely prevented many more AIDS cases, said Buchanan.

The study also created a community advisory board that continues to this day, and for years the study led the way locally in commemorating World AIDS Day in Pittsburgh.

Growing understanding — and options

As the AIDS epidemic continued, understanding of the virus grew, as did treatments. In 1987, the FDA approved the first AIDS drug, called AZT. The drug prolonged the lives of some AIDS patients but had serious side effects for some, such as nausea, liver problems and headaches.

For Wagner, the side effects of AZT were unbearable. In what he believed was a choice between quality of life and quantity of life, he stopped taking it.

By 1993, HIV was the leading cause of death among Americans aged 25 to 44. But new and better drugs were on the way. In the mid-1990s, the FDA approved combination therapies that were more effective, but required taking many pills per day. By the late 1990s, those medications were further improved and consolidated into fewer pills.

With medication, Wagner’s viral load is now so low that it is considered undetectable. “I’ve outlived so many of my relatives. If you would have told me at the beginning of this journey that I would still be here and they would be gone, I never would have believed this to be possible. The study gave back to me so much understanding of my own body, peace of mind of knowing what’s going on.”

In some ways, the study has transformed into research on aging with HIV and AIDS, and the effect that the virus has on the body.

With such a large bank of data — and 40 years of specimens in freezers — there are unlimited opportunities for research. Rinaldo is involved in one study that has taken modern understanding of microbiomes and applied it to decades-old stool samples of HIV-positive men, showing differences in the bacteria of those who developed AIDS. Other studies are looking at how HIV affects men who become infected today versus in the early 1980s.

“Forty years later, the specimens that the men gave us are extremely relevant,” said Rinaldo. “I tell my students and postdocs, every time you go into the freezer and take out these specimens, just remember how we got these. Even with all the fancy technology we use now, there’s no way at all we could do all this without these men.”

And to those involved, the study has meant more than just science. For 40 years, they have come to a nondescript building, sharing not just their blood but also friendship, sorrow and camaraderie.

“It’s one of the most dedicated groups of people that I’ve ever seen. Some of the best people in the world walk through that door,” said Buchanan. “I came to love them as friends. Even though I’m retired, there’s a number of them who said, ‘I need your home number, I need to stay in touch.’ Some of them showed up at my mother’s funeral last month.”

Part of the close kinship, of course, comes from tragedy. Toth, one of the original participants and a current data manager for the study, still has a photo from his gay softball team in the early 1980s. “The majority of the team is gone,” he said, “and most of them, sadly, is because of AIDS.”

Later this year, the study will hold events to honor the participants and mark 40 years.

“I don’t call this a celebration: I call this a commemoration,” said Rinaldo. “We won’t be celebrating until we don’t have to do this anymore — until we cure this infection or have a vaccine. We want to keep this going until the study is no longer needed.”

Related Stories

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Challenges and support needs in psychological and physical health among pilots: a qualitative study.

• 1 School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
• 2 Other, Shanghai, China
• 3 National Center For Global Health and Medicine, Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan
• 4 School of Public Health, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
• 5 School of Nursing, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, Shanghai, China
• 6 International Peace Maternity and Child Health Hospital, Shanghai, Shanghai Municipality, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Select one of your emails

You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:

Notify me on publication

Please enter your email address:

If you already have an account, please login

You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here

Abstract Introduction Physical and mental health problems among pilots affect their working state and impact flight safety. Although pilots’ physical and mental health problems have become increasingly prominent, their health has not been taken seriously. This study aimed to clarify challenges and support needs related to psychological and physical health among pilots to inform development of a more scientific and comprehensive physical and mental health system for civil aviation pilots. Methods This qualitative study recruited pilots from nine civil aviation companies. Focus group interviews via an online conference platform were conducted in August 2022. Colaizzi analysis was used to derive themes from the data and explore pilots’ experiences, challenges, and support needs. Results The main sub-themes capturing pilots’ psychological and physical health challenges were: 1) imbalance between family life and work; 2) pressure from assessment and physical examination eligibility requirements; 3) pressure from worries about being infected with COVID-19; 4) nutrition deficiency during working hours; 5) changes in eating habits because of the COVID-19 pandemic; 6) sleep deprivation; 7) occupational diseases; 8) lack of support from the company in coping with stress; 9) pilots’ yearly examination standards; 10) support with sports equipment; 11) respecting planned rest time; and 12) isolation periods. Discussion The interviewed pilots experienced major psychological pressure from various sources, and their physical health condition was concerning. We offer several suggestions that could be addressed to improve pilots’ physical and mental health. However, more research is needed to compare standard health measures for pilots around the world in order to improve their physical and mental health and contribute to overall aviation safety.

Keywords: Occupational Health, Mental Health, physical health, qualitative study, Pilots and cabin crew, COVID-19

Received: 06 Dec 2023; Accepted: 05 Apr 2024.

Copyright: © 2024 Xu, Bao, Zhang, Li, Zhang, Li, Jin, Chen, Duan, Shi, Wang, Lu, Chen, Gao, Han, Ren, Su and Xiang. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Yuyan Bao, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China Lin Zhang, Other, Shanghai, China Qingqing Jin, Other, Shanghai, China Yan Chen, Other, Shanghai, China Qingqing Duan, Other, Shanghai, China Feng Shi, Other, Shanghai, China Linlin Wang, Other, Shanghai, China Ziyang Lu, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China Xuhua Chen, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China Qijing Gao, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China Bin Ren, Other, Shanghai, China Ya Su, School of Nursing, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, Shanghai, China Mi Xiang, School of Public Health, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, 200240, China

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Yale Directories

Institution for Social and Policy Studies

Advancing research • shaping policy • developing leaders, yale-led study spurs federal action: hhs requires consent for intimate medical procedures.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued new guidance to teaching hospitals and medical schools April 1, requiring that medical providers obtain written consent before performing intimate examinations, particularly on patients under anesthesia.

The national directive marks a major milestone in a yearslong effort driven by the research and advocacy of Lori Bruce , associate director of Yale’s Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics, supported by the Institution for Social and Policy Studies.

“This landmark achievement for patient consent was attained because countless advocates — including patients, community members, medical students, ethicists, and some physicians — spoke up despite pressure to remain silent,” Bruce said. “Our work isn’t done. We still need to ensure the careful implementation of the updated guidelines. But HHS’s commitment to patient rights is profoundly redeeming.”

In a letter signed by HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra, the department acknowledged media reports and scientific literature demonstrating how hospitals often perform pelvic, breast, and rectal examinations on unconscious patients without their informed consent. Such examinations are often medically unnecessary, Bruce said, serving as an opportunity for trainees and new clinicians to gain practical experience. But unconsented procedures can be traumatic for patients, particularly those who have experienced previous sexual trauma.

“It is critically important that hospitals set clear guidelines to ensure providers and trainees performing these examinations first obtain and document informed consent from patients before performing sensitive examinations in all circumstances,” the HHS letter said, linking to guidelines hospitals must follow to receive Medicare and Medicaid funds .  “Informed consent includes the right to refuse consent for sensitive examinations conducted for teaching purposes and the right to refuse to consent to any previously unagreed examinations to treatment while under anesthesia.”

In 2020, Connecticut elected officials invited Bruce to shine a light on the ethics of consent for intimate medical examinations. She gave public lectures explaining the ethical tensions, served on the state’s strategic task force, solicited community insights through Yale’s Community Bioethics Forum , and conducted a national survey — the first of its kind — that helped instigate the passage of Connecticut’s 2022 bill requiring explicit consent for these examinations.

Bruce and her co-authors uncovered how potentially 3.6 million American women and men are likely to have received unconsented pelvic or prostate exams and that Black patients are four times more likely than white patients to report having received such unconsented exams.

In September, the national NBC Nightly News ran a story citing Bruce’s report , drawing the attention of RAINN (Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network), who sought out federal legislators who might help end the practice, Bruce said. About six weeks ago, an aide for U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-South Carolina) reached out to Bruce and collaborated with her on a letter to HHS.

“It’s a step in the right direction that HHS has finally mandated hospitals obtain written consent for these invasive examinations,” Mace said. “The fact that doctors were conducting these exams on women under anesthesia without their consent or medical need is simply unacceptable.”

Bruce said that while medical professionals do not intend any harm in conducting intimate examinations on unconscious patients, research has uncovered how these practices can have a negative impact on medical students as well.

In addition, several research studies have shown that if asked for permission to conduct an extra training exam, about 90% of patients will agree, Bruce said.

“We have been risking the mental health of patients and putting students and everyone in the room watching through this moral angst for no reason,” Bruce said. “Recent studies demonstrate that obtaining explicit consent improves clinicians’ relationship with their patients.”

Connecticut State Rep. Josh Elliot (D-Hamden) recruited Bruce to help inform the Public Health Committee and overcome what he called inertia over the informed consent bill in the years before it eventually passed.

“The biggest problem is that doctors in the state were coming out and saying this was not a problem and this law would cause more problems than it would solve,” Elliot said. “Being able to undercut that argument with specific figures and surveys was necessary. This wouldn’t have happened without Lori’s help.”

Other states followed with similar laws, Bruce said, and she is unaware of any institution reporting significant harm in their ability to train the next generation of medical providers.

ISPS Director Alan Gerber , Sterling Professor of Political Science, praised Bruce for demonstrating how science can inform effective, ethical policy.

“Lori and Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics Director Stephen Latham exemplify the ideals we strive to uphold at ISPS,” Gerber said. “The Connecticut law and new HHS guidance on consent for intimate medical exams show how expertise, tenacity, and collaboration can culminate in more sensitive and thoughtful practices for everyone.”

Bruce agreed and hopes that the lessons of this overdue correction will reverberate to other areas of medical research and practice.

“Ethical medicine is reliant on good data,” she said. “When we don’t know exactly what is happening, it is challenging to write an ethical law.”

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.

• Alzheimer's disease & dementia
• Arthritis & Rheumatism
• Attention deficit disorders
• Autism spectrum disorders
• Biomedical technology
• Diseases, Conditions, Syndromes
• Endocrinology & Metabolism
• Gastroenterology
• Gerontology & Geriatrics
• Health informatics
• Inflammatory disorders
• Medical economics
• Medical research
• Medications
• Neuroscience
• Obstetrics & gynaecology
• Oncology & Cancer
• Ophthalmology
• Overweight & Obesity
• Parkinson's & Movement disorders
• Psychology & Psychiatry
• Radiology & Imaging
• Sleep disorders
• Sports medicine & Kinesiology
• Vaccination
• Breast cancer
• Cardiovascular disease
• Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
• Colon cancer
• Coronary artery disease
• Heart attack
• Heart disease
• High blood pressure
• Kidney disease
• Lung cancer
• Multiple sclerosis
• Myocardial infarction
• Ovarian cancer
• Post traumatic stress disorder
• Rheumatoid arthritis
• Schizophrenia
• Skin cancer
• Type 2 diabetes
• Full List »

share this!

April 5, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

peer-reviewed publication

reputable news agency

Surveillance colonoscopy rarely IDs cancer in older adults, study finds

by Lori Solomon

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is rarely detected from surveillance colonoscopy among older adults, regardless of prior adenoma findings, according to a study published online April 2 in JAMA Network Open .

Jeffrey K. Lee, M.D., M.P.H., from Kaiser Permanente Northern California in Oakland, and colleagues estimated surveillance colonoscopy yields in older adults . The analysis included 9,601 individuals 70 to 85 years who received 9,740 surveillance colonoscopies at a large, community-based U.S. health care system (2017 through 2019) and had an adenoma detected ≥12 months previously.

The researchers reported that CRC yields were found in 0.3 percent of procedures, advanced adenoma in 11.7 percent, and advanced neoplasia in 12.0 percent. There were no significant differences in yields across age groups.

CRC yields were significantly higher for colonoscopies among patients with a prior advanced adenoma versus nonadvanced adenoma (0.5 versus 0.2 percent).

A similar pattern was seen for advanced neoplasia (16.5 versus 10.6 percent). Detection of advanced neoplasia at surveillance was associated with prior advanced adenoma (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.65), body mass index ≥30 versus <25 kg/m 2 (aOR, 1.21), and having ever smoked tobacco (aOR, 1.14). There was an inverse association between Asian or Pacific Islander race and advanced neoplasia.

"With current guidelines offering no specific age at which to stop surveillance colonoscopy, the study findings can inform clinicians and older patients regarding the potential benefits (or lack of benefits) of continuing with postpolypectomy surveillance in the context of the life expectancy of the patient and weighed against the rare but known harms of colonoscopy," the authors write.

Copyright © 2024 HealthDay . All rights reserved.

Explore further

Feedback to editors

Stopping aspirin 1 month after coronary stenting significantly reduces bleeding complications in heart attack patients

11 hours ago

Oral vaccine for UTI is potential alternative to antibiotics, finds 9-year study

Apr 6, 2024

Study: Epilepsy patients benefit from structured 'seizure action plans'

Screening with a PSA test has a small impact on prostate cancer deaths but leads to overdiagnosis, finds study

Clinical trial: First cardiac bioimplants for treatment of myocardial infarction using umbilical cord stem cells

Apr 5, 2024

Research team builds first tandem repeat expansions genetic reference maps

Human neuron model paves the way for new Alzheimer's therapies

A deep dive into the genetics of alcohol consumption

First atlas of the human ovary with cell-level resolution is a step toward artificial ovary

Pig hearts kept alive outside the body for more than 24 hours offers hope for many humans needing a transplant

Related stories.

Advanced young-onset adenoma increases colorectal cancer risk

Sep 18, 2023

AI does not improve advanced colorectal neoplasia detection rate

Aug 29, 2023

Advanced neoplasia risk found to increase at upper range of negative FIT values

Nov 7, 2023

Recurrence up with incomplete resection of colorectal polyps

Aug 10, 2021

Colorectal neoplasia risk up for Hodgkin Lymphoma survivors

Apr 15, 2019

Negative fecal tests tied to low risk for advanced colorectal cancer

Jan 31, 2023

Recommended for you

Radiation before mastectomy found to cut time delays for reconstructive surgery in breast cancer patients

The architectural role of p53: Early 3D chromatin remodeling to trigger cellular stress response

Molecular subtypes of advanced kidney cancer matter for treatment response

Research details adaptation tactics of pancreatic cancer

Apr 4, 2024

New study reveals how T cells gain and maintain tolerance to gut bacteria

Let us know if there is a problem with our content.

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Medical Xpress in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter