past questions on research methodology

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Final Exam Review for Research Methodology (RES301)

Research Methodology final exam review

Related Papers

Dr. John Karanja , JOHN KARANJA, PhD

research proposal is a comprehensive plan for a research project. It is a written description of a research plan that has to be undertaken. It determines the specific areas of research, states the purpose, scope, methodology, overall organization and limitations of the study. It also estimates its requirements for equipment (if necessary), finance and possible personnel.

pinky marie mendi gallano

Rebekka Tunombili

Rengganis Ernia

Dr RUKUNDO Levi, PhD

Dewi Nurbaeti Widianingsih

Nidhi Mishra

Fundamental_of_Research_Methods and Statisti

Hadi Pranoto

RELATED PAPERS

Pabrik Bronjong Kawat Galvanis

Revista Mundi Engenharia, Tecnologia e Gestão (ISSN: 2525-4782)

Fernando Oliveira de Araujo

Mário Veloso

Revista Geografar

Aparecido Andrade

Jornal de Pediatria

JOEL ALVES LAMOUNIER

Marek Sklodowski

Angela Olaya

Behavioral Neuroscience

Gonzalo Viana

Larry Magalhães

Photochem. Photobiol. Sci.

Vit Kalousek

Applied Optics

Kaisa Lakkala

Revue des sciences de l'éducation

Rafaela dos anjos

Kimberly Wooten

Shigeki YOKOYAMA

Jurnal Teknologi Informasi dan Ilmu Komputer

Mardiana Purwaningsih

Remote Sensing

Clint Hoffmann

Isabel Ortigosa

Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association

Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Saga Komunitas

syifa pauziah

LEE RIDOUTT

Suci Rahmadani

arXiv (Cornell University)

Marisa Vasconcelos

Vol 3. No 1. NJNS

iqbal jebril

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• Technical Support
• Find My Rep

You are here

100 Questions (and Answers) About Research Methods

• Neil J. Salkind
• Description

"How do I create a good research hypothesis?"

"How do I know when my literature review is finished?"

"What is the difference between a sample and a population?"

"What is power and why is it important?"

In an increasingly data-driven world, it is more important than ever for students as well as professionals to better understand the process of research. This invaluable guide answers the essential questions that students ask about research methods in a concise and accessible way.

See what’s new to this edition by selecting the Features tab on this page. Should you need additional information or have questions regarding the HEOA information provided for this title, including what is new to this edition, please email [email protected] . Please include your name, contact information, and the name of the title for which you would like more information. For information on the HEOA, please go to http://ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/hea08/index.html .

For assistance with your order: Please email us at [email protected] or connect with your SAGE representative.

SAGE 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, CA 91320 www.sagepub.com

"This is a concise text that has good coverage of the basic concepts and elementary principles of research methods. It picks up where many traditional research methods texts stop and provides additional discussion on some of the hardest to understand concepts."

"I think it’s a great idea for a text (or series), and I have no doubt that the majority of students would find it helpful. The material is presented clearly, and it is easy to read and understand. My favorite example from those provided is on p. 7 where the author provides an actual checklist for evaluating the merit of a study. This is a great tool for students and would provide an excellent “practice” approach to learning this skill. Over time students wouldn’t need a checklist, but I think it would be invaluable for those students with little to no research experience."

I already am using 3 other books. This is a good book though.

Did not meet my needs

I had heard good things about Salkind's statistics book and wanted to review his research book as well. The 100 questions format is cute, and may provide a quick answer to a specific student question. However, it's not really organized in a way that I find particularly useful for a more integrated course that progressively develop and builds upon concepts.

comes across as a little disorganized, plus a little too focused on psychology and statistics.

This text is a great resource guide for graduate students. But it may not work as well with undergraduates orienting themselves to the research process. However, I will use it as a recommended text for students.

Key Features

· The entire research process is covered from start to finish: Divided into nine parts, the book  guides readers from the initial asking of questions, through the analysis and interpretation of data, to the final report

· Each question and answer provides a stand-alone explanation: Readers gain enough information on a particular topic to move on to the next question, and topics can be read in any order

· Most questions and answers supplement others in the book: Important material is reinforced, and connections are made between the topics

· Each answer ends with referral to three other related questions: Readers are shown where to go for additional information on the most closely related topics

Sample Materials & Chapters

Question #16: Question #16: How Do I Know When My Literature Review Is Finished?

Question #32: How Can I Create a Good Research Hypothesis?

Question #40: What Is the Difference Between a Sample and a Population, and Why

Question #92: What Is Power, and Why Is It Important?

For instructors

Select a purchasing option.

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base
• Dissertation
• What Is a Research Methodology? | Steps & Tips

What Is a Research Methodology? | Steps & Tips

Published on 25 February 2019 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 10 October 2022.

Your research methodology discusses and explains the data collection and analysis methods you used in your research. A key part of your thesis, dissertation, or research paper, the methodology chapter explains what you did and how you did it, allowing readers to evaluate the reliability and validity of your research.

It should include:

• The type of research you conducted
• How you collected and analysed your data
• Any tools or materials you used in the research
• Why you chose these methods
• Your methodology section should generally be written in the past tense .
• Academic style guides in your field may provide detailed guidelines on what to include for different types of studies.
• Your citation style might provide guidelines for your methodology section (e.g., an APA Style methods section ).

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Be assured that you'll submit flawless writing. Upload your document to correct all your mistakes.

Table of contents

How to write a research methodology, why is a methods section important, step 1: explain your methodological approach, step 2: describe your data collection methods, step 3: describe your analysis method, step 4: evaluate and justify the methodological choices you made, tips for writing a strong methodology chapter, frequently asked questions about methodology.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Your methods section is your opportunity to share how you conducted your research and why you chose the methods you chose. It’s also the place to show that your research was rigorously conducted and can be replicated .

It gives your research legitimacy and situates it within your field, and also gives your readers a place to refer to if they have any questions or critiques in other sections.

You can start by introducing your overall approach to your research. You have two options here.

Option 1: Start with your “what”

What research problem or question did you investigate?

• Aim to describe the characteristics of something?
• Explore an under-researched topic?
• Establish a causal relationship?

And what type of data did you need to achieve this aim?

• Quantitative data , qualitative data , or a mix of both?
• Primary data collected yourself, or secondary data collected by someone else?
• Experimental data gathered by controlling and manipulating variables, or descriptive data gathered via observations?

Option 2: Start with your “why”

Depending on your discipline, you can also start with a discussion of the rationale and assumptions underpinning your methodology. In other words, why did you choose these methods for your study?

• Why is this the best way to answer your research question?
• Is this a standard methodology in your field, or does it require justification?
• Were there any ethical considerations involved in your choices?
• What are the criteria for validity and reliability in this type of research ?

Once you have introduced your reader to your methodological approach, you should share full details about your data collection methods .

Quantitative methods

In order to be considered generalisable, you should describe quantitative research methods in enough detail for another researcher to replicate your study.

Here, explain how you operationalised your concepts and measured your variables. Discuss your sampling method or inclusion/exclusion criteria, as well as any tools, procedures, and materials you used to gather your data.

Surveys Describe where, when, and how the survey was conducted.

• How did you design the questionnaire?
• What form did your questions take (e.g., multiple choice, Likert scale )?
• Were your surveys conducted in-person or virtually?
• What sampling method did you use to select participants?
• What was your sample size and response rate?

Experiments Share full details of the tools, techniques, and procedures you used to conduct your experiment.

• How did you design the experiment ?
• How did you recruit participants?
• How did you manipulate and measure the variables ?
• What tools did you use?

Existing data Explain how you gathered and selected the material (such as datasets or archival data) that you used in your analysis.

• Where did you source the material?
• How was the data originally produced?
• What criteria did you use to select material (e.g., date range)?

The survey consisted of 5 multiple-choice questions and 10 questions measured on a 7-point Likert scale.

The goal was to collect survey responses from 350 customers visiting the fitness apparel company’s brick-and-mortar location in Boston on 4–8 July 2022, between 11:00 and 15:00.

Here, a customer was defined as a person who had purchased a product from the company on the day they took the survey. Participants were given 5 minutes to fill in the survey anonymously. In total, 408 customers responded, but not all surveys were fully completed. Due to this, 371 survey results were included in the analysis.

Qualitative methods

In qualitative research , methods are often more flexible and subjective. For this reason, it’s crucial to robustly explain the methodology choices you made.

Be sure to discuss the criteria you used to select your data, the context in which your research was conducted, and the role you played in collecting your data (e.g., were you an active participant, or a passive observer?)

Interviews or focus groups Describe where, when, and how the interviews were conducted.

• How did you find and select participants?
• How many participants took part?
• What form did the interviews take ( structured , semi-structured , or unstructured )?
• How long were the interviews?
• How were they recorded?

Participant observation Describe where, when, and how you conducted the observation or ethnography .

• What group or community did you observe? How long did you spend there?
• How did you gain access to this group? What role did you play in the community?
• How long did you spend conducting the research? Where was it located?
• How did you record your data (e.g., audiovisual recordings, note-taking)?

Existing data Explain how you selected case study materials for your analysis.

• What type of materials did you analyse?
• How did you select them?

In order to gain better insight into possibilities for future improvement of the fitness shop’s product range, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 8 returning customers.

Here, a returning customer was defined as someone who usually bought products at least twice a week from the store.

Surveys were used to select participants. Interviews were conducted in a small office next to the cash register and lasted approximately 20 minutes each. Answers were recorded by note-taking, and seven interviews were also filmed with consent. One interviewee preferred not to be filmed.

Mixed methods

Mixed methods research combines quantitative and qualitative approaches. If a standalone quantitative or qualitative study is insufficient to answer your research question, mixed methods may be a good fit for you.

Mixed methods are less common than standalone analyses, largely because they require a great deal of effort to pull off successfully. If you choose to pursue mixed methods, it’s especially important to robustly justify your methods here.

Next, you should indicate how you processed and analysed your data. Avoid going into too much detail: you should not start introducing or discussing any of your results at this stage.

In quantitative research , your analysis will be based on numbers. In your methods section, you can include:

• How you prepared the data before analysing it (e.g., checking for missing data , removing outliers , transforming variables)
• Which software you used (e.g., SPSS, Stata or R)
• Which statistical tests you used (e.g., two-tailed t test , simple linear regression )

In qualitative research, your analysis will be based on language, images, and observations (often involving some form of textual analysis ).

Specific methods might include:

• Content analysis : Categorising and discussing the meaning of words, phrases and sentences
• Thematic analysis : Coding and closely examining the data to identify broad themes and patterns
• Discourse analysis : Studying communication and meaning in relation to their social context

Mixed methods combine the above two research methods, integrating both qualitative and quantitative approaches into one coherent analytical process.

Above all, your methodology section should clearly make the case for why you chose the methods you did. This is especially true if you did not take the most standard approach to your topic. In this case, discuss why other methods were not suitable for your objectives, and show how this approach contributes new knowledge or understanding.

In any case, it should be overwhelmingly clear to your reader that you set yourself up for success in terms of your methodology’s design. Show how your methods should lead to results that are valid and reliable, while leaving the analysis of the meaning, importance, and relevance of your results for your discussion section .

• Quantitative: Lab-based experiments cannot always accurately simulate real-life situations and behaviours, but they are effective for testing causal relationships between variables .
• Qualitative: Unstructured interviews usually produce results that cannot be generalised beyond the sample group , but they provide a more in-depth understanding of participants’ perceptions, motivations, and emotions.
• Mixed methods: Despite issues systematically comparing differing types of data, a solely quantitative study would not sufficiently incorporate the lived experience of each participant, while a solely qualitative study would be insufficiently generalisable.

Remember that your aim is not just to describe your methods, but to show how and why you applied them. Again, it’s critical to demonstrate that your research was rigorously conducted and can be replicated.

1. Focus on your objectives and research questions

The methodology section should clearly show why your methods suit your objectives  and convince the reader that you chose the best possible approach to answering your problem statement and research questions .

2. Cite relevant sources

Your methodology can be strengthened by referencing existing research in your field. This can help you to:

• Show that you followed established practice for your type of research
• Discuss how you decided on your approach by evaluating existing research
• Present a novel methodological approach to address a gap in the literature

3. Write for your audience

Consider how much information you need to give, and avoid getting too lengthy. If you are using methods that are standard for your discipline, you probably don’t need to give a lot of background or justification.

Regardless, your methodology should be a clear, well-structured text that makes an argument for your approach, not just a list of technical details and procedures.

Methodology refers to the overarching strategy and rationale of your research. Developing your methodology involves studying the research methods used in your field and the theories or principles that underpin them, in order to choose the approach that best matches your objectives.

Methods are the specific tools and procedures you use to collect and analyse data (e.g. interviews, experiments , surveys , statistical tests ).

In a dissertation or scientific paper, the methodology chapter or methods section comes after the introduction and before the results , discussion and conclusion .

Depending on the length and type of document, you might also include a literature review or theoretical framework before the methodology.

Quantitative research deals with numbers and statistics, while qualitative research deals with words and meanings.

Quantitative methods allow you to test a hypothesis by systematically collecting and analysing data, while qualitative methods allow you to explore ideas and experiences in depth.

A sample is a subset of individuals from a larger population. Sampling means selecting the group that you will actually collect data from in your research.

For example, if you are researching the opinions of students in your university, you could survey a sample of 100 students.

Statistical sampling allows you to test a hypothesis about the characteristics of a population. There are various sampling methods you can use to ensure that your sample is representative of the population as a whole.

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2022, October 10). What Is a Research Methodology? | Steps & Tips. Scribbr. Retrieved 9 April 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/methodology/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a dissertation proposal | a step-by-step guide, what is a literature review | guide, template, & examples, what is a theoretical framework | a step-by-step guide.

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

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

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

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

Importance of a Good Methodology Section

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

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

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

Structure and Writing Style

I.  Groups of Research Methods

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

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

II.  Content

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

The remainder of your methodology section should describe the following:

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

In addition, an effectively written methodology section should:

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

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

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

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

III.  Problems to Avoid

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

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

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

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

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

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

Writing Tip

Statistical Designs and Tests? Do Not Fear Them!

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

To locate data and statistics, GO HERE .

Another Writing Tip

Knowing the Relationship Between Theories and Methods

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

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

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

Yet Another Writing Tip

Methods and the Methodology

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

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

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

• << Previous: Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Next: Qualitative Methods >>
• Last Updated: Apr 11, 2024 1:27 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

• AQA Model Answers Info
• Purchase AQA Model Answers
• Private Tuition
• Info + Contact

PAST PAPERS: RESEARCH METHODS: AQA A-LEVEL PSYCHOLOGY RESOURCES

Psychology aqa  a-level (7182)  unit 2: 7182/2.

Full model answers for all of these questions are  available here

Sign up to the PsychLogic newsletter at the bottom of this page to download printable AQA A-level Psychology revision notes + AQA A-level Psychology revision guide + A-level Psychology revision tips + more...

The best way to revise Psychology A-level

THE SYLLABUS

METHODS, TECHNIQUES & DESIGN

• Primary and secondary data, and meta-analysis. Quantitative and qualitative data
• Aims, operationalising variables, IV’s and DV’s
• Hypotheses - directional and non-directional
• Experimental design - independent groups, repeated measures, matched pairs
• Validity – internal and external; extraneous and confounding variables; types of validity and improving validity
• Control – random allocation, randomisation, standardisation
• Demand characteristics and investigator effects
• Reliability; types of reliability and improving reliability
• Pilot studies
• Correlation analysis – covariables and hypotheses, positive/negative correlations
• Observational techniques – use of behavioural categories
• Self-report techniques – design of questionnaires and interviews
• Case studies
• Content analysis & thematic analysis

PARTICIPANTS; ETHICS; FEATURES OF SCIENCE & SCIENTIFIC METHOD; THE ECONOMY

• Selecting participants and sampling techniques
• The British Psychological Society (BPS) code of ethics and ways of dealing with ethical issues
• Forms and instructions
• Peer review
• Features of science: objectivity, empirical method, replicability and falsifiability, paradigms and paradigm shifts
• Reporting psychological investigations
• The implications of psychological research for the economy

DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

• Analysis and interpretation of quantitative data. Measures of central tendency - median, mean, mode. Calculating %’s. Measures of dispersion – range and standard deviation (SD)
• Presentation and interpretation of quantitative data – graphs, histograms, bar charts, scattergrams and tables
• Analysis and interpretation of correlational data; positive and negative correlations and the interpretation of correlation coefficients
• Distributions: normal and skewed

INFERENTIAL STATISTICS

• Introduction
• Factors affecting choice of statistics test: Spearman’s rho, Pearson’s r, Wilcoxon, Mann-Whitney, related t-test, unrelated t-test, Chi-Squared test
• Levels of measurement – nominal, ordinal, interval
• Procedures for statistics tests
• Probability and significance: use of statistical tables and critical values in interpretation of significance; Type I and Type II errors
• Introduction to statistical testing: the sign test

>>>>>>>

SPECIMEN PAPER 1 ( Psychology A-level revision)

Read the item and then answer the questions that follow.

A psychologist wanted to see if verbal fluency is affected by whether people think they are presenting information to a small group of people or to a large group of people.

The psychologist needed a stratified sample of 20 people. She obtained the sample from a company employing 60 men and 40 women.

The participants were told that they would be placed in a booth where they would read out an article about the life of a famous author to an audience. Participants were also told that the audience would not be present, but would only be able to hear them and would not be able to interact with them.

There were two conditions in the study, Condition A and Condition B.

Condition A: 10 participants were told the audience consisted of 5 listeners.

Condition B: the other 10 participants were told the audience consisted of 100 listeners.

Each participant completed the study individually. The psychologist recorded each presentation and then counted the number of verbal errors made by each participant.

(a) Identify the dependent variable in this study. (2 marks)

(b) Write a suitable hypothesis for this study. (3 marks)

(c)  Identify one extraneous variable that the psychologist should have controlled in the study and explain why it should have been controlled. (3 marks)

(d) Explain one advantage of using a stratified sample of participants in this study. (2 marks)

(e) Explain how the psychologist would have obtained the male participants for her stratified sample. Show your calculations. (3 marks)

(f) The psychologist wanted to randomly allocate the 20 people in her stratified sample to the two conditions. She needed an equal number of males in each condition and an equal number of females in each condition. Explain how she would have done this. (4 marks)

Mean number of verbal errors and standard deviations for both conditions

(g)  What conclusions might the psychologist draw from the data in the table? Refer to the means and standard deviations in your answer. (6 marks)

(h) Read the item and then answer the question that follows.

The psychologist had initially intended to use the range as a measure of dispersion in this study but found that one person in Condition A had made an exceptionally low number of verbal errors.

Explain how using the standard deviation rather than the range in this situation, would improve the study. [3 marks]

(i) Name an appropriate statistical test that could be used to analyse the number of verbal errors in Table 1. Explain why the test you have chosen would be a suitable test in this case. [4 marks]

(j) The psychologist found the results were significant at p<0.05. What is meant by ‘the results were significant at p<0.05’? [2 marks]

(k) Briefly explain one method the psychologist could use to check the validity of the data she collected in this study. [2 marks]

(l)  Briefly explain one reason why it is important for research to undergo a peer review process. [2 marks]

(m) Read the item and then answer the question that follows.

The psychologist focused on fluency in spoken communication in her study. Other research has investigated sex differences in non-verbal behaviours such as body language and gestures

Design an observation study to investigate sex differences in non-verbal behaviour of males and females when they are giving a presentation to an audience.

In your answer you should provide details of:

• The task for the participants
• The behavioural categories to be used and how the data will be recorded
• How reliability of the data collection might be established
• Ethical issues to be considered.

(Total 12 marks)

SPECIMEN PAPER 2 ( A-level Psychology revision)

Researchers were interested in the spatial awareness skills of motorists. They decided to investigate a possible relationship between different aspects of spatial awareness. Motorists who had between ten and twelve years of driving experience and held a clean driving licence with no penalty points were asked to complete two sets of tasks.

Set 1: To follow a series of instructions and using a map, to identify various locations correctly. This provided a map reading score for each motorist with a maximum score of 20.

Set 2: To complete a series of practical driving tasks accurately. This involved tasks such as driving between cones, driving within lines and parking inside designated spaces. Each motorist was observed completing the Set 2 tasks by a single trained observer who rated each performance by giving the driver a rating out of 10.

The following results were obtained.

Table 1: The map reading scores and driver ratings of motorists

(a) Should the hypothesis be directional? Explain your answer. (2 marks)

(b) Write a suitable hypothesis for this investigation. (3 marks)

(c) Identify a suitable graphical display for the data in Table 1 and briefly explain why this display would be appropriate. (2 marks)

(d) Using the data in Table 1, comment on the relationship between the map reading scores and the driver rating scores of the participants. [3 marks]

(e) Briefly outline one problem of using a single trained observer to rate the participants’ driving skills in the practical task. Briefly discuss how this data collection method could be modified to improve the reliability of the data collected. (6 marks)

(f) The researchers decided to analyse the data using a Spearman’s rho test. Explain why this is a suitable choice of test for this investigation. (3 marks)

(g) After analysis of the data the researchers obtained a calculated value of r s = 0.808. Using the information in Table 2 above, what conclusion can the researchers draw about the relationship between the map reading and driving skills of the motorists? Explain your answer. [4 marks]

(h) Distinguish between a Type I error and a Type II error. (4 marks)

When the researchers looked at the data collected more closely they noticed possible gender differences in the results.

(i) What do the mean and standard deviation values suggest about the male and female performances in the investigation? (4 marks)

In a replication of the part of the study in which map reading skills were investigated, 20 men and 20 women completed the original map reading task and the researchers obtained the following data:

(j) The mean map reading score for both groups together was 12.23. What percentage of the male group scored above the mean score and what percentage of the female group scored above the mean score? Show your calculations. (4 marks)

(k) Using your answers to both 2 previous questions, comment on the performances of the male and the female participants in this study. (2 marks)

(l) Briefly explain one reason why it is important for research to be replicated. (2 marks)

(m) Imagine you have been asked to design a study to investigate possible gender differences in card sorting behaviours. You decide you will ask participants to sort a shuffled pack of playing cards into their suits of hearts, clubs, diamonds and spades. You decide you will time the participants as they do this using a stop watch.

Discuss the following aspects of this investigation:

• with reference to the card sorting task, explain how you would ensure that this is made the same task for all participants
• one methodological issue you should take into account when obtaining suitable participants for this study and explain how you would deal with this issue
• how you would ensure that the experience of your participants is ethical.

 >>>>>>>

SPECIMEN PAPER 3 ( AQA A-level Psychology revision)

Following previous research indicating the social benefits of green space in urban areas, two psychology students decided to observe social behaviour in public spaces. They focused on two neighbouring towns, Greensville where most public spaces were planted with flowers and vegetables, and Brownton where most public spaces were paved with concrete.

The students compared the instances of considerate behaviours in the two towns.

Considerate behaviour categories included putting litter in the bin, having a dog on a lead and riding a bike with care.

The observations were carried out in four different areas of a similar size in each town on weekdays between the hours of 4.30pm and 6.00pm. The students worked together to ensure inter-observer reliability, recording each target behaviour whenever it occurred.

(a) Should the hypothesis for this research be directional or non-directional? Explain your answer. (2 marks)

(b) Before the observation could begin, the students needed to operationalise the behaviour category ‘riding a bike with care’.

Explain what is meant by operationalisation and suggest two ways in which ‘riding a bike with care’ could have been operationalised. (4 marks)

(c) The students thought that having a dog on a lead was a useful measure of considerate behaviour because it had face validity. Explain what is meant by face validity in this context. (3 marks)

(d) Identify and briefly outline two other types of validity in psychological research. (4 mark

(e) Identify the behaviour sampling method used by the students. Shade one box only.

• Time sampling
• Pair sampling
• Event sampling
• Target sampling

(f) Explain how inter-observer reliability could be ensured by working as a pair. (3 marks)

The students noted that overall more considerate behaviours occurred in Greensville than in Brownton.

(g) Calculate the ratio of considerate behaviours observed in Greensville to considerate behaviours observed in Brownton. Show your workings and present your answer in the simplest form. (3 marks)

(h) The students carried out a Chi-square test on their data.  Explain why the Chi-square test was an appropriate test to use in this case. (3 marks)

(i) In order to interpret the results of the Chi-square test the students first needed to work out the degrees of freedom. They used the following formula.

Degrees of freedom (df) = (r–1) x (c–1)

r = number of rows and c = number of columns

Calculate the degrees of freedom for the data in Table 1. Show your workings.

(j) The calculated value of Chi-square was 6.20. Referring to Table 2 below, state whether or not the result of the Chi-square test is significant at the 0.05 level of significance. Justify your answer. (3 marks)

To be significant at the level shown the calculated value of Chi Square must be equal to or greater than the critical/table value

(k) In the discussion section of their report of the investigation the students wanted to further discuss their results in relation to levels of significance.

Write a short paragraph the students could use to do this. (4 marks)

(l) As a follow-up to their observation the students decided to interview some of their peers about inconsiderate behaviours in their 6th Form Centre. The interviews were recorded.

Explain how the students could develop their interview findings by carrying out a content analysis and why content analysis would be appropriate in this case. (3 marks

(m) Suggest one inconsiderate behaviour that the students might focus on in their content analysis. (1 mark)

(n) Design an experiment to investigate the effect of indoor plants on mood in office workers. For your measure of mood, you should devise a measure that would give data suitable for testing at the ordinal level of measurement.

• Design – include reference to the experimental design, variables and controls
• Materials/Apparatus – describe any special materials required
• Data analysis that could be used – include reference to descriptive and inferential analysis.

Justify your choices. (12 marks)

2017 ( AQA A-level Psychology revision guide)

A psychologist wanted to test whether listening to music improves running performance.

The psychologist conducted a study using 10 volunteers from a local gym. The psychologist used a repeated measures design. Half of the participants were assigned to condition A (without music) and half to condition B (with music).

All participants were asked to run 400 metres as fast as they could on a treadmill in the psychology department. All participants were given standardised instruction. All participants wore headphones in both conditions. The psychologist recorded their running time in seconds. The participants returned to the psychology department the following week and repeated the test in the other condition.

(a) Identify the type of experiment used in this study.

(b) Identify the operationalised dependent variable in the study. (2 marks)

The results of the study are given in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Mean number of second taken to complete the 400m run and the standard deviation for both conditions.

(c) Explain why a histogram would not be an appropriate way of displaying the means shown in Table 1. (2 marks)

(d) Name a more appropriate graph to display the means shown in Table 1. Suggest appropriate X (Horizontal) and Y (vertical) axis labels for your graph choice. (3 marks)

Name of graph

X axis label

Y axis label

(e) What do the mean and standard deviation values in Table 1 suggest about the participants’ performances with and without music? Justify your answer. (4 marks)

(f) Calculate the percentage decrease in the mean time it took participants to run 400 metres when listening to music. Show your workings. Give your answer to three significant figures. (4 marks)

The researcher used a directional hypothesis and analysed the data using a related t-test. The calculated value of t where degrees of freedom (df) = 9 was 1.4377. He decided to use the 5% level of significance.

Table 2. Table of critical values of t

Calculated value of t must be equal to or greater than the critical value in this table for significance to be shown.

(g) Give three reasons why the researcher used a related t-test in this study and, using Table 2, explain whether or not the results are significant (5 marks)

(h) What is meant by a Type II error? Explain why psychologists normally use the 5% level of significance in their research. (3 marks)

(i) Identify one extraneous variable that could have affected the results of this study. Suggest why it would have been important to control this extraneous variable and how it could have been controlled in this study. (3 marks)

(j) The report was submitted for peer review and a number of recommendations were advised.

Describe the process and purposes of peer review. (6 marks)

People’s perception of how they spent their time at the gym is often not very accurate. Some spent more time chatting than on the treadmill. A psychologist decides to observe the actual behaviour of an opportunity sample of gym users at a local gym.

(k) Explain why it is more appropriate for the psychologist to use an observation than a questionnaire in this case. (3 marks)

(l) Design an observational study to investigate how people spent their time at the gym.

In your answer you will be awarded credit for providing appropriate details of

• Type of observation with justification
• Operationalised behaviour categories
• Use of time and/or event sampling with justification
• How reliability of data collection could be assessed.

2018 ( A-level Psychology resources)

A psychologist was reading an article about typical dream themes in adults.

Figure 2 shows the main dream themes identified in the article.

Figure 2 Main dream themes

(a) Using Figure 2, estimate the percentage of dreams that were reported to be about being chased. Shade one box only. [1 mark]

A           4%

B           12%

C           27%

D           42%

The psychologist was interested in finding out whether dream themes differed between box males and females, particularly in terms of social interaction. She decided to conduct a pilot study. Twenty undergraduate students (8 male and 12 female) volunteered for the study. For a six-week period the students were interviewed at 9 am each morning when they arrived at university. Interviewers, who did not know the purpose of the study, carried out and recorded the dream interviews.

(a) What is meant by a pilot study? Explain one possible reason why the psychologist decided to conduct a pilot study for this investigation. [3 marks]

(b) The interviews produced qualitative data. What is meant by qualitative data? Give one strength of collecting qualitative data in this study. [2 marks]

(c) What are investigator effects? Suggest one way in which they could have been minimised during the dream interviews. [3 marks]

Another researcher, who did not know the purpose of the study, carried out a content analysis of the interview data.

(d) Explain how this content analysis could have been conducted. [4 marks]

The psychologist wanted to assess the reliability of the content analysis.

(e) Explain how the reliability of the content analysis could be assessed. [4 marks]

When comparing the data for males and females, the psychologist found that there was a difference in the proportion of friendly and aggressive social interactions. This is shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Percentage of friendly and aggressive social interactions in dreams reported by males and females

A total of 375 dreams reported by males included social interaction.

(f) Use the data in Table 2 to calculate how many of these dreams reported by males were classified as aggressive. Show your workings. [2 marks]

(g) Draw a suitable graphical display to represent the data in Table 2 box. Label your graph appropriately. [4 marks]

The psychologist decided to conduct an experiment to investigate the effect of watching box horror films before going to bed.

A volunteer sample of 50 university students consented to take part in the experiment.

The 50 students were randomly split into two groups. Group 1 watched a horror film before going to bed each night for the first week then a romantic comedy before going to bed each night for the second week. Group 2 watched the romantic comedy in the first week and the horror film in the second week.

When the students woke up each morning, each student received a text message that asked if they had had a nightmare during the night. They could respond ‘yes’ or ‘no’.

(h) Write a brief consent form that would have been suitable for use in this experiment. The consent form should:

• include some detail of what participants might expect to happen
• refer to ethical issues
• be in an appropriate format/style

(i) The psychologist proposed a directional hypothesis.

Write a directional hypothesis for this experiment. [3 marks]

The psychologist used a repeated measures design in this experiment.

(j) Explain why it was important to use a repeated measures design in this case.  [2 marks]

The psychologist used counterbalancing in this experiment.

(k) Explain why it was appropriate to use counterbalancing in this experiment. [2 marks]

(l) Explain how the box psychologist could have randomly split the sample of 50 students into the two groups. [3 marks]

The psychologist collated the responses of all the participants over the two-week period and calculated the mean and standard deviation for each condition.

Table 3: Mean number of nightmares reported and the standard deviation for each condition

(m) What do the mean and standard deviation values in Table 3 suggest about the effect of the type of film watched on the occurrence of nightmares? Justify your answer. [4 marks]

The psychologist found that the difference in the number of nightmares reported in the two conditions was significant at p<0.05.

(n) Explain what is meant by ‘significant at p<0.05’ in the context of this experiment. [2 marks]

(o) The psychologist was concerned about the validity of the experiment.

Suggest one possible modification to the design of the experiment and explain how this might improve validity. [3 marks]

2019 ( AQA A-level Psychology resources)

(a) Which of the following does reliability refer to?

Shade one circle only. [1 mark]

A           The accuracy of the data

B           The consistency of the data

C           The levels of the data

D           The validity of the data

(b) Which of the following is not a role of peer review in the scientific process?

A           To determine whether to award research funding

B           To ensure only significant results are published

C           To make sure research has high validity and reliability

D           To retain the integrity of psychological research

(c) Give one reason why it is important for scientific reports to include a referencing section? [1 mark]

It was recently reported in a newspaper that time spent playing team sports increases happiness levels. A researcher was keen to find out whether this was due to participating in a team activity or due to participating in physical activity, as he could not find any published research on this.

The researcher used a matched-pairs design. He went into the student café and selected the first 20 students he met. Each student was assigned to one of two groups.

Participants in Group A were requested to carry out 3 hours of team sports per week. Participants in Group B were requested to carry out 3 hours of exercise independently in a gym each week. All participants were told not to take part in any other type of exercise for the 4-week duration of the study.

All participants completed a happiness questionnaire at the start and end of the study. The researcher then calculated the improvement in happiness score for each participant.

(d) Which of the following is correct?

A           Groups A and B are conditions of the dependent variable and happiness is the independent variable.

B           Groups A and B are conditions of the independent variable and happiness is the dependent variable.

C           Groups A and B are the controls and happiness is the experimental condition.

D           Groups A and B are the experimental conditions and happiness is the control.

(e) Would a directional or non-directional hypothesis be more suitable for the researcher to use? Explain your answer. 2 marks]

(f) Write a suitable hypothesis for this experiment. [3 marks]

(g) Identify the type of sampling method used in this experiment. Explain one limitation of using this sampling method in this study. [3 marks]

(h) Identify one variable on which participants should be matched in this matched-pairs design. Explain how the researcher could assign matched participants to either Group A or Group B. [4 marks]

(i) Explain one strength of using a matched-pairs design rather than a repeated-measures design. [2 marks]

The results of the study are given in Table 2 below.

               Table 2 Improvement in happiness scores

The researcher decided to use the Sign Test to see whether there was a significant difference in the improvement in the scores between the two groups at the 5% level of significance.

(j) Calculate the value of S in this study. Show your workings. [2 marks]

Significance is shown if the calculated value of S is equal to or less than the critical value.

(k) Explain whether or not there was a significant difference in the improvement in the scores between the two groups. Use your answer to Question 22 and Table 3. [2 marks]

The validity of the data was questioned when the researcher presented his results. The researcher explained that he chose to use the happiness questionnaire because it had high concurrent validity.

(l) Explain what it means for a test to have high concurrent validity. [2 marks]

The questionnaire had high concurrent validity.

Validity was still a concern because the researcher knew which participants were in each experimental group.

(m) Explain how this could have affected the validity of the study. [4 marks]

(n) Using your answer to Question m, suggest one way in which the researcher could modify the study to improve the internal validity of the study? Justify your answer. [4 marks]

A psychology teacher read the researcher’s study on sport and happiness. She considered whether setting group tasks could improve her students’ level of happiness. She decided to conduct an independent groups experiment with 30 students taking A-level Psychology using the same happiness questionnaire.

(o) Suggest an appropriate statistical test the psychology teacher could use to analyse the data. Justify your choice of test. [4 marks]

(p) Design an independent groups experiment that the psychology teacher could conduct.

• the aim of the experiment
• identification and manipulation of variables including details of the task
• controls to minimise the effects of extraneous variables
• data handling and analysis – use of descriptive statistics and/or data presentation.

Justify your design choices. [12 marks]

2020 ( A-level Psychology notes)

A study into the relationship between recreational screen time and academic achievement was conducted. Students were asked to self-report the number of hours spent watching TV, playing on their mobile phones or video games (daily recreational screen time) and their end-of-year test performances (academic performance).

The results of the study are shown in Figure 2.

(a) In which section(s) of a scientific report would you expect to find reference to the results/findings of the investigation?

A           The abstract and the results sections only

B           The abstract, the discussion and the results sections only

C           The results and the discussion sections only

D           The results section only

(b) Which of the following correlation co-efficients best describes the data represented in Figure 2?

A           –0.80

B           –0.25

C           +0.25

D           +0.80

(c) Identify the type of graph shown in Figure 2 and explain why this is an appropriate graph to use for the data collected. [3 marks]

(d) Explain why it would not be appropriate for the researchers to conclude that increased recreational screen time reduces academic performance. [2 marks]

A psychologist reads a review of a meta-analysis confirming the relationship between recreational screen time and academic performance.

(e) What is meant by the term meta-analysis? [2 marks]

The psychologist decided to design an experiment to test the effects of recreational screen time on children’s academic performance.

The psychologist randomly selected four schools from all the primary schools in her county to take part in the experiment involving Year 5 pupils. Three of the four schools agreed to take part. In total, there were 58 pupils whose parents consented for them to participate. The 58 pupils were then randomly allocated to Group A or Group B.

For the two-week period of the experiment, pupils in Group A had no recreational screen time. Pupils in Group B were allowed unrestricted recreational screen time. At the end of the experiment all pupils completed a 45-minute class test, to achieve a test score.

(f) Complete Table 1 by ticking the statement that best describes the population and the sample in the psychologist’s experiment.

Place one tick in each column. [2 marks]

(g) Briefly explain why a directional hypothesis would be most suitable for this experiment. [1 mark]

(h) Write an appropriate hypothesis for this experiment. [3 marks]

The results obtained from the experiment are summarised in Table 2.

Table 2  Descriptive statistics for the test performance scores for Group A and Group B

(i) Using the data in Table 2, explain how the distribution of scores in Group A differs from the distribution of scores in Group B. [4 marks]

(j) What do the mean and standard deviation values in Table 2 suggest about the effect of the recreational screen time on test performance? Justify your answer. [4 marks]

(k) The psychologist wanted to test the statistical significance of the data.

Identify the most appropriate choice of statistical test for analysing the data collected and explain three reasons for your choice in the context of this study. [7 marks]

One criticism of the study is that the pupils were not matched on their typical recreational screen time.

(l) Explain how the psychologist could have matched pupils on their typical recreational screen time across the experimental conditions. [4 marks]

(m) Identify one other variable for which the psychologist could have matched the pupils. Explain how this might have affected the test performance if it was not controlled. [2 marks]

The feedback from one of the schools was that recreational screen time affected pupils’ social interactions. The psychologist decided to investigate this further by using an observation of social interaction during playtime at the school.

(n) Design the observation to investigate pupils’ social interaction in the playground.

In your answer you will be awarded credit for providing appropriate details of:

• type of observation, with justification
• choice of time sampling or event sampling, with justification
• dealing with one relevant ethical issue
• assessing reliability of the data through inter-observer reliability.

2021 ( AQA A-level Psychology notes)

A researcher placed an advert in a university psychology department asking for third year students to participate in a sleep experiment.

Each student had a sleep tracker watch to wear at home for the two-week study. Each morning they were asked to open the sleep tracker app to view their sleep quality data on their mobile phones. The students were unaware that the sleep data they could see on their phones had been manipulated by the researcher. Over the two weeks of the study, each student saw that he or she had had poor sleep quality for seven random nights of the experiment and good sleep quality for the remaining nights.

Every morning, after viewing the sleep data, each student completed a questionnaire about the previous night’s sleep. One of the questions asked the students to rate how well rested they felt, on a scale from 1–10, after the previous night’s sleep. Apart from this, students were asked to continue their normal everyday activities.

(a) Which of the following best describes the experimental method used in this study?

Shade one box only. [1 mark]

A           Field experiment

B           Laboratory experiment

C           Natural experiment

D           Quasi-experiment

(b) Write a directional hypothesis the researcher might use for this study. [3 marks]

(c) Which of the following best describes the sampling method used in this study?

A           Opportunity sampling

B           Stratified sampling

C           Systematic sampling

D           Volunteer sampling

(d) Explain one strength and one limitation of using this sampling method in this study. [4 marks]

The researcher collected quantitative data about how well rested the students felt.

(e) Explain one strength of collecting quantitative data in this study. [2 marks]

One ethical issue in this study is deception, as the students were unaware that the sleep data they could see on their phones had been manipulated by the researcher.

(f) Explain one way in which the researcher might deal with the deception in this study. [2 marks]

Apart from the question about how well rested the students felt, the researcher’s questionnaire contained nine other questions. The responses to these questions were not analysed.

(g) Explain one reason why the researcher decided to include these additional questions on the questionnaire. [2 marks]

(h) Explain one limitation of assessing sleep quality using a rating scale of 1–10. [2 marks]

The researcher believed that the actual number of hours slept by the students could have affected the results of the study.

(i) Suggest one other extraneous variable that could have affected the results of this study. Explain why it would have been important to control this extraneous variable and how it could have been controlled in this study. [4 marks]

In a follow-up study, the researcher investigated whether there was a correlation between the number of hours slept and how well rested the students felt.

The researcher randomly selected 18 participants from first-year students at the university.

On the day of the study, each student participant was asked, ‘How many hours did you sleep last night?’ They then had to rate on a scale of 1 to 5 how well rested they felt.

The researcher hypothesised that there would be a positive correlation between the two co-variables.

(j) Outline one reason why it was appropriate to conduct a correlation rather than an experiment in this case. [2 marks]

(k) Describe how the researcher could have used random sampling to obtain the students for this study. [3 marks]

The researcher used Spearman’s rho statistical test to analyse the data from this study.

(l) Explain why Spearman’s rho was a suitable test for this study. Refer to the description of the study in your answer. [4 marks]

The researcher chose to use the 5% level of significance and the calculated correlation coefficient for the Spearman’s rho test was 0.395

(m) Identify the appropriate critical value from Table 1. Explain your choice. [4 marks]

(n) Explain whether the researcher’s hypothesis should be accepted. Refer to the critical value identified in Question 21 in your answer. [2 marks]

(o) Explain why the researcher decided to use the 5% level of significance rather than the 1% level in this study. [2 marks]

When the researcher compared the calculated and critical values of rho, he began to wonder if he might have made a Type II error.

(p) Explain what is meant by a Type II error in the context of this study. [2 marks]

(q) Discuss features of science. Refer to one or more examples of psychological research in your answer. [8 marks]

2022 ( A-level Psychology revision notes)

A controlled observation was designed to compare the social behaviours of pre-school children of working parents and pre-school children of stay-at-home parents. The sample consisted of 100 children aged three, who were observed separately. Half of the children had working parents and the other half had stay-at-home parents.

The observation took place in a room which looked like a nursery, with a variety of toys available. In the room, there were four children and one supervising adult. Their behaviour was not recorded.

Each child participant was brought into the room and settled by their parent. The parent then left to sit outside. Each child participant’s behaviour was observed covertly for five minutes while they played in the room.

The observation was conducted in a controlled environment and a standardised script was used when the children and their parents arrived.

(a) Explain why the researcher used a controlled observation and a standardised script in this study. [4 marks] 

(b) Identify one limitation of controlled observations. [1 mark]

The researcher used two trained observers to record the social behaviours of each child during the observation.

(c) Give two behavioural categories that the observers could have used in the observation to assess the pre-school children’s social behaviour. Explain why your chosen categories are appropriate. [4 marks]

(d) Describe how the observers could use time sampling to record the social behaviour of each child during the five-minute period. [4 marks]

(e) Explain one strength and one limitation of using time sampling for this observation. [4 marks]

(f) Explain how the reliability of the controlled observation could be assessed through inter-observer reliability. [4 marks]

The data from the observation was summarised by converting the number of agreed observations into a total social behaviour score for each child.

The researcher then conducted a statistical test to identify whether there was a significant difference between the social behaviour scores for the children of stay-at-home parents and those of working parents.

(g) Identify an appropriate statistical test that the researcher could use to analyse the social behaviour scores in this study. Explain three reasons for your choice in the context of this study. [7 marks]

(h) Explain one reason why collecting quantitative data could reduce the validity of this study. [2 marks]

The findings of this study might have implications for the economy.

(i) Explain one or more possible implications of this study for the economy. [3 marks]

This study was written up as a scientific report.

(j) Describe features of the abstract section in a scientific report. [3 marks]

A new TV programme has been developed to increase positive social behaviours in pre-school children.

There is a proposal to carry out an experiment to compare the effects of the new TV programme and an existing TV programme, on positive social behaviours in pre-school children.

A sample of 500 pre-school children and their parents is available for the experiment. The parents have given consent for their children to take part in this experiment.

The experiment will take place over an 8-week period. Data on the children’s social behaviours will be gathered from the parents using a self-report method.

(j) Design the experiment to investigate whether watching the new TV programme leads to an increase in positive social behaviours in the children, compared with watching the existing TV programme.

In your answer you will gain credit for providing appropriate details of the following:

• the type of experimental design, with justification
• a self-report method of data collection, with justification
• how to control one extraneous variable, with justification as to why this would need to be controlled.

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

Research Methods | Definitions, Types, Examples

Research methods are specific procedures for collecting and analyzing data. Developing your research methods is an integral part of your research design . When planning your methods, there are two key decisions you will make.

First, decide how you will collect data . Your methods depend on what type of data you need to answer your research question :

• Qualitative vs. quantitative : Will your data take the form of words or numbers?
• Primary vs. secondary : Will you collect original data yourself, or will you use data that has already been collected by someone else?
• Descriptive vs. experimental : Will you take measurements of something as it is, or will you perform an experiment?

Second, decide how you will analyze the data .

• For quantitative data, you can use statistical analysis methods to test relationships between variables.
• For qualitative data, you can use methods such as thematic analysis to interpret patterns and meanings in the data.

Table of contents

Methods for collecting data, examples of data collection methods, methods for analyzing data, examples of data analysis methods, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about research methods.

Data is the information that you collect for the purposes of answering your research question . The type of data you need depends on the aims of your research.

Qualitative vs. quantitative data

Your choice of qualitative or quantitative data collection depends on the type of knowledge you want to develop.

For questions about ideas, experiences and meanings, or to study something that can’t be described numerically, collect qualitative data .

If you want to develop a more mechanistic understanding of a topic, or your research involves hypothesis testing , collect quantitative data .

You can also take a mixed methods approach , where you use both qualitative and quantitative research methods.

Primary vs. secondary research

Primary research is any original data that you collect yourself for the purposes of answering your research question (e.g. through surveys , observations and experiments ). Secondary research is data that has already been collected by other researchers (e.g. in a government census or previous scientific studies).

If you are exploring a novel research question, you’ll probably need to collect primary data . But if you want to synthesize existing knowledge, analyze historical trends, or identify patterns on a large scale, secondary data might be a better choice.

Descriptive vs. experimental data

In descriptive research , you collect data about your study subject without intervening. The validity of your research will depend on your sampling method .

In experimental research , you systematically intervene in a process and measure the outcome. The validity of your research will depend on your experimental design .

To conduct an experiment, you need to be able to vary your independent variable , precisely measure your dependent variable, and control for confounding variables . If it’s practically and ethically possible, this method is the best choice for answering questions about cause and effect.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Your data analysis methods will depend on the type of data you collect and how you prepare it for analysis.

Data can often be analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. For example, survey responses could be analyzed qualitatively by studying the meanings of responses or quantitatively by studying the frequencies of responses.

Qualitative analysis methods

Qualitative analysis is used to understand words, ideas, and experiences. You can use it to interpret data that was collected:

• From open-ended surveys and interviews , literature reviews , case studies , ethnographies , and other sources that use text rather than numbers.
• Using non-probability sampling methods .

Qualitative analysis tends to be quite flexible and relies on the researcher’s judgement, so you have to reflect carefully on your choices and assumptions and be careful to avoid research bias .

Quantitative analysis methods

Quantitative analysis uses numbers and statistics to understand frequencies, averages and correlations (in descriptive studies) or cause-and-effect relationships (in experiments).

You can use quantitative analysis to interpret data that was collected either:

• During an experiment .
• Using probability sampling methods .

Because the data is collected and analyzed in a statistically valid way, the results of quantitative analysis can be easily standardized and shared among researchers.

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

• Chi square test of independence
• Statistical power
• Descriptive statistics
• Degrees of freedom
• Pearson correlation
• Null hypothesis
• Double-blind study
• Case-control study
• Research ethics
• Data collection
• Hypothesis testing
• Structured interviews

Research bias

• Hawthorne effect
• Unconscious bias
• Recall bias
• Halo effect
• Self-serving bias
• Information bias

Quantitative research deals with numbers and statistics, while qualitative research deals with words and meanings.

Quantitative methods allow you to systematically measure variables and test hypotheses . Qualitative methods allow you to explore concepts and experiences in more detail.

In mixed methods research , you use both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods to answer your research question .

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

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

The research methods you use depend on the type of data you need to answer your research question .

• If you want to measure something or test a hypothesis , use quantitative methods . If you want to explore ideas, thoughts and meanings, use qualitative methods .
• If you want to analyze a large amount of readily-available data, use secondary data. If you want data specific to your purposes with control over how it is generated, collect primary data.
• If you want to establish cause-and-effect relationships between variables , use experimental methods. If you want to understand the characteristics of a research subject, use descriptive methods.

Methodology refers to the overarching strategy and rationale of your research project . It involves studying the methods used in your field and the theories or principles behind them, in order to develop an approach that matches your objectives.

Methods are the specific tools and procedures you use to collect and analyze data (for example, experiments, surveys , and statistical tests ).

In shorter scientific papers, where the aim is to report the findings of a specific study, you might simply describe what you did in a methods section .

In a longer or more complex research project, such as a thesis or dissertation , you will probably include a methodology section , where you explain your approach to answering the research questions and cite relevant sources to support your choice of methods.

Is this article helpful?

Other students also liked, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples.

• What Is a Research Design | Types, Guide & Examples
• Data Collection | Definition, Methods & Examples

More interesting articles

• Between-Subjects Design | Examples, Pros, & Cons
• Cluster Sampling | A Simple Step-by-Step Guide with Examples
• Confounding Variables | Definition, Examples & Controls
• Construct Validity | Definition, Types, & Examples
• Content Analysis | Guide, Methods & Examples
• Control Groups and Treatment Groups | Uses & Examples
• Control Variables | What Are They & Why Do They Matter?
• Correlation vs. Causation | Difference, Designs & Examples
• Correlational Research | When & How to Use
• Critical Discourse Analysis | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Cross-Sectional Study | Definition, Uses & Examples
• Descriptive Research | Definition, Types, Methods & Examples
• Ethical Considerations in Research | Types & Examples
• Explanatory and Response Variables | Definitions & Examples
• Explanatory Research | Definition, Guide, & Examples
• Exploratory Research | Definition, Guide, & Examples
• External Validity | Definition, Types, Threats & Examples
• Extraneous Variables | Examples, Types & Controls
• Guide to Experimental Design | Overview, Steps, & Examples
• How Do You Incorporate an Interview into a Dissertation? | Tips
• How to Do Thematic Analysis | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples
• How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates
• How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Steps & Examples
• Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria | Examples & Definition
• Independent vs. Dependent Variables | Definition & Examples
• Inductive Reasoning | Types, Examples, Explanation
• Inductive vs. Deductive Research Approach | Steps & Examples
• Internal Validity in Research | Definition, Threats, & Examples
• Internal vs. External Validity | Understanding Differences & Threats
• Longitudinal Study | Definition, Approaches & Examples
• Mediator vs. Moderator Variables | Differences & Examples
• Mixed Methods Research | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Multistage Sampling | Introductory Guide & Examples
• Naturalistic Observation | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Operationalization | A Guide with Examples, Pros & Cons
• Population vs. Sample | Definitions, Differences & Examples
• Primary Research | Definition, Types, & Examples
• Qualitative vs. Quantitative Research | Differences, Examples & Methods
• Quasi-Experimental Design | Definition, Types & Examples
• Questionnaire Design | Methods, Question Types & Examples
• Random Assignment in Experiments | Introduction & Examples
• Random vs. Systematic Error | Definition & Examples
• Reliability vs. Validity in Research | Difference, Types and Examples
• Reproducibility vs Replicability | Difference & Examples
• Reproducibility vs. Replicability | Difference & Examples
• Sampling Methods | Types, Techniques & Examples
• Semi-Structured Interview | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Simple Random Sampling | Definition, Steps & Examples
• Single, Double, & Triple Blind Study | Definition & Examples
• Stratified Sampling | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Structured Interview | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Survey Research | Definition, Examples & Methods
• Systematic Review | Definition, Example, & Guide
• Systematic Sampling | A Step-by-Step Guide with Examples
• Textual Analysis | Guide, 3 Approaches & Examples
• The 4 Types of Reliability in Research | Definitions & Examples
• The 4 Types of Validity in Research | Definitions & Examples
• Transcribing an Interview | 5 Steps & Transcription Software
• Triangulation in Research | Guide, Types, Examples
• Types of Interviews in Research | Guide & Examples
• Types of Research Designs Compared | Guide & Examples
• Types of Variables in Research & Statistics | Examples
• Unstructured Interview | Definition, Guide & Examples
• What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods
• What Is a Case-Control Study? | Definition & Examples
• What Is a Cohort Study? | Definition & Examples
• What Is a Conceptual Framework? | Tips & Examples
• What Is a Controlled Experiment? | Definitions & Examples
• What Is a Double-Barreled Question?
• What Is a Focus Group? | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples
• What Is a Likert Scale? | Guide & Examples
• What Is a Prospective Cohort Study? | Definition & Examples
• What Is a Retrospective Cohort Study? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples
• What Is an Observational Study? | Guide & Examples
• What Is Concurrent Validity? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Content Validity? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Convenience Sampling? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Convergent Validity? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Criterion Validity? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Data Cleansing? | Definition, Guide & Examples
• What Is Deductive Reasoning? | Explanation & Examples
• What Is Discriminant Validity? | Definition & Example
• What Is Ecological Validity? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Ethnography? | Definition, Guide & Examples
• What Is Face Validity? | Guide, Definition & Examples
• What Is Non-Probability Sampling? | Types & Examples
• What Is Participant Observation? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Peer Review? | Types & Examples
• What Is Predictive Validity? | Examples & Definition
• What Is Probability Sampling? | Types & Examples
• What Is Purposive Sampling? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Qualitative Observation? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Qualitative Research? | Methods & Examples
• What Is Quantitative Observation? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Quantitative Research? | Definition, Uses & Methods

Unlimited Academic AI-Proofreading

✔ Document error-free in 5minutes ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

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

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• BMC Med Res Methodol

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

Lawrence mbuagbaw.

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

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

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

Daeria O. Lawson

Livia puljak.

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

David B. Allison

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

Lehana Thabane

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

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

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

Associated Data

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

epidemiological study” in PubMed.

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

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

What is a methodological study?

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

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

When should we conduct a methodological study?

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

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

How often are methodological studies conducted?

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

Why do we conduct methodological studies?

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

Where can we find methodological studies?

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

Some frequently asked questions about methodological studies

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

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

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

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

Q: How many databases should I search?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Q: Should I justify a sample size?

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

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

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

Q: What should I call my study?

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

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

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

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

Q: Should I extract data in duplicate?

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

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

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

Q: What variables are relevant to methodological studies?

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

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

Q: Should I focus only on high impact journals?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A proposed framework

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

• What is the aim?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

• 2. What is the design?

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

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

• 3. What is the sampling strategy?

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

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

• 4. What is the unit of analysis?

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

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

This framework is outlined in Fig.  2 .

A proposed framework for methodological studies

Conclusions

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

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

Acknowledgements

Abbreviations, authors’ contributions.

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

This work did not receive any dedicated funding.

Availability of data and materials

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

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

Publisher’s Note

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

Past Examination Questions

Record detail, department of sociology.

• SOCI 305: RESEARCH METHODS

INSTRUCTIONS (READ CAREFULLY): ANSWER QUESTION ONE IN SECTION A, TWO QUESTIONS FROM SECTION B AND ALL QUESTIONS IN SECTION C. IN VIEW OF SECTION C, ALL RESIT CANDIDATES ARE TO ANSWER AN ADDITIONAL QUESTION IN SECTION B. WRITE YOUR RESEARCH GROUP NUMBER OR RESIT (AS APPROPRIATE) ON THE COVER PAGE OF YOUR ANSWER BOOKLET. TIME ALLOWED: TWO AND HALF (2.5) HOURS

Detail Information

File attachment, information.

RECORD DETAIL Back To Previous

Advance Search

A-Level AQA Psychology Questions by Topic

Filter by paper, core content, 1. social influence, 3. attachment, 4 . psychopathology, 5 . approaches in psychology, 6. biopsychology, 7 . research methods, 8. issues and debates in psychology, 9. relationships, 11. cognition and development, 12. schizophrenia, 13. eating behaviour, 15. aggression, 16. forensic psychology, 17. addiction.

👉 Relocate to Canada Today!

Live, study and work in canada. no payment is required hurry now click here to apply >> immigrate to canada.

Past Questions on Research Methodology

Past Questions on Research Methodology. All those who have bought our NNPC/Total Scholarship Past Questions in PDF Format have been giving testimonies of how it helped them. We are very sure it is going to help you as well. When you get this past question it will definitely help you to score higher than your competitors and give you an edge over them.   Pounds to Naira

With the proper use of our original NNPC/Total Scholarship Past Questions in PDF Format, you will definitely be successful and be awarded the scholarship money to expand or take your career to the next level. This past question comes to you through your email address or WhatsApp once you make payments to purchase it. The downloadable format is going to be in softcopy, you can either choose to download it and read with your android phone or laptop and at your own convenience – wherever and whenever .

Why you need Past Questions on Research Methodology

Research Methodology and the main essence of undergoing this programme is to gain admission through direct entry. As expensive as it is, it is unfortunate that the result of this programme is only meant for admission, and if you cannot gain admission because of poor performance during the examination, then it is all in vain. If you are serious about gaining admission into the university this academic session, then you need this past question for the following reasons .

How is Past Questions on Research Methodology Pattern?

Research Methodology Past Questions in PDF Format is in a multiple-choice question pattern. We have made it very easy for you. we bring all the questions for many years and put them together but we indicate the specific years of their occurrence. We provide the correct answers in order to save your time. All you need to do is to devote quality time to study the NNPC/Total Scholarship Past Questions in PDF Format and watch yourself change the narrative by winning that scholarship examination.

Sample of Past Questions on Research Methodology

NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA UNIVERSITY VILLAGE, PLOT 91, CASDASTRAL ZONE, NNAMDI AZIKIWE EXPRESS WAY, JABI, ABUJA FACULTY OF EDUCATION SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2015 EXAMINATION COURSE CODE: EDU323 COURSE TITLE: Basic Research Method in Education DURATION: 2 Hours INSTRUCTIONS: Answer Question 1 and two other questions

QUESTION 1. You are about to undertake your research project. Explain the steps you need to take so as submit a good project report for your degree. (b) Differentiate between Quantitative and Qualitative researches. (30 marks) QUESTION 2. (a) Using TWO examples each, explain the two types of deductive hypothesis. (b) Give the characteristics of a research question. (20 marks) QUESTION 3. Differentiate between the following: i. Probability sampling and non-probability ii. Population and sample iii. Validity and reliability iv. Norm reference test and criterion reference test (20 marks) QUESTION 4. (a) In writing your research project report, explain the contents of the preliminary pages of report. (b) How are the preliminary pages numbered? (20 marks)

The complete Past Questions And Answers in PDF Format with accurate answers is N2,000.

To purchase this past question , Please chat with the Whatsapp number 08162517909 to check availability before you proceed to make Payment.

After payment, send the (1)  proof of payment, (2) course of study, (3) name of past questions paid for and (4) email address  to  Ifiokobong  (Examsguru) at  Whatsapp: 08162517909 . We will send the past questions to your email address.

Delivery Assurance

How are you sure we will deliver the past question to you after payment.

Our services are based on honesty and integrity. That is why we are very popular.

For us  (ExamsGuru Team),  we have been in business since 2012 and have been delivering honest and trusted services to our valued customers.

Since we started, we have not had any negative comments from our customers, instead, all of them are happy with us.

Our past questions and answers are original and from the source. So, your money is in the right hand and we promise to deliver it once we confirm your payment.

Each year, thousands of students gain admission into their schools of choice with the help of our past questions and answers.

7 Tips to Prepare for Exams

• Don’t make reading your hobby:  A lot of people put reading as a hobby in their CV, they might be right because they have finished schooling. But “You” are st i ll schooling, so reading should be in top priority and not as a hobby. Read far and wide to enhance your level of aptitude
• Get Exams Preparation Materials:  These involve textbooks, dictionaries, NNPC/Total Scholarship Past Questions in PDF Format, mock questions, and others. These materials will enhance your mastering of the scope of the exams you are expecting.
• Attend Extramural Classes:  Register and attend extramural classes at your location. This class will not only help you refresh your memory but will boast your classroom understanding and discoveries of new knowledge.
• Sleep when you feel like:  When you are preparing for any exams, sleeping is very important because it helps in the consolidation of memory. Caution: Only sleep when you feel like it and don’t oversleep.
• Make sure you are healthy:  Sickness can cause excessive feelings of tiredness and fatigue and will not allow you to concentrate on reading. If you are feel i ng as if you are not well, report to your parent, a nurse, or a doctor. Make sure you are well.  Waec Result
• Eat when you feel like:  During the exam preparation period, you are advised not to overeat, so as to avoid sleep. You need to eat little and light food whenever you feel like eating. Eat more fruits, drink milk and glucose. This will help you to enhance retention.  Npower Recruitment
• Reduce your time in social media:  Some people live their entire life on Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, Messenger chat. This is so bad and catastrophic if you are preparing for exams. Try and reduce your time spent on social media during this time. Maybe after the exams, you can go back and sleep in it.

If you like these tips, consider sharing them with your friends and relatives. Do you have a question or comments? Put it on the comment form below. We will be pleased to hear from you and help you to score as high as possible.

We wish you good luck!

Check and Confirm:  How much is Dollar to Naira                 Pounds to Naira Rate Today

📢 We are hiring writers!

Copyright warning.

BREAKING: APC Chairman Announces Consensus Presidential Candidate

Tasued admission brochure 2022/2023 session is out, related articles.

15 best masters degree in social work online

Akwa-Ibom Ministry of Health Basic Nursing Entrance Exam Result 2023 (Stream 1)

COEIKERE Cut Off Mark 2021/2022 | COEIKERE JAMB Cut Off Mark, COEIKERE Post UTME Cut Off Mark & COEIKERE Departmental Cut Off Marks

WAEC Syllabus for Yorùbá

Leave a reply 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.

It looks like you're using an ad blocker!