David Wilkinson, Dennis Dokter - The Researcher's Toolkit. The Complete Guide To Practitioner Research-Routledge. Taylor & Francis Group (2023)

THE RESEARCHER’S
TOOLKIT
Designed for those undertaking research for the first time, this fully
updated edition of The Researcher’s Toolkit is a practical and accessi-
ble guide for all those partaking in small-scale research. Jargon-free and
assuming no prior knowledge, it covers the entire research process, from
defining a research topic or question through to its completion.
This second edition has been fully revised by a collaborating team with
a wealth of knowledge and practical experience in research project work.
Including activity boxes to highlight key concepts and short summary
boxes to indicate fundamental elements of various research areas, the
chapters cover:
● The importance of research and framing your research question and

research ethics
● Practical elements associated with planning and executing your
research activity
● The application of survey-based research methods and the value pro-
vided by social media as data collection devices
● Deploying both quantitative and qualitative tools and techniques to
analyse research data
● Writing up your research work and preparing it for wider access and
consumption
● Examining the effect of your research work through assessing or
measuring its impact
The Researcher’s Toolkit is a must-read guide for students and budding

researchers as well as educators seeking to explain academic research
and writing to their pupils. It will benefit anyone looking to complete a
research project whether inside academia or beyond.
David Wilkinson is based in Nexus at the University of Leeds where he
runs his consultancy – Research Toolkit. He edited the first edition of this
textbook and has been a researcher and evaluator for over twenty years.
Dennis Dokter is the Manager of Data & Insights and Smart Cities lead at
Nexus, the University of Leeds’ innovation hub and community. He pos-
sesses wide-ranging experience in writing research proposals as well as
coordinating, managing, and leading them.
THE RESEARCHER’S
TOOLKIT
The Complete Guide to Practitioner
Research
Second Edition
David Wilkinson and Dennis Dokter

Designed cover image: © Getty Images
Second edition published 2023

by Routledge
4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2023 David Wilkinson and Dennis Dokter
The right of David Wilkinson and Dennis Dokter to be identified as authors of this work
has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs
and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in
any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter
invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered

trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to
infringe.
First edition published by Routledge 2000
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN: 978-1-032-01809-6 (hbk)

ISBN: 978-1-032-01810-2 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-1-003-18015-9 (ebk)
DOI: 10.4324/9781003180159
Typeset in Mixage
by SPi Technologies India Pvt Ltd (Straive)
CONTENTS
vii
ix
23
David Wilkinson
3 Collecting your data: literature and other forms of data 45

David Wilkinson
4 Analysing your data 82
116
139

161
FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Pure and applied research comparison 4

Figure 1.2 Traditions in research 10
Figure 1.3 Quantitative and qualitative research compared 13
Figure 2.1 The research project process 25
Figure 2.2 An example research plan – Gantt chart 37
Figure 2.3 Example informed consent protocol 42
Figure 3.1 Examples of open-ended questions 63
Figure 3.2 Examples of multiple-choice questions 64
Figure 3.3 Advantages and disadvantages of social media
platforms as data collection devices 77
Figure 4.1 Sample categories that may emerge from the data
when exploring important memories linked to music 84
Figure 4.2 Analysing content: stages in developing
a coding frame 85
Figure 4.3 Charts showing admissions to Paperfield Hospital
(year and gender) 95
Figure 4.4 Admissions to Barnswell Hospital (2022 and 2023
compared) 96
Figure 4.5 Age of admissions (female) to Department A in 2022 97
Figure 4.6 Tally chart of female admissions to Department A
in 2022 97
Figure 4.7 Grouping of ages – female admissions to
Department A in 2022 98
Figure 4.8 Frequency of ages of female admissions during
2022 100
Figure 4.9 Distribution of exam results 101
Figure 4.10 Working out standard deviations 102
Figure 4.11 Distribution of exam results showing standard
deviation 103
viii Figures
Figure 4.12 Positive relationship (correlation) between two

data sets 104
Figure 4.13 Negative relationship (correlation) between two
data sets 105
Figure 4.14 No relationship (correlation) between two data sets 105
Figure 4.15 An example using Pearson’s Product Moment
Correlation Coefficient approach (R) 106
Figure 6.1 Exploring impact and examples 144
Figure 6.2 A co-produced view of a research topic in health 147
Figure 6.3 Dissemination identifier 152
PREFACE
The first edition of this book was written over twenty years ago to support
those engaging in research work for the first time. It was developed to
help demystify the research project process and make it accessible and
(hopefully) enjoyable.
A new element of this edition is to assess the value of the content
specific to four user-groups or stakeholders who may have a voice in the
research work: academics (including undergraduate or college students),
industry or business representatives, those who work in the public sector,
and society or wider community groups. Throughout the content we
make regular reference to these groups and discuss elements of the
research process and its application and relevance to them. Our aim is to
contextualise the content and make it meaningful, applicable and relevant.
Whilst this updated edition recasts and updates the content, it still
follows the typical research project structure and timeline. We begin (in
Chapter 1) by exploring why research work is undertaken and the purposes
it satisfies. This includes an assessment of the defining characteristics of
different attitudes towards research work and its associated definitions.
From this foundation we then quickly move (Chapter 2) to practical
elements associated with planning and executing your research activity.
In this section we spend some time on the importance of specifying an
appropriate research question or hypothesis and linking this to relevant
published material. Developing a research strategy and considering the
best or most effective research methods are also covered in this chapter.
Following the planning stage, we then move on (Chapter 3) to consider
the forms and types of data you might collect or collate as part of your
research project work. This section provides an overview of the typical
research methods used in small-scale research project work (experimental
methods, survey-based approaches, research interviews, focus groups,
observation techniques, and the value provided by social media as data
x Preface
collection devices). Dealing with the data you collect (Chapter 4) is an

important part of the research process and will require you to become
skilled in data analysis techniques. In this chapter we spend some time
working through a few approaches that allow researchers to deal with
both quantitative and qualitative tools and techniques. Preparing your
research findings for wider consumption (Chapter 5) includes preparing
your written work and carefully considering the format and structing of
your reporting. In this chapter we spend some time reflecting on the styles
of research reporting as relevant for different readership or audience
groups. This includes considering the value of tools and techniques such
as storytelling and data visualisation. Finally, we explore (Chapter 6) the
value of research work by examining material which seeks to assess effect
and impact. This includes coverage of the interpretation of impact and
how it can be enhanced through mechanisms such as co-production and
dissemination.
Although the content of the Researcher’s Toolkit has been completely
updated for this edition, the driving force remains the same – to support
you as a researcher engaged in small-scale project work, and to help you
successfully negotiate your own way through the process.
David Wilkinson
Dennis Dokter
January 2023
WHY RESEARCH?
What to look out for and what to think of
1
David Wilkinson
IN THIS CHAPTER WE EXPLORE:

● The purpose of research
● Traditions and methods
● Ethics of research
The purpose of research
In the social world, research is going on all around us, every day. Most of
us have been asked to provide feedback on services we’ve received or
answer a survey seeking our views on particular topics. Market research-
ers ask us about our preferred brand of toothpaste, chocolate, smart-
phone, or other consumer good. Pollsters ask us about our views on the
latest political topics, environmental issues, world events. Software appli-
cations (apps) and websites will ask for your feedback or to give a satis-
faction score. Academic researchers may seek our views on medicines,
public policy issues, and new technological developments. All of this activ-
ity is carried out under the banner of ‘research’. In all of these examples
research is carried out with a common purpose: To increase knowledge
and understanding of what is known or understood and to take action
based on that increased knowledge and understanding.
Research results may also have indirect effects on our lives. Policy-
makers in central or local government may, for example, make decisions
based on the outcomes of research work they have been involved with or
DOI: 10.4324/9781003180159-1
2 Why research?
commissioned. Each year government departments employ universities

or research organisations to carry out enquiries on their behalf. Other
organisations, such as charities, healthcare organisations, hospitals,
community groups, and unions, also employ research organisations to
undertake research work on their behalf.
Research work is also carried out by, or on behalf of, commercial and
industrial organisations to explore the potential value and development
of new products or services, to gain customer feedback, and to monitor
competitors. Having a research and innovation strategy is a big part of
the successes made by many innovative corporations and small and
medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Research activity, therefore, informs
policy and action; it can help guide or steer organisational improvement
and development and can also lead to new products and services.
Throughout this textbook we return to a core set of stakeholders
and discuss the relevance of our content to them. We are interested in
exploring ‘what this means’ to them and want to further emphasise that
research is not only relevant when pursuing a career in academia, but that
this skillset is valuable within any career path. Our four stakeholder groups
are: Academia, society, industry, and the public sector.
THE PURPOSE OF RESEARCH
Academia
Engaging in research activity is one of the most important parts
of the work of academia (university or higher education). It
provides a base from which to develop effective and relevant
teaching practice and knowledge creation. It is here that most
state-of-the-art knowledge is developed and disseminated.
Society
Research into the effectiveness treatments and vaccines helps
to protect health and save lives. A powerful example of this
were the huge research programmes developed to evaluate the
effectiveness of Covid-19 vaccines during the global pandemic
in 2020–2022. Research that has a societal impact or purpose
provides us with insights on the value of research and how it
affects groups within society.
Why research? 3
Industry
Research that reveals changing consumer practices enable
industry to refine products and services to better meet their
needs. It is at the core of their innovation strategy and provides
insights into future endeavours.
Public sector
Research for the public sector helps establish policy that is data-
driven and evidence-based. This allows for a more transparent
and democratic process by which decisions within the public sec-
tor are made and evaluated. Transport habit research and the
collection and analysis of population growth data for instance
allow public sector bodies to make changes to infrastructure and
services to support the population.
The focus of research
Broadly speaking, research can be categorised as expanding knowledge in

a discipline or subject area, and/or to create impact. There is some degree
of flexibility and overlap between these two categories. For example,
policy research may also contribute to disciplinary knowledge. They rep-
resent different points on a continuum rather than being completely sep-
arate. Each of these objectives is examined below. However, because this
book is aimed at practitioners, the role of research in informing practice is
explored in greater detail. In socially driven research work there are other
classifiers for research work that are equally valid (Robson and McCartan,
2016). For example (Leavy, 2017, p. 5) articulates that research can be a
mixture of exploration, explanation, and description.
To expand knowledge in a discipline or area
Research can be seen as enquiry designed to contribute to disci-

pline-based knowledge. Much of what we learn in school, college, or
university is derived from some form of research. The social, behavioural,
and natural sciences, in particular, are research-based disciplines, but all
subjects rely on continuous enquiry and new ideas. For example, some
4 Why research?
people may think that history is a given set of facts that do not change,
but it is likely that the version of history that we were taught in school or
university is quite different from the one which our grandparents were
taught. This is partly because history is continually being revised, based on
new evidence or on a reconsideration of the existing evidence. Research
moves disciplines forward and is central to the life of the university.
Research that is primarily aimed at expanding theory and knowledge in
a particular discipline is sometimes called ‘pure’ research because it is often
without context or direct application (Robson and McCartan, 2016, p. 397).
Pure research can be described as a search for knowledge and understanding
for its own sake. Historically, most scientific and academic research work would
be described as pure research work in that its primary focus was on expanding
knowledge and understanding. The alternative to research work that is ‘pure’
is research work that is more immediately transferrable, contextualised, or
applied. There are differences between these two classifying types:
Academic ‘pure’ research Contextualised ‘applied’ research

Seeks to expand “body of knowledge” in Seeks to find solutions to instant ‘real-
a given subject area. world’ (Robson, 2017) problems and
issues.
Questions tend to be more conceptual Problems tend to be more practical and
and theory-driven. focused around a given topic or
concern.
Findings are generally made public. Findings are often made public but
sometimes are kept private (for example
when linked to the development of new
products).
Results generally spur ideas and Results are generally used internally to
questions for future research. make decisions and set up strategy.
Assessed through peer review by Assessed by client-organisation and/or
means of academic discipline industry standards.
standards.
Shared primarily through academic Shared mainly through internal reports
writings (doctoral dissertation, thesis, to reveal results; may also be shared
dissertation research, scholarly journals, more widely through professional
academic conferences & presentations, conferences and industry/trade
academic articles and other publications publications (e.g., articles, case studies,
(e.g., books). etc.).
Figure 1.1 Pure and applied research comparison
To create impact
The measurable effect or impact of research work is central in commer-

cially framed work. Examples might include the attractiveness amongst
Why research? 5
consumer groups of remote working and the likelihood of purchasing

technology solutions to support this. In the academic world, although
research may contribute to the knowledge base of a discipline, findings are
often accessible and meaningful to only a small group of fellow research-
ers or academics. Results from such research projects have historically
been published in academic journals that were not easily accessible for
the non-expert. Greater understanding of a research topic or issue was
more important than the tangible (and measurable) effect or impact of the
research. However, this is now changing. In most academic research work
funded in UK universities there are measures in place to explore effect
and impact. This includes how the work is disseminated inside and outside
academia.
This was not always the case. Historically, research in academia
(as well as other areas) was often referred to (unkindly) as ‘research by
academics for academics’. Some commentators argued that historically
research in the social and behavioural sciences had little influence on
the day-to-day lives and practices of most people. They suggested that
practitioners (e.g., psychologists, teachers, nurses, business managers)
did not read research findings, or that, if they did, they didn’t necessarily
act upon them in their work. More recently, things have changed in the
perception of the rationale and value of research work. It is now driven by
a focus on effect and measurable impact.
There are numerous ways to explore value and impact in research
work. Some of the key ones have been identified by Mark Reed,
a transdisciplinary researcher specialising in the identification and
measurement of research impact Reed et al., (2021) identifies that
to demonstrate meaningful impact, research should be capable of
classification within one or more of the following ten categories:
• Understanding and awareness – meaning your research helped peo-

ple understand an issue better than they had before.
• Attitudinal – your research helped lead to a change in attitudes.
• Economic – your research contributed to cost savings, or costs
avoided; or increases in revenue, profits or funding.
• Environmental – benefits arising from your research aid genetic diver-
sity, habitat conservation and ecosystems.
• Health and well-being – your research led to better outcomes for
individuals or groups.
6 Why research?
• Policy – your research contributed to new or amended guidelines or

laws.
• Decision-making – supporting the development of this and other
behavioural impacts.
• Cultural – changes in prevailing values, attitudes and beliefs.
• Other social impacts – such as access to education or improvement
in human rights.
• Capacity or preparedness – research that helps individuals and
groups better cope with changes that might otherwise have a nega-
tive impact.
(Reed, 2016)
One of the ways in which research can provide impact is by it being accessi-
ble and contextualised. When it reaches this level of understanding it can be
effectively used to inform policy, decision-making, and practice. Those who
fund large-scale research recognise this and now demand a commitment
to demonstrating impact in all of the research project work they support.
Examples here include requirements issued by the largest academic research
funder in the UK (UK Research and Innovation (UKRI)), and one of the largest
healthcare research funders (National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)).
UK RESEARCH AND INNOVATION (UKRI)
Launched in April 2018, UKRI is a non-departmental public body

sponsored by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial
Strategy (BEIS). The organisation brings together the seven dis-
ciplinary research councils, Research England, which is respon-
sible for supporting research and knowledge exchange at higher
education institutions in England, and the UK’s innovation agency,
Innovate UK. They provide funding to researchers, businesses,
universities, NHS bodies, charities, non-governmental organisa-
tions (NGOs) and other institutions.
The UKRI provide two substantive strands which should be used to

demonstrate impact, and both of which could be present in impactful
research work. Academic impact is the demonstrable contribution that
excellent social and economic research makes in shifting understanding
and advancing scientific method, theory, and application across and
within disciplines. Economic and societal impact is the demonstrable
Why research? 7
contribution that excellent social and economic research has on society

and the economy, and its benefits to individuals, organisations, or nations
(UKRI, 2022). This will include the development of new innovative products
that will help a company and its business models, or/and support end-
users with the solution/support for societal challenges.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH RESEARCH (NIHR)
The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) has a mission

to improve the health and wealth of the nation through research.
A substantial part of this mission involves funding health, public
health, and social care research that leads to improved outcomes
for patients and the public and makes the health and social care
system more efficient, effective, and safe. They work closely with
a range of different organisations and stakeholders from across
the healthcare ecosystem to ensure that the research they fund
addresses the health and wealth challenges the nation faces.
The NIHR provide a short summary of their focused interest in

supporting impactful work as part of their core guidelines to applicants. It
articulates that applicants for funding should plan their ‘pathway to impact’
within their funding applications. They usefully define how they interpret
impact as the demonstrable contribution that research makes to society
and the economy. It should be of benefit to individuals, organisations, and
nations. Generating impact from research is highly context-dependent,
takes time, involves serendipity, and, often, comprises a series of small
incremental changes carried out collaboratively (NIHR, 2022).
Traditions and methods
Research work relies on an agreed understanding of how we come to

know something is true or valid. In most research work carried out in the
social sciences our ‘truth’ is defined by our acceptance of certain traditions
in research. When embarking on research work (i.e., at the planning stage)
we usually decide on our underpinning tradition as this will then steer us
towards (or away from) particular devices or research tools to help us on
our research journey.
8 Why research?
Underlying elements: Ontology, epistemology,

methodology
Guba and Lincoln (1994, p. 12) have explored the important characteris-
tics of research traditions (sometimes also called paradigms). They state
that all substantive ways of seeing the truth through research rely on three
underlying elements: What is the form and nature of reality and what is
there that can be known about it? This is often referred to as ‘Ontology’.
What is the nature of the relationship between the knower or would-be
knower and what can be known? This is often called ‘Epistemology’. How
can the inquirer (would-be knower) go about finding out whatever he
or she believes can be known? This is often termed the ‘Methodology’
and includes the identification of the research tools or instruments the
researcher will use to conduct the work. Any given research tradition is
expected to have coherent responses to these questions as a paradig-
matic trait (Gallifa, 2018, p. 12).
RESEARCH TRADITION
A research tradition or paradigm is a philosophical framework

that your research is based on. It sets out a framework of under-
standings and beliefs and from which the theories and practices
of your research project operate.
There are numerous traditions or paradigms through which to frame

your research work. Popular ones include positivism, constructivism,
pragmatism.
Some examples of traditions: positivism,

constructivism, pragmatism
Positivism
Positivist research is often linked to scientific research and is reliant on

quantitative data (usually lots of it). Positivism uses well-established statis-
tical and analytical techniques to interpret research work. For this reason,
Why research? 9
positivism typically uses quantitative research methods or approaches to

collecting and managing data. Within positivist-framed research, measure-
ment and comparisons are common in order to evaluate effect and impact.
Positivist researchers are comfortable utilising language that sets out a
hypothesis or research question which can then be proved or disproved by
the methods applied. Post-positivist researchers make efforts to utilise the
core underlying principles of positivism, but are generally less rigid in their
use of only quantitative research tools or instruments. However, not all writ-
ers on research traditions and methodologies agree with this interpreta-
tion of post-positivists. Some believe that positivism/post-positivism only
draws upon quantitative approaches and summarise it in this way (Mertens,
2019), whereas others identify that post-positivist approaches have simi-
larities to constructivism (detailed below), in that they are more inclusive
of different approaches to determining truth and validity (Marvasti, 2004).
Constructivism
Constructivist research traditions are fundamentally based on the belief

that reality is socially constructed. A major element of constructivism is the
interpretive understanding of meaning (often referred to as hermeneutics).
The essence of constructivism identifies that human beings do not find or
discover knowledge so much as construct or make it (Schwandt, 2000,
p. 197). These constructions, interpretations, and understandings of mean-
ing are carried out by researchers in a number of settings. For example, his-
torians attempt to include contextual and environmental factors to assess
and interpret documents written in a particular time period. Constructivist
researchers therefore utilise hermeneutics (the interpretation of spoken
and written language) as a way to interpret the meaning of something from
a certain standpoint or situation (Guba and Lincoln, 1989).
Pragmatism
The pragmatist paradigm is underpinned by its acceptance of a

mixed-methods approach to research work (Tashakkori and Teddlie,
2010). In essence, the pragmatic tradition is one that is developmental
in its embrace and acceptance of newer and more innovative ways of
10 Why research?
conducting research work. A pragmatic approach to research work is

more practically focused upon the core scope and remit of the research
work. As such, pragmatism allows the researchers to choose the methods
(or combination of methods) that work best for answering their research
questions (Onwuegbuzie and Johnson, 2006).
Approaches to collecting data – methods and tools
Methods and tools commonly used within particular paradigms or tra-

ditions vary to fit the philosophical underpinning or positioning of each.
Some are rigidly framed and applied and tend to be exclusively used by
particular traditions; others are more flexibly utilised and are therefore
applied across multiple traditions.
A useful shorthand for broadly classifying research tools or instruments
can be achieved by exploring their central data source. Research tools
can therefore be described as either essentially quantitative (numerically-
based) or essentially qualitative (non-numeric) in nature. Performing a
classification in this way helps us to identify some of the fundamental
strengths and limitations of the specific tools and instruments we might
use to realise our research work. In order to understand the nature of data
collection and analysis two broad categories have been used to describe
different approaches. These are: Quantitative and qualitative research.
Tradition or paradigm Quantitative or Examples
qualitative
Positivism. Mainly quantitative. Experiments.
Quasi-experiments.
Tests.
Scales.
Constructivism. Mainly qualitative. Interviews.
Focus groups.
Observations.
Document reviews.
Visual data analysis.
Pragmatism Mixture of both Includes tools or instruments
quantitative and that are quantitative and
qualitative. qualitative. Focus groups.
Interviews.
Observations.
Testing.
Scale measurement.
Experiments.
Figure 1.2 Traditions in research

Why research? 11
Quantitative methods
Surveys, tests, structured interviews, laboratory experiments, and

non-participant observation are usually categorised as quantitative
data collection methods. One of the important features of quantitative
research is that it is highly structured and produces data which are amena-
ble to statistical analysis. For example, structured questionnaires usually
ask respondents to select an appropriate response in order to answer
questions – respondents are not usually asked to say anything in their
own words. They simply have to agree or disagree with statements the
researcher has devised. This approach makes it easier for the researcher
to quantify the data and calculate how many people made a particular
point.
QUANTITATIVE DATA
Quantitative data are those types of data that can usually be

reduced to numerical form. The analysis of these data types
involves manipulating them in some way and/or applying some
form of statistical test.
The results of quantitative research are presented in the form of

descriptive or complex statistics, like tests of significance, correlation,
regression analysis. As the name suggests, quantitative research is
concerned with presenting findings in a numerical form. The values
underlying quantitative research include neutrality, objectivity, and the
acquisition of a sizeable scope of knowledge (e.g., a statistical overview
from a large sample) (Leavy, 2017, p. 9). Some authors articulate that
quantitative tools and techniques are of far more importance in terms
of presenting truth about a research topic or issue than their qualitative
counterparts. The canons of reliability for quantitative research may be
simply unworkable for qualitative research (LeCompte and Preissle,
1993). However, the complexities of researched realities have caused
some academics to question the rigid absolutes provided through the
use of only quantitative approaches to research investigation (Brunsdon,
2016).
12 Why research?
Qualitative methods
Participant observation, focus groups, unstructured interviews, or life his-

tories are all types of qualitative research methods (Dawson, 2019). The
resulting data are often presented in the form of quotations or descrip-
tions, though some basic statistics may also be presented.
The development and application of qualitative tools and techniques
are a relatively recent phenomena in social research. Up until around the
1960s social sciences researchers modelled themselves on the natural
sciences, focusing on the need for objective, quantifiable information.
Much of the research in psychology, for example, was based on an
experimental design and carried out in laboratories or similar controlled
conditions. Another important aspect of psychological research
was (and still is) the use of various tests, for example, of intelligence,
personality, attitude, and academic achievement. Although sociological
research was not usually experimental in character, it used measurement
techniques (e.g., pupils’ ability tests) and forms of statistical analyses
similar to those used in psychology. In the social sciences, surveys, tests,
and observation were commonly accepted as objective methods of
producing ‘hard’ data.
QUALITATIVE DATA
Qualitative data include observations, interviews, and life his-

tory accounts. They enable the voices of those being researched
to be heard. Qualitative data are usually analysed by subjecting
it to some form of coding process.
This approach to research began to be challenged during the 1960s

and 1970s when it was argued that the application of a ‘scientific’
quantitative approach – in the form of surveys and experiments – failed
to take into account the differences between people and the objects of
the natural sciences. There were concerns that the experimental method,
in particular, was so artificial and removed from everyday life that the
findings might not be valid; they might not represent accurately what they
Why research? 13
claim to represent. Quantitative research just seemed to lack imagination

(Shipman, 1985).
These criticisms of quantitative research have led many researchers
to adopt qualitative approaches that are more flexible and adaptable to
different research topics or scenarios. For example, a qualitative research
strategy, in which participant observation and unstructured interviewing
are the data collection methods, allows researchers to get closer to the
people they are investigating (Mannay, 2015).
Quantitative research Qualitative research

Quantitative research tools include Qualitative research tools include
surveys with closed questions. surveys with open-ended questions.
Uses categorical questions such as Asks respondents to specify views and
male/female, yes/no, checkbox or reactions to questions by providing
multiple choice responses. written or verbal responses.
Examples of specific tools and Examples of specific tools include:
instruments include: content analysis, focus groups, interviews, observations,
frequency counts, inferential analysis video analysis.
tools and techniques.
Tend to be narrowly focused around Tend to be broad in focus, embracing
specific research parameters or aims. multiple perspectives and accounts.
Heavily reliant on facts and numbers. Heavily reliant on impressions, opinions,
views and perspectives.
Figure 1.3 Quantitative and qualitative research compared
Mixing quantitative and qualitative methods
There are numerous examples of how quantitative and qualitative methods

have been combined in research projects, though one method is usually
dominant. Furthermore, the distinction between quantitative and qualita-
tive approaches can be rather artificial and misleading as quantitative meth-
ods, such as surveys, can produce qualitative data if open-ended questions
are included. Qualitative data can also be quantified (Brannen, 1995).
In the following section we explore a popular approach to research
that draws upon a mixture of methods, although there is an emphasis
on interpretative qualitative techniques. Action research has its roots
in constructivist or pragmatic research traditions (given our overview
descriptions above). Developing understanding or context around issues
and relating research work to the ‘real world’ would also afford it the label
of ‘applied research’.
14 Why research?
Action research
Action research is about diagnosing a specific problem (e.g., pupil absence)

in a specific setting (a school) and attempting to solve it. The ultimate
objective is to improve practice in some way. Action research is usually,
but not always, collaborative. Teams of researchers and practitioners work
together on a project. Alternatively, a project can be undertaken by the
practitioners themselves, without any involvement from outside research-
ers. In action research, practitioners play an active role in designing the
project, collecting data, and implementing change. This is quite different
from the forms of research described earlier where an outside researcher
conducts a study (e.g., in a hospital) and the role of the practitioners is
usually to fill out questionnaires or participate in interviews.
Action research can take place in a diverse range of settings, e.g.,
hospitals, companies or schools. Observation and interviews are the two
methods of data collection most often associated with action research,
though a whole range of other methods, including questionnaires, tests,
or documentary evidence, can also be used. The conditions imposed on
other forms of research are often relaxed with action research, it interprets
the scientific method much more loosely and flexibly. The claim is made
that action research is strongly empowering and emancipatory in that it
gives practitioners a ‘voice’ (Cohen, Manion, and Morrison, 2017, p. 31).
Not surprisingly, action research has been criticised by those who
subscribe to a more traditional scientific approach to research. Critics
suggest that it is too subjective; it overlooks the need for systematic
methods and lacks scientific rigour. Findings are not generalisable; in
other words, they do not apply solely to the environment in which the
research was carried out. Nevertheless, the champions of action research
are encouraged by the thoughts of one of its founders, who indicated
that research which produced nothing but books was inadequate; to be
effective and meaningful research required action to be taken once its
findings were revealed (Lewin, 1968).
Ethics of research
If research work is carried out to expand knowledge and understanding

and/or provide impact it should be conducted in a transparent and fair
way. If it is not, we would question its value or worth (Farrimond, 2012).
Why research? 15
All commissioned or sponsored research work will document and identify

the scope and remit of what is being investigated, examined, or explored.
It will also identify how it will collect data, where it will collect it from, and
how it will be analysed. This process documentation (sometimes called a
research protocol) includes the ethical issues considered by the researcher
or research group. Ethical considerations in research are a set of principles
that provide clear structure and a ‘moral compass’ for research designs
and practices. Within academia and public sector research work there are
clearly defined codes of practice and guidance materials articulating how
research projects must be conducted and how data must be held and
analysed (Brooks, Te Riele, and Maguire, 2014).
Research ethics matters because your actions in this area help to
ensure research work is accepted and trusted by sponsors, peer groups,
and society. Without clear and robust ethical guidance, our trust of
research work would erode.
MERTON’S NORMS AND COUNTER-NORMS
Robert Merton made his reputation as a key social science

researcher and academic. He published prolifically in the 1950s,
1960s, and 1970s on various sociological issues and he brought
visibility and legitimacy to the specialty of the social study of
science (Cole, 2004). Very early in his academic career, Merton
devised a framework of norms for good scientific research work.
These ‘norms’ he identified as the core standards of good aca-
demic research work (Merton and Sztompka, 1996). They should
be in the minds of all researchers seeking to produce good and
effective research work. Although devised to support ‘scientific’
research work, they have commonly been applied to all research
work as meaningful standards of good academic practice. His
four norms are:
Communalism (or communism) This identifies that research dis-

coveries should have shared ownership if they are to have the
maximum societal effect or impact. This links to notions of
open science and discoveries belonging in the public domain.
Universalism removes the protective barriers that preclude
some from conducting research work. This norm celebrates
16 Why research?
the idea that everyone can do science, regardless of tradi-

tional limitations such as race, nationality, gender, or any
other differences. Within the universalism norm, everyone
should be judged equally, on the merits of their research
work, rather than their prestige or position.
Disinterestedness articulates that research should be pure and
free from influences. Merton believed that scientists should
work only for the benefit of science.
Organised scepticism espouses that research should be robustly
and transparently assessed and examined. The acceptance of
any research work should be conditional on assessments of
its scientific contribution, objectivity, and rigour.
Whilst these norms are important yardsticks by which to

measure research work, some other authors have presented
counter-norms which seek to undermine these worthy stand-
ards. In work published in 1974 Ian Mitroff presented his anal-
ysis of these counter-norms that are diametrically opposed to
Merton’s idealised standards. Mitroff’s counter-norms focused
instead on research work that is kept secret, is particular to
specific research approaches or ‘ways of doing things’, and is
heavily influenced by external factors (including sponsors and
policy-makers), and dogmatic in that its inflexible to what the
truth might be.
(Mitroff, 1974)
Of paramount ethical importance in research work is the fair and

reasoned treatment of participants in a study. Participants may include,
for example, patients, students, service users, clients, or colleagues.
Ethical considerations should always be driven by transparency and
openness in how we coordinate the research work and deal with the
data we collect, especially if it is collected from individuals or participants.
Professional research processes that are ethical will ensure scientific
integrity, protect human rights and dignity, and encourage meaningful
collaboration between science and society.
Why research? 17
If you are conducting research work within an academic or public

sector environment, there are clear guidelines or frameworks directing you
to deal with your research subjects and the data collected from them in very
specific ways. Generally, you should have consideration of the following
standard areas, and this should be clearly communicated as part of your
research design to sponsors, academic reviewers, and clients. These should
also be communicated to participants (usually as information sheets or
guidance notes) as part of the recruitment process to your research project.
Consenting to participate (informed consent)
Those participating in your research project should be informed about the

purpose and benefits of your study. They should also be made aware of
any risks associated with their participation in the research work. Risks are
usually associated with healthcare-related research work but also apply
to more socially driven work. For example, if participants are exposed to
differing viewpoints to their own this may be uncomfortable for some to
hear so a robust ethics policy will ensure that you inform them of this
possibility. Armed with this information, prior to the research beginning,
some participants may decide not to support your work. Whilst this may
be disappointing, it shows empathy and consideration of your participant
group. It is good ethical practice as a researcher to do this.
Voluntary participation
Your participants should not be coerced into participating in your research

work. They should participate voluntarily. You should communicate to
them that they are free to opt in or out of the study at any point in time.
Participants who contribute to your research work voluntarily are more
likely to provide authentic and realistic data to support your work as a result.
Anonymity
Protecting the identity of participants to your research work should be

of central importance. Most research protocols or ethics guidance have
clear mechanisms and processes that show how respondent information
18 Why research?
is dealt with anonymously. Sometimes projects may need to collect iden-

tifying information from participants in order to ensure data are being col-
lected from the correct profile of respondents, but these data are usually
removed before reporting and analysis. Generally, personally identifiable
data are not collected.
Confidentiality
Where identifiable information is collected from participants to a research

project, you must provide clear information on how this is dealt with in
the research work. Examples of what you might do to ensure confidenti-
ality are actions you take to keep that information hidden from everyone
else. You anonymise personally identifiable data so that it can’t be linked
to other data by anyone else.
Potential for harm
In almost all social science-based research work participants will not usu-
ally be exposed to activities or actions that would cause physical, social,
or psychological harm. In some circumstances, you may be asking partici-
pants to consider views or perspectives that are different from their own.
This in itself could be a potential cause of distress or harm for some partic-
ipants, especially if the viewpoint of others is very different from their own.
Examples here might include attitudes and perspectives related to socially
divisive or controversial issues. Where there is a potential to cause harm to
participants researchers should make clear their strategies for mitigating
or removing this harm.
Accurate reporting
Professionally produced research work should be your own and clearly

acknowledge the work of others i.e., it should not be plagiarised. It should
objectively and accurately present research data and make clear the types
of data collected and analytical tools or techniques applied.
Why research? 19
WHEN RESEARCH GOES WRONG
Unfortunately, not all research work includes robust mecha-

nisms for ensuring clear ethical processes have been applied.
Robson and McCartan (2016, p. 211) have identified ten question-
able practices in social research. These are:
1. Involving people without their knowledge or consent.

2. Coercing them to participate.
3. Withholding information about the true nature of the research.
4. Otherwise deceiving the participant.
5. Inducing them to commit acts diminishing their self-esteem.
6. Violating rights of self-determination (e.g., in studies seek-
ing to promote individual change).
7. Exposing participants to physical or mental stress.
8. Invading their privacy.
9. Withholding benefits from some participants (e.g., in com-
parison groups).
10. Not treating participants fairly, or with consideration, or
with respect.
Summary
This introductory chapter has explored the role of research in our soci-
ety. Research can contribute to disciplinary knowledge, inform policy,
develop new products and materials, or address specific problems. Some
of the limitations of research approaches, traditions, or paradigms have
also been discussed. These include the fact that methods of interpre-
tation can have an effect on the perceived value of the research (scien-
tific or positivist approaches may be ‘valued’ more than constructivist or
mixed-methods approaches), or policy-makers may ignore information
that does not fit their agenda.
Debates about the nature of social research have also been covered.
We have seen that the scientific approach has historically influenced social
20 Why research?
research methods but in recent decades innovative and more qualitative

methods have become more popular, particularly in sociology and
education.
Ethical considerations in research work direct the approach undertaken
by researchers and provide important markers to allow sponsors and
other research consumers to value results and outputs produced from
it. The problems typically encountered by weak commitments to ethical
principles have been outlined.
References
Brannen, J. (1995) Mixing methods: Qualitative and quantitative research/
edited by Julia Brannen. Aldershot, Brookfield, USA: Avebury.
Brooks, R., Te Riele, K. and Maguire, M. (2014) Ethics and education
research. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Brunsdon, C. (2016) ‘Quantitative methods I: Reproducible research and
quantitative geography’, Progress in Human Geography, 40(5), pp.
687–696.
Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2017) Research methods in edu-
cation. 8th edn. London: Routledge.
Cole, S. (2004) ‘Merton’s contribution to the sociology of science’, Social
Studies of Science, 34(6), pp. 829–844.
Dawson, C. (2019) Introduction to research methods: A practical
guide for anyone undertaking a research project. 5th edn. London:
Robinson.
Farrimond, H. (2012) Doing ethical research. London: Bloomsbury
Academic.
Gallifa, J. (2018) ‘Research traditions in social sciences and their meth-
odological rationales’, Aloma: Revista de Psicologia, Ciències de l’Edu-
cació i de l’Esport, 36, pp. 9–20.
Guba, E. G. and Lincoln, Y. S. (1989) Fourth generation evaluation.
Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.
Guba, E. G. and Lincoln, Y. S. (1994) ‘Competing paradigms in qualita-
tive research’, in N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (eds.) Handbook of
qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.,
pp. 105–117.
Why research? 21
Leavy, P. (2017) Research design: Quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods,

arts-based, and community-based participatory research approaches.
New York: The Guilford Press.
LeCompte, M. and Preissle, J. (1993) Ethnography and qualitative design
in educational research. 2nd/Margaret D. LeCompte, Judith Preissle
with Renata Tesch. edn. London: Academic Press Limited.
Lewin, K. (1968) Resolving social conflicts. [S.l.]: Harper & Brothers.
Mannay, D.(2015) Visual, narrative and creative research methods:
Application, reflection and ethics. London: Routledge.
Marvasti, A. B. (2004) Qualitative research in sociology: An introduction.
London: SAGE.
Mertens, D. M. (2019) Research and evaluation in education and psy-
chology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed
methods. 5th edn. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Merton, R. K. and Sztompka, P. (1996) On social structure and science.
Heritage of Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mitroff, I. I. (1974) ‘Norms and counter-norms in a select group of the
apollo moon scientists: A case study of the ambivalence of scientists’,
American Sociological Review, 39(4), pp. 579–595.
NIHR (2022) Plan Your Pathway to Impact: NIHR. Available at: https://
www.nihr.ac.uk/researchers/apply-for-funding/how-to-apply-for-
project-funding/plan-for-impact.htm (Accessed: 29 July 2022).
Onwuegbuzie, A. and Johnson, R. (2006) ‘The validity issues in mixed
research’, Research in the Schools Mid-South Educational Research
Association Research in the Schools, 13, pp. 48–63.
Reed, M. S. (2016) The research impact handbook. Huntly, Aberdeenshire:
Fast Track Impact.
Reed, M. S., Ferré, M., Martin-Ortega, J., Blanche, R., Lawford-Rolfe, R.,
Dallimer, M. and Holden, J. (2021) ‘Evaluating impact from research: A
methodological framework’, Research Policy, 50(4), pp. 104147.
Robson, C. and McCartan, K. (2016) Real world research: A resource for
users of social research methods in applied settings. 4th edn. Hoboken,
NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Schwandt, T. A. (2000) ‘Three epistemological stances for qualitative
inquiry: Interpretivism, hermeneutics, and social constructionism’, in
N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research.
2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publishing, pp. 189–213.
22 Why research?
Shipman, M. D. (1985) Educational research: Principles, policies and prac-

tices. London: Falmer.
Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C. (2010) Sage handbook of mixed methods in
social & behavioral research. 2nd edn. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
UKRI (2022) Defining Impact: UK Research and Innovation. Available at:
https://www.ukri.org/councils/esrc/impact-toolkit-for-economic-
and-social-sciences/defining-impact/ (Accessed: 29 July 2022).
PLANNING THE
RESEARCH
David Wilkinson
2

● Planning your research and the messy research journey.
● Things to think about before you start.
● Framing your questions.
● Being realistic about what you can do.
● The hypothesis.
● Exploring the literature.
● Developing a strategy.
● Timing and planning.
● Methodology.
● Ethics as part of your planning.
Planning your research and the messy

research journey
Most research begins with the development of a research question, topic,

or theme. In some cases, such as a personal piece of work, you may
decide on your own questions or theme; in others, they may be given to
DOI: 10.4324/9781003180159-2
24 Planning the research
you. A great deal of research project work is now commissioned by others

to support organisational development, inform policy, and develop new
services, for example, with explicit aims and outcomes. Whoever decides
on the topic or theme of the research, there are a number of fundamental
clarifying questions that can be applied to it in order to help steer and
direct its direction and focus. These include:
What is it that we wish to learn more about?

Why is it of interest or importance to research this area?
What other work has been carried out in this area?
This clarifying process should enable you to develop, refine, and frame the
questions you’d like to set out to answer in your research. Initially you will,
no doubt, have generated many questions. Some of these will be related,
so you should aim to limit the questions tackled in your research to a few
which are clearly formulated and distinctive. Many research projects fail
due to the sheer number of questions posed and the lack of clarity they
display.
Stages in the process
Research in the social sciences typically has a number of fundamen-

tal stages. These include framing your questions, exploring the litera-
ture, developing a strategy, collecting data, analysing data, and writing/
submitting your report. This might suggest that research is a neat, linear
undertaking but in real-world research, this is rarely the case (Robson and
McCartan, 2016). However, most research project work cycles around
these fundamental stages (VanderStoep and Johnson, 2009), and is itera-
tive, reflective, and developmental.
Setting your research topic or question can be time-consuming and
requires careful thought in order to frame it appropriately around a given
focus or topic (Denscombe, 2017). Planning research work can sometimes
feel overwhelming when you have limited experience or are unsure about
the process. It can be helpful in these situations to draw strength from
your personal characteristics in order to make the experience as pain-free
as possible.
Planning the research 25
Figure 2.1 The research project process
WHAT KIND OF RESEARCHER ARE YOU?
Factors you might think about to help you plan and structure
your research include:
● Are you good with people?

● Do you prefer written communication or face-to-face
interaction?
● Do you love or loath mathematics and statistics?
● Do people feel at ease with you and are they willing to con-
fide in you?
● Do you like to number-crunch?
● Do you like to conduct web-based research work?
(Dawson, 2019, p. 3)
In a real-world setting the stages of research are not distinct and as sepa-
rate as they might at first appear; they are flexible and organic in their form,
adapting to the research work as it continues and develops. As an exam-
ple, your research project may have reached the data collection stage and
you may become aware of other published work that raises important
additional questions you might like to ask your research subjects about.
In a real-world setting you might be required to edit your interview or sur-
vey questions to include the newly published work you have discovered.
Similarly, you may start to analyse some elements of the data you have
collected (for example, reading through your interview transcripts) whilst
still collecting other forms of data (such as observations of participants
in their work setting). If this is the case (and it happens to the best of us),
you may need to revise some aspect of your plan. The researcher often
has to move backwards and forwards between different stages in their
work. Social research is, by its very nature, a messy process, something
that many research textbooks disguise from their readers. However, some
well-respected social science researchers do acknowledge that social
research is often a lot less smooth than the accounts of research you may
read about in textbooks (Bryman, 2016, p. 14).
ACADEMIC
Students are required (on most college and degree programmes)

to carry out a piece of original research work as part of their
programme of study. Such work would need to ensure that it
met the standard required.
Industry
A small or medium-sized enterprise (SME) might need to carry
out research work to explore the appetite for a new product or
service. This would require planning in terms of (for example)
which markets/sectors to concentrate on in terms of survey or
interview work.
Public sector
A local authority may be charged with providing adequate levels
of service in relation to refuse collection. They may need to plan
for research work examining the best collection times and days
for certain postcode areas.
Society
Charities or third sector organisations might be interested in
the rights afforded to certain groups represented by them. They
may need to plan for effective research work to establish how to
service these groups.
Things to think about before you start
There are a number of factors that shape the way in which a project
is carried out, especially the availability and amount of time, money
and other resources (for example, software and other appliances,
and instruments or tools you might use to help shape and report on
your research work) (Robson, 2017, pp. 150–157). Accessibility of the
research subjects or participants, and ethical issues also need to be kept
in mind.
Resources
One of the key resource elements in research work is the amount of fund-
ing resource (money) that is available to undertake the work. Very often in
small-scale research work, you will be acting as a lone researcher and will
be required to undertake all elements of the work yourself. But this is not
without a financial cost; your time and experience are of some financial
value, and it is useful (for planning and assignment purposes) to think of
it in this way. Research projects that are based primarily on observation
and face-to-face interviews are labour-intensive, so the ‘cost’ in terms of
researcher time will be the greatest. If the project data are being collected
using qualitative methods, such as open-ended interviews, then the anal-
ysis can also be very time-consuming as interviews may need to be tran-
scribed and transcriptions analysed and coded in some way as part of the
reporting process.
Some of the main costs (in terms of time and effort) in survey research
include: piloting the draft questions; constructing the survey instrument
(usually an online hosted survey), coding the responses, and analysing the
data. There are many software packages (such as SPSS (Statistical Package
for the Social Sciences) and Nvivo for dealing with interview, observation
and other qualitative data). Using analysis packages such as these can
drastically reduce the time you might need to dedicate to collating, coding,
and analysing your research data.
NEGOTIATING ACCESS CHECKLIST – EXAMPLE

FROM EDUCATION
Gaining access within school or other education settings

requires thought and consideration of a number of issues.
Cohen, Manion, and Morrison (2017) identify ten key elements
that are of value:
1. Formally request permission to carry out your research

work as soon as you have an agreed project outline.
2. Speak to the people who will be asked to participate in your
work.
3. Submit the project outline to the headteacher, if you are car-
rying out a study in your or another educational institution.
4. Decide what you mean by anonymity and confidentiality
and communicate this to your research participants.
5. Decide whether participants will receive a copy of the report
and/or see drafts or interview transcripts.
6. Inform participants what is to be done with the information
they provide.
7. Prepare an outline of intentions and conditions under which
the study will be carried out to hand to the participants.
8. Be honest about the purpose of the study and about the
conditions of the research.
9. Remember that people who agree to help are doing you a
favour.
10. Never assume ‘it will be all right’. Negotiating access is an
important stage in your investigation.
(adapted from Cohen, Manion, and Morrison, 2017, p. 57)
Amount of time available
The timeframe in which you need to complete the research is central to your
planning. Setting realistic goals is important. One trap that researchers can
fall into is that whilst they allow sufficient time to carry out the research
and to analyse the data, they do not allocate enough time for writing up the
final report. Report writing is where you bring all of the various elements of
your project together into a coherent piece of work. It is where you provide
clear answers or responses to your research questions. You need to allow
yourself time and space in order to reflect upon the data you have collected,
literature consulted, and the feedback received from peers/colleagues or
line managers. Managing and committing time to the stages of your pro-
ject (during your planning stage) will ensure you are more likely to produce
good-quality work, on time and within the budget or resourcing envelope.
Accessibility of research sample (your participants or

respondents)
Some groups are more accessible than others. Teachers, university stu-
dents and school pupils are among the easier targets, whereas the home-
less, those with drug dependencies or the super-rich may be more difficult
to access. In some cases you may need to negotiate access with a ‘gate-
keeper’ before you are able to reach the people you would like to reach.
For example, if you want to carry out research on hospital patients, you will
probably have to get the approval of the hospital management. Similarly, it
will be impossible to interview school pupils without first obtaining permis-
sion from the headteacher, and also from the children’s parents. Therefore,
in any one project you may have to negotiate several access ‘hurdles’ before
you finally reach your respondent group. Guaranteeing confidentiality,
arranging visits well in advance, and impressing upon people the value of
the research are all useful tactics in negotiating access (Clark, 2011).
RESEARCH ‘GATEKEEPERS’
Gatekeepers are key or influential figures associated with

the community or participant group you wish to work with or
research. These individuals can help you to better understand

the community or participant group and can help you get to
know other people. Working with them, you will be able to build
trust and generate acceptance within their community.
(Dawson, 2019, p. 106)
Negotiating or managing successful access to your research subjects

or participants is fundamental to all research projects. Without their
support your research project will undoubtably stumble, if not fail. A
typical, negotiated access approach undertaken by researchers seeking to
collect interview data from a respondent group might include:
1. Introducing the research work to the participant group – through

an email, letter, tweet or other social media release sent directly to
participants or via a gatekeeper (someone who acts as a link person
between you and the participants).
2. Negotiating access to the participant group – achieved by asking
those interested to come forward and discuss the specifics of their
involvement (time for interviews, detailed purposes of the research,
etc.).
3. Securing consent from participants – achieved through discussing the
need and use of consent forms with participants.
4. Interacting with participants – speaking with participants and secur-
ing their responses to your questions. Part of this negotiation stage
would also include summarising data and reporting back to partici-
pants (for sense-checking and accuracy) what they have said.
(adapted from Fobosi, 2019, p. 507)
STAGES IN A RESEARCH PROJECT
Framing your questions

Before you start you need a subject. If you work as a researcher
or have been asked to carry out a specific project as part of
your job, then your focus or topics may already have been
selected for you. This stage can be one of the most challeng-
ing parts of the research process, as it involves translating the
overall theme of the research into a viable research question or
hypothesis.
Exploring the literature

Acknowledging what has been published is an important part
of all research projects. In this stage you establish and identify
what has been produced and published elsewhere and how this
influences your own research work.
Develop a strategy
This development stage is where you identify the tradition or
paradigm you will draw upon to support delivery of your research
project. This is the stage where decisions are made regarding
which methods of data collection and analysis are to be used.
You will also identify the types of participants or stakeholders
involved in your research work.
Collecting data
This is the stage in which you carry out the interviews, send out
your surveys, and so on (these are your primary data sources).
You may also utilise data collected elsewhere (such as census
data or market research agency data). These are often referred
to as secondary data sources and may require specific permis-
sions to be sought from the data holders prior to using them for
your research work.
Data analysis
The data analysis stage is where you bring together the vari-
ous strands of your research project work in order to develop a
narrative within your write-up stage. Data analysis is where you
would code your data and identify its key themes or topics. This
stage usually takes place towards the project when most or all of
the data have been collected.
Writing up the results

The stage in the project where you bring together your research
data and present it in an accessible form for your audience. It is
a good idea to have the framework for your report or write-up
developed during your planning stage.
Framing your questions
All research work is based around a topic or theme which is then nar-
rowed down to a specific research topic or question. These elements of
your research project are usually detailed in the introductory section of
your write-up or reporting. They are where you set the scene for your
research work by determining its scope and remit.
Introducing the research and setting it in context is an important part
of a research proposal and any subsequent write-up or reporting. This
is where you would define what you wanted to find out by setting your
research in context and linking it to other related work. Setting the context
of your own research includes identifying data/information, published
materials that have acted as guides to the development of your research
topic or questions. Your introduction should also seek to establish the
need for your research work. This could include, for example, a need
driven by the limited previous work that has been undertaken in this area.
A need could also reasonably be defined if your work was developmental
for practitioners who could apply the results of your work in their own
practice.
Framing your questions allows you to be specific about what your
research will cover and want it will not. It provides markers or areas of
interest so that you can explore and follow these up, in-depth, in relevant
literature sources. The linear process for developing research questions is
usually:
1. Establish your research topic or theme so that you can focus on the
body of literature you need to include and review in your work.
2. Carry out an extensive review of relevant literature so that you are in
a position to form appropriate, researchable questions.
(O’Leary, 2014, p. 35)
However, this neat and logical interpretation presents an issue around practi-
cality. Which do you focus on first – your topic or question, or the literature? You
may find that, following an exhaustive review of the literature, your research
question has already been answered by others. Equally, you may become
aware of issues, in this particular research context, linked to the use of par-
ticular research and analytical tools or instruments. These types of dilemmas
emerge in many more research projects than are probably reported. As a pro-
fessional researcher you may, through your own iterative and developmental
research journey, need to rationalise changes or edits to research question,
and adaptations to methods, data sources and forms of reporting. Effective
research activity should work through these stages of organic developmental
planning and refinement. Your goal should be to articulate in your reporting or
write up the decisions you have made (to edit or adapt your research ques-
tions, or to abandon the use of specific data collection approaches, for exam-
ple), and to provide robust arguments for those decisions.
THE PURPOSE OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Research questions should help you to define the limits of your

study.
● Research questions help you to clarify your research study.

● Research questions allow you to develop knowledge and under-
standing based on practical experience rather than theory.
When defining research questions care must be taken to develop

them objectively. As professional researchers we must always make clear
the theoretical perspectives or models we are employing, and the related
strategies we are about to employ. We should similarly provide clear reasons
for collecting data and presenting information in the way that we do. This
makes clear, to anyone who reads our work, our philosophical positions
and identifies any biases that might exist (Creswell and Creswell, 2018).
Being realistic about what you can do
It is worth spending some time thinking carefully about the research ques-
tion you will seek to address in your work. The questions below might help
and guide you:
● Will the research question be of interest to me and be able to sustain

my interest for the duration of the project work?
● Am I able to answer the question in an objective way, or are there any
biases I have towards the research work that I might need to address?
● Will the research work make a valuable and meaningful contribution
to the work that is already out there?
● In terms of my question, is it clearly and unambiguously set?
● Is the question ‘do-able’? Can I complete it within the timeframe available?
● Do I have the requisite skills needed to complete the research work?
Will I need to be able to use specific data collection tools or analytical
techniques?
The hypothesis
Research topics or themes are usually generally set. Research questions

are more specific, and a research hypothesis is a refinement of a research
question. In scientific research work (belonging to the positivist tradition
or paradigm) the hypothesis is a central part of the research process. For
those who operate within other research traditions, such as constructiv-
ists or pragmatists, there is a common view that research which focuses
on the research hypothesis loses all of its colour and value. Research terms
such as ‘hypothesis’ are usually linked to scientific, quantitative, research
projects rather than qualitative ones (Creswell and Creswell, 2018). The
following definition aligns with this view:
A research hypothesis is a specific, clear and testable proposition or

predictive statement about the possible outcome of a scientific research
study based on a particular property of a population, such as presumed
differences between groups on a particular variable or relationships
between variables. Specifying the research hypotheses is one of the
most important steps in planning a scientific quantitative research study.
(Kalaian and Kasim, 2008)
Exploring the literature
In many proposals, the research plan will make reference to key literature
to emphasise points and provide authority to the work being undertaken.
Therefore, early consultation of the literature in a research project is important.
The next chapter details the processes involved in comprehensively review-

ing the literature and this should be carefully timetabled into the project. A
quick literature search or scan through relevant journal abstracts in the early
stages of the research should, however, provide assistance in establishing
the key concerns or issues arising in your subject area. Following a compre-
hensive literature review, you may find that your original research questions
are no longer appropriate or require reshaping (for example, you may dis-
cover that very similar work has been carried out elsewhere). In this case you
would need to refine your questions to concentrate on an area not explored
fully in the other work or concentrate on questions which add to the research
already conducted. This re-forming of the research is quite common, and
you should not feel obliged to stick rigidly to your original questions. Many
substantial research projects change their focus once it has emerged that
similar work has either been carried out or is being carried out elsewhere.
Developing a strategy
Once you have framed (and perhaps reshaped) your questions, how will you
actually go about answering them? You will need to develop a strategy for
your research. Your research strategy should focus on the specified question
or questions and explore the most effective and efficient ways of answering
them. For example, your strategy should detail which research instruments
you will use and how you will collect the data (through documentary analysis,
via telephone/face-to-face interviews, through questionnaires, by using case
studies, etc.). The strategy forms a major part of the research, and it is useful
to develop a visual plan as part of the strategy indicating key milestones in the
research. We’ve produced a simple example of a research plan below.
An example research plan
Week 1 to 2
● Develop questions
● Consult colleagues
● Refer to key journals
● Review current research in the area
● Write proposal
Week 3 to 10
● Develop strategy for research
● Design instruments
● Pilot instruments
● Refine instruments
● Select sample group
● Administer instruments
Week 10 to 13
● Collate data
● Analyse data
● Submit draft report to colleagues for comment
Week 14
● Submit report
A visual plan – the GANTT chart
Whilst the outline plan above shows some of the component parts of the
research and provides a broad indication of when they will occur, it is linear
and does not take into account the inter-related nature of some elements
of the work. Gantt charts do just that. They are a visual representation of a
project, with clear indications of when each activity will take place and how
it is linked, or related to, other activities. A well-prepared Gantt chart, in a
research plan, shows that you have dedicated some time and effort to think-
ing in detail about your research work. They show your logic and timetable
for your research work and, as such, are very useful for sharing with those
involved with the research work, such as sponsors, line managers, peers, and
supervisors.
GANTT CHART
A Gantt chart is a visual chart that illustrates a project schedule.

This chart lists the tasks to be performed on the vertical axis, and
time intervals on the horizontal axis. Typically, the width of the
horizontal bars in the graph shows the duration of each activity.
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Develop questions
Consult colleagues
Refer to key journals
Review current research
Write proposal
Develop strategy for research
Design instruments
Pilot instruments
Refine instruments
Select sample group
Administer instruments
Collate data
Analyse data
Submit draft report to colleagues
Submit report
Figure 2.2 An example research plan – Gantt chart
Of course, even the most carefully organised research may not go

according to plan. For example, it might prove difficult to interview teachers
during the summer holiday when the school is closed! Therefore, you need
to build into your plan some ‘leeway’ and you may need to change the order
of things slightly. Attempt to view your plan as a template: all the necessary
ingredients for the research should be there, but the ordering of them may
change. This shouldn’t alter greatly the eventual ‘dish’ that you serve.
Timing and planning
Collecting data
Collecting data very often takes longer than researchers anticipate.

Arranging interview venues, conducting interviews, distributing online
surveys, monitoring returns, and issuing reminders all take time and effort.
It is easy to fall into the trap of thinking data collection will be easy and
problem-free. You should carefully plan and manage your research time,
unmanaged research time has a funny way of slipping away from you
(O’Leary, 2014, p. 22).
Although it is important not to underestimate the length of time it
will take to collect research data; you should also not overestimate the
amount of data you are likely to be able to collect. Many research projects
have spectacularly unravelled when the ambitiously planned-for survey
response rates have not been realised. In our experience, response rates
of between 30% and 60% are reasonable. These rates would apply to
work that has succinct and well-formed questions, requires limited time
and effort from the respondent group, and is of interest to your participant
or respondent group. You should not be too disheartened if, after all your
work, you only receive 30 responses out of 100 surveys distributed (that’s
actually a reasonable response rate). Rather than being disheartened,
however, it might be useful to anticipate in your planning stage that this
might occur. You could then aim to distribute many more surveys (subject
to resource considerations such as your time in circulating to a larger
respondent group) than you expect to be returned completed.
SURVEY RESPONSE RATE – WHAT IS IT?
A survey response rate relies on two pieces of information in

order to provide you with a response rate. You need to divide the
total number of survey responses received by people you have
sent the survey to. So, for example 40 people responding to a
survey that was initially sent out to 250 would equal a response
rate of 16% (that is 40/250 = 0.16).
Analysing data
The ease of analysing your data will depend on how well structured your
instruments for collecting the data are. One of the most common instru-
ments used by less experienced researchers is the research survey or
questionnaire. Many researchers are quick to use this instrument as they
often view it as an inexpensive and easy way to collect large amounts of
research data. In many cases this is true, but the structuring, planning and
layout of a survey all require careful consideration. Doing this well requires
thought and effort and is often a time-consuming process. Whilst there
are numerous support tools and software packages designed to assist
with the analysis of your research data, you will need to carefully consider
the analysis frameworks you deploy to theorise and make meaning from
your results (O’Leary, 2014). The process of analysing data can also take
time; it may even produce results you did not expect to find. Again, be
prepared for this and apportion time to consider the implications of the
data being different to how you expected them to be. Can you explain
this? Does it necessitate further analysis or data collection?
Drawing conclusions
Drawing conclusions from your data is often the most difficult part of a
research project. You may have considered your conclusions when design-
ing or framing your research questions. Once you have collected your data
you must ask yourself how the data answers your original questions. Does
it provide evidence (in your findings) upon which to make conclusions?
Do you consider alternative explanations for your conclusions? In other
words, is your research topic subject to other factors perhaps not consid-
ered in your work? It is not a major failing if you indicate that other work or
external factors beyond the remit of your research affect your conclusions.
However, it would be a failing if you didn’t mention them. In addition, do
you indicate the strengths and weaknesses of your research (or method-
ological) approach? These are the types of question you should seek to
address in the conclusions of your research report. They show that you
have evaluated the approach you have taken in the work.
Writing and submitting your report
In PhD research, which takes an average period of three years of full-time

study, it is usual for six months to be given to the write-up of the work.
This is often in addition to notes and draft chapters written throughout the
period of study. Many of those new to research don’t allow enough time
for writing. The process often involves drafting and re-drafting. In, say a
ten-week project you should aim to leave perhaps two weeks for writing
the report. Chapter 5 provides further guidance on the research write-up
process, including how to prepare, draft, and submit your work.
Methodology
At the planning stage of your research work you will need to make clear
decisions about the approach to research you are going to draw upon.
Which tools or instruments will you use? Which theories or design
elements will you base your work on in order to carry out the research
project work? In Chapter 1 we briefly covered some of the research
traditions typically used in social and behavioural sciences research
work. As part of your planning, you should consider which of the tra-
ditions or paradigms will inform or influence your research work and
you should consider the implications this will have on planning the
research. In choosing your methods it is useful to consider a number
of core factors:
● Is it a suitable approach? For example, will it produce the kinds of

data that are required?
● Is it feasible? For example, can it be done in the time available and
with the resources at hand?
● What are the ethical implications? For example, will the approach
chosen allow you as a researcher to be honest and ethical in your
dealings with participants?
(Denscombe, 2017, p. 6)
For many researchers (particularly those engaged in socially-framed

research work), core methodological considerations usually reduce down
to utilising and deploying quantitative, qualitative, or a mixed-methods
approach. Your decisions related to tools, techniques, and traditions
will all impact upon the planning requirements for your research work.
Open, organic, and iterative approaches, favoured more by construc-
tivist or pragmatist philosophies, may require more flexible and reactive
plans than a research project which draws upon positivist traditions or
approaches.
Qualitative and quantitative data rely on different approaches to
their collection and analysis. They are different in terms of the way
they can be reduced or analysed, and the way they can be presented
or reported. Some funders often place greater emphasis and weight
on one data type over the other. For example, in scientific work
(drawing upon positivist research traditions), data sources are usually
quantitative when presenting messages about effect and impact. In
social science research funders are often interested in a mixture of
both quantitative and qualitative data types to provide evidence of
effect or impact.
Ethics as part of your planning
All professional researchers must follow ethical principles, particularly

when research work involves collecting or harvesting data from partici-
pants or organisations. Your research plan should clearly outline the pro-
cesses and procedures you will adopt to ensure any data you collect is
stored safely, securely and protects the identify of those who provided it
(Mager and Galandini, 2020). As researchers we generally recognise that,
when working with human subjects, certain steps must be taken to protect
the dignity and safety of the research participants (Marvasti, 2004, p. 134).
There are numerous set frameworks or protocols you can refer
to as you develop the ethical framework for your research work. One
such framework is that of UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) (a non-
departmental public body of the government of the United Kingdom
that directs research and innovation funding). This ethics framework
helps researchers to consider ethics issues during the complete lifecycle
of a project and includes information and guidelines on good research
conduct and governance. The framework covers six substantive areas or
principles:
● research should aim to maximise benefit for individuals and society

and minimise risk and harm
● the rights and dignity of individuals and groups should be respected
● wherever possible, participation should be voluntary and appropri-
ately informed
● research should be conducted with integrity and transparency
● lines of responsibility and accountability should be clearly defined
● independence of research should be maintained and where conflicts
of interest cannot be avoided they should be made explicit.
(UKRI, 2022; UKRIO, 2021)
Informed consent
Appropriately and adequately informing participants or research subjects

about the scope and remit of research work forms part of informed consent.
This is the process you as a researcher would follow to enable research sub-
jects to consent to participate. Informed consent is a fundamental element
Add your
initials next
to the
statement if
you agree
I confirm that I have read and understand the information sheet dated
12/08/2023 explaining the above research project and I have had the
opportunity to ask questions about the project.
I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at
any time without giving any reason and without there being any negative
consequences. In addition, should I not wish to answer any particular question
or questions, I am free to decline.
I give permission for members of the research team to have access to my
anonymised responses. I understand that my name will not be linked with the
research materials, and I will not be identified or identifiable in the report or
reports that result from the research.
I understand that my responses will be kept strictly confidential.
I agree for the data collected from me to be stored and used in relevant future
research [in an anonymised form].
I understand that other genuine researchers may use my words in publications,
reports, web pages, and other research outputs, only if they agree to preserve
the confidentiality of the information as requested in this form.
I agree to take part in the above research project and will inform the lead
researcher should my contact details change.
I confirm that I have read and understand the information sheet dated
12/08/2023 explaining the above research project and I have had the
opportunity to ask questions about the project.
Name of participant
Participant’s signature
Date
Name of lead researcher
Signature
Date*
*To be signed and dated in the presence of the participant.
Figure 2.3 Example informed consent protocol
of ethical frameworks as this ensures participants give information and data

freely and are fully aware of how you will use and analyse and present their
data. Often, information is provided to participants at the beginning of the
research process. This usually details the research project, and why partic-
ipant data are sought. The information sheet is usually accompanied by an
‘informed consent protocol’ which seeks a signature from the participant
indicating they understand the process and agree to their data being used.
A typical ‘informed consent protocol’ might look like Figure 2.3.
Summary
This chapter has introduced the important role that effective project
planning has on the research process. Initial considerations – such as
resourcing, time available and access to your participant or respondent
group – have also been discussed. Recognising the difficulties of gaining

access to research subjects or settings should also be considered in the
planning stage of any research project. Of central importance is the devel-
opment of a clear research topic or theme through which to set realistic
research questions. Guidance has been provided in this chapter to help
you to determine workable and engaging questions to explore as you
progress on your research journey. Planning tools and techniques, such
as the project plan and Gantt chart, have been briefly covered and their
value specified.
References
Bryman, A. (2016) Social research methods. 5th edn. Oxford, New York:
Oxford University Press.
Clark, T. (2011) ‘Gaining and maintaining access: Exploring the mecha-
nisms that support and challenge the relationship between gatekeep-
ers and researchers’, Qualitative Social Work, 10(4), pp. 485–502.
cation. 8th edn. London: Routledge.
Creswell, J. W. and Creswell, J. D. (2018) Research design: Qualitative,
quantitative, and mixed method approaches. 5th edn. Los Angeles:
SAGE.
Dawson, C. (2019) Introduction to research methods: A practical guide for
anyone undertaking a research project. 5th edn. London: Robinson.
Denscombe, M. (2017) The good research guide: For small-scale social
research projects. 6th edn. London: McGraw Hill Education/Open
University Press.
Fobosi, S. (2019) ‘Experience of negotiating access in the “Field”: Lessons
for future research’, World Journal of Social Science Research, 6, p. 503.
Kalaian, S. A. and Kasim, R. M. (2008) ‘Encyclopedia of Survey Research
Methods’, [Online]. Version. Available at: https://methods.sagepub.
com/reference/encyclopedia-of-survey-research-methods
Mager, F. and Galandini, S. (2020). Research ethics: A practical guide.
Oxford: Oxfam GB.
Marvasti, A. B. (2004) Qualitative research in sociology: An introduction.
London: SAGE.
O’Leary, Z. (2014) The essential guide to doing your research project. 2nd
edn. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
Robson, C. (2017) Small-scale evaluation: Principles and practice. 2nd

edn. London: SAGE.
UKRI (2022) Research Ethics Guidance: UKRI. Available at: https://
www.ukri.org/councils/esrc/guidance-for-applicants/research-
ethics-guidance/ (Accessed: 7 August 2022).
UKRIO (2021) UKRIO Recommended Checklist for Researchers: UK
Research Integrity Office. Available at: https://ukrio.org/wp-content/
uploads/UKRIO-Recommended-Checklist-for-Researchers.pdf
(Accessed: 29 July 2022).
VanderStoep, S. W. and Johnson, D. D. (2009) Research methods for
everyday life: Blending qualitative and quantitative approaches. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
COLLECTING YOUR
DATA 3
Literature and other forms of data
David Wilkinson

● The importance of data – finding out what is already out there.
● Collecting data through a literature review.
● Collecting other research data.
● Experiment-based research.
● Survey-based research.
● Research interviews.
● Focus group interviews.
● Observation as a data collection tool.
● A note on using social media as data collection tools.
The importance of data – finding out what

is already out there
Everyone who decides to undertake a piece of research should feel confi-

dent and knowledgeable about the topic they are studying and the ques-
tions they are asking. A researcher who fails to invest sufficient time and
effort into investigating others’ previous, related work in their chosen area
of study will be unable to make much progress (Ridley, 2012). How can
you refine and build upon the previous work of others if you are not fully
aware of the efforts they have made and the conclusions they reached?
Likewise, once you have decided to undertake a piece of research you
DOI: 10.4324/9781003180159-3
46 Collecting your data
should want your finished work to be both valued and valuable. It will be
most highly valued if it is apparent that it has been informed by, and has
expanded upon, a rigorous and thorough attention to similar work under-
taken in the past (Boote and Beile, 2005, p. 3). It will be valuable if, pre-
cisely because of the efforts devoted to its formative stages, the research
reveals the final pieces of a complex puzzle, or indeed introduces more
puzzles to the debate.
LITERATURE REVIEW
A research literature review is a systematic, explicit, and repro-

ducible method for identifying, evaluating, and synthesising
the existing body of completed and recorded work produced by
researchers, scholars, and practitioners (Fink, 2013, p. 3). The
purpose of a research literature review is to identify the previ-
ous work that has been carried out in your area and to show how
it relates to your work and influences it.
To put it simply, you cannot advance knowledge in your field without

first learning what has been achieved by others and what still remains
to be achieved (Denney and Tewksbury, 2013). The literature review is
to a research project what the foundations are to a house. Without solid
foundations, the house is likely to fall down, and without a detailed look
at the literature, your project is likely to be simplistic, naïve, and an inferior
repetition of work already completed by someone else.
Learning to review the literature has never really received the
attention it undoubtedly deserves. Despite the long-standing tradition
of literature reviews featuring in the early stages of research, there has
been a significant lack of attention paid to just how a researcher ought
to go about searching for, collecting, evaluating, and using past research
in his or her current project. In fact, it seems to be a lot more difficult to
provide a definition of a literature review that we can all have confidence
in than it is to recognise one on paper when we turn to the first few
pages of a research report. Researchers’ opinions of, and attitudes to,
the nature, process, and purpose of a literature review vary enormously.
There are, however, common elements that all researchers ought to take
on board.
Collecting your data 47
Collecting data through a literature review
A literature review enables a researcher to accomplish a number of more spe-

cific aims. It is likely, for example, that in the early stages of your research you
may have only a vague idea of the area you would like to explore more fully.
You may have only a tentative outline of your research problem. This should
not give you cause for concern. A review of the literature will help you to focus
your tentative problem by both limiting, and defining more clearly, the topic
you are interested in researching (Fink, 2013). Look out for recommendations
made by researchers for those intent on continuing with research in a particu-
lar field. You may be provided with advance warnings of possible pitfalls, or
research questions that have been thus far neglected. Reading around the
subject will help you to distil the issues you wish to concentrate upon and
leave you with a concise, detailed, and distinct plan of action.
The existing literature relating to the topic you wish to study is just
as important for what it omits as it is for what it contains. Do not be
overwhelmed by the work others have done before you. You may have
experienced something related to your area of interest that others have
not; an experience that allows you to approach the problem from a unique
and novel perspective.
In examining the available literature, it is tempting to look first (or only) at
the results and conclusions the authors have drawn. It is advisable to employ
a little scrutiny. Rather than focus on results alone, look at the methods,
measurements, and subjects that the researcher has used. In tackling a
particular research problem, the use of certain methodologies and sampling
procedures will prove more fruitful than the use of other, less appropriate
strategies, and a good researcher will justify his or her choice from a range of
possible options. Do not disregard whole studies because you may not be
convinced by their results. If you throw out the baby with the bath water, you
may miss out on insights into how best to design a piece of your own research
that produces findings which stand up to the criticism and scrutiny of others.
Types of literature review
Having discussed why a literature review is a vitally important element

of any research, it is appropriate to consider just what such a review
might entail. It seems that there are as many approaches to undertaking
a literature review as there are research methods textbooks available to

new researchers keen to conduct their own inquiries. It is fair to say that
experienced and novice researchers alike differ in their understandings of
literature reviews because of this. But just what are these understandings?
Broadly speaking, there are six fundamental types of literature review of
value for research work (Bruce, 1994). These are:
Literature review as a list
A list or collection of descriptions and key words from journal articles,

books, newspapers, etc. that represent the available literature on the
research topic. The emphasis is on the listing of the literature rather than
its content.
Literature review as a search
The act of searching for and identifying information of relevance to the

research topic. Again, the content of the literature does not receive prior-
ity. Instead, the literature’s ability to steer the researcher in the direction of
other, relevant existing literature is the prime motivation.
Literature review as a survey or scan
A survey or a scan of past, present, and possible future writing or research

related to the research topic. The focus is very much on the content of the
literature, especially what is known about a particular topic.
Literature review as a knowledge enhancer
A means by which a researcher can increase his or her knowledge of a

particular research topic and test his or her own thoughts or hypotheses.
The focus here is on the literature’s potential to influence the researcher, in
terms of his or her personal development, but not to influence the research.
Literature review as a steering instrument
An instrument capable of supporting, influencing, steering, shaping, or

changing the research to be undertaken. In this conception, the literature
influences both the researcher and the research.
Literature review as a report
A report in its own right, or as a discrete section of a larger report, in which

Six fundamental types of
the researcher frames and thematically organises the literature. It is a final literature review that can help
representation of the ways in which the literature has impacted upon both and shape a research project
the researcher and the research project. 1. A list
There are clear links and relationships between the fundamental 2. A search
types of literature review. They are related in that they are progressively 3. A survey
more encompassing. It is a good idea to view the types as six rungs of a 4. A knowledge enhancer
ladder. It is not possible to climb on to a higher rung without first being 5. A supporting/directing tool
familiar with, and actually using, the lower rungs. Similarly, you continue to 6. A report.
(Adapted from Bruce, 1994)
appreciate the lower rungs in assisting you to climb higher, long after you
have reached the top of the ladder.
Locating the literature
Wherever you go or to whomever you speak in order to gather your

information, the first thing you ought to do is identify and list as many
key words as you can that relate to the topic of your research. This is
because, as a general rule, all resources open to you – apart from people
with experience or knowledge related to your topic you might be lucky
enough to access – are organised by subject. It is by means of these key
words that you will be able to find information connected with the topic
you intend to study. They provide you with a starting point. Of course,
in these very early stages of your research you will not want to over-
look related studies completed by others before you, especially those
which may prove to be important or relevant. You should therefore ‘cast
your nets’ as widely as possible when you come to making a note of key
words.
Developing a review strategy: search terms and lists
Try thinking of a way to turn the topic of your research into a question.
What is it you may wish to find out? If, rather than doing the research
yourself, you were able to approach someone in your imagination and
ask them to give you the answers you seek, how would you phrase the
question? For example, if you were a nurse interested in investigating
the ways in which elderly patients on geriatric wards were viewed by
your colleagues, you may ask: ‘What are the attitudes of medical profes-
sionals towards geriatric patients in hospital?’ Alternatively, as a teacher
(say, of history) you may be interested in looking at how a new computer
program may impact upon a lesson. In this case you might ask: ‘What
effect do computers have on the teaching of history?’ In both cases, you
can see that some of the words within your question would be appro-
priate key words with which to start your search: ATTITUDES, MEDICAL
PROFESSION, GERIATRIC, PATIENT, HOSPITAL, and COMPUTERS,
TEACHING, HISTORY.
This initial list of key words may be very short – as in the second
example above, which contains only three words – but do not be put off
by this. The next stage is to take each of the words from your list in turn
and think of related words or phrases. You might use a thesaurus to help
you find these synonyms. Terms related to COMPUTERS, TEACHING,
and HISTORY which you think appropriate to add might include ONLINE
LEARNING, TABLETS, SMARTPHONES, INTERNET, PEDAGOGY,
CLASSROOMS, TEACHER TRAINING, HUMANITIES, and so on. Soon
your list will have grown, along with your chances of finding as much of
the literature as possible when you begin your search.
The information you do find might be located in a range of different
sources – two of the most common being books and journals. Your first
port of call should therefore be an online library catalogue or bibliographic
database to search for relevant source material in these two formats.
There are many online resource portals you can consult in order to
begin your research literature review. Some of the more expansive ones
require paid-for subscriptions so it might be useful to check with your
institution or organisation to find out if you already have a license to access
these. Others require that you are linked to an educational institution in
order to secure access.
USEFUL DATABASES AND ONLINE REFERENCE

RESOURCES
EBSCO (https://essentials.ebsco.com/)
EBSCO provides free research databases covering a variety of
subjects for students, researchers, and librarians. Researchers are
able to use EBSCO Essentials to search for free, reliable articles
and connect to their library to access additional EBSCO content.
ResearchGate (https://www.researchgate.net/)
ResearchGate is an online portal that allows you to connect with
researchers across a wide range of discipline and subject areas.
Materials written by other members (academics, researchers,
policy-makers etc.) can be downloaded and archived to your
local account.
ScienceDirect (https://www.sciencedirect.com/)
ScienceDirect is a website which provides access to a large bib-
liographic database of scientific and medical publications of the
Dutch publisher Elsevier. The full site provides access to over
4,000 academic journals and around 30,000 e-books.
JSTOR (https://www.jstor.org/)
JSTOR is an online library that provides access to more than
12 million journal articles, books, images, and primary sources
across 75 distinct disciplinary groups. The service was estab-
lished in 1994 and is used by researchers worldwide to support
literature searches.
Google Scholar (https://scholar.google.com/)

Google Scholar has been referred to as the more academic ver-
sion of Google. Rather than searching all of the indexed infor-
mation on the web, Google Scholar searches repositories of
publishers, universities, or scholarly websites. Searches using
the platform therefore tend to be more focused and relevant
than a general search using Google.
Web of Science (https://www.webofscience.com/)

The Web of Science is a paid-access platform that provides
access to multiple databases that provide reference and cita-
tion data from academic journals, conference proceedings,
and other documents in various academic disciplines. It is
one of the largest, if not the largest, bibliographic databases
in the world and spans a diverse range of disciplines in its
coverage.
Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/)
Wikipedia is a free online encyclopaedia written and maintained
by a community of volunteers. Anyone can log into the online
resource and edit/update or amend entries. This makes its con-
tent accessible and up to date, but has also encouraged users to
create distorted or inaccurate entries. As a reference resource it
is useful, but researchers have generally been guided away from
it as an authoritative source. This is despite the fact that some
studies have found that its content is less inaccurate than has
historically been perceived (Giles, 2005).
The range of materials which you may be able to access will no doubt
vary according to your own particular circumstances, and you should
make efforts to find out what facilities are available to you (Knopf, 2006).
As we have already indicated, your institution or organisation may have
specific licensing arrangements with particular online reference resources
or databases. The more resources you can consult and the wider and
more specialist the content held in them, the more chance you have of
your literature review being thorough and exhaustive.
As you consult these resources, you may see patterns emerge.
Perhaps a small number of authors appear again and again, or you may
notice alternative synonyms to those you listed crop up repeatedly. In
either case, cross-referencing the bibliographies with the actual library
catalogue may help you to find more books of relevance to your topic
of study than you thought were available after consulting just the library
catalogue.
It is a good idea to use indexes, categorisations, and abstracts

provided by online databases and reference resources. These supporting
functions are designed to help you to identify and locate research articles
and other information relevant to your own project. Finding precisely
what you want is by no means a straightforward task, but to discover a
reference closely centred on exactly the nature of your own inquiries has
the potential to be the most valuable single find in your entire investigation,
so persevere!
Selecting appropriate literature and maintaining

literature notes
As you begin your investigations in earnest you will begin to get a feeling
for the amount of information that has been written by others about the
topic you wish to research. You might find yourself with tens, or possi-
bly hundreds, of pieces of relevant information, each of a different length,
prospective audience or focus of study. At this point you need to con-
sider ways in which you might manage and organise all this information
to prevent it getting out of hand. There are a number of reference man-
agement software packages available to support researchers in logging,
managing, and coordinating your information sources. One of the most
popular ones is Endnote, which helps you collect and store all the refer-
ences you have found from different sources. You can use your Endnote
library to insert in-text citations and create bibliographies within Microsoft
Word documents, reformatting them into your chosen referencing style.
As you collect your research literature and log its detail within Endnote,
the software helps you to categorise and keep track of the books, policy
papers, websites etc. that you have consulted.
TOOLS TO HELP YOU MANAGE YOUR

LITERATURE: ENDNOTE
Endnote (https://endnote.com/) is a commercial software pro-

gram that helps you to create, store, and manage the litera-
ture you consult as part of your research project. It can save
references and citations you import from other sources (such as

online library catalogues and databases). You can use Endnote
with Microsoft Word to produce reference lists and bibliogra-
phies to support your research report writing.
When you are selecting material for consideration and potential

inclusion in your literature review, you should start with the most recently
published materials. They are likely to be more valuable to you as their
authors should have used earlier research as a foundation. Apart from
noting accurately where you found the material, a good summary of a
piece of research literature you uncover should include details about:
● The problem the material is attempting to address.

● The purpose(s) of the study or studies related in the material.
● Brief information about the population(s) studied – comprising
whom? How many subjects?
● Methods and techniques used by the researcher(s).
● The results of the study or studies.
● Any conclusions.
Introductions to articles and other published materials usually contain

details on the first two of the above points, while more information on
methods and results is usually reported in the middle and the end of the
material respectively. Of course, after reading through the abstract at the
beginning or the summary at the end, you may decide that a particular
reference contains insufficient information relevant to your study to justify
reading the whole thing from end to end.
One thing is certain: The contents of a literature source will remain
fresh in your mind only for the time you are reading it. With so much
to familiarise yourself with you will begin to confuse the contents and
conclusions of others’ research very early on in your reading. With each
new piece of literature you consult you will find yourself relying increasingly
on the summaries you make, so it is worth investing some time and effort
in collating thorough and consistent notes at this stage.
Apart from listing all the pertinent points in each of the studies you
consider to be important, you might like to record your own evaluation
of the study at the same time. If you are utilising reference management
software such as Endnote to support this, you can make additional notes
within the reference record in the software. These additional notes can
provide your assessment of the arguments in the reference as well as your
other thoughts on how it might link with other materials you have consulted.
One rapid way to familiarise yourself quickly with any type of written
material consulted to inform your research project work would be to scan
what has been written by reading the first one or two sentences of each
paragraph. This ought to provide you with enough information to help
you to decide whether an article or chapter is worth reading thoroughly
from start to finish. In the case of those research papers, policy papers,
journal articles etc. that you choose not to discard you should still be
able to summarise the problem being addressed in the material, and the
conclusions drawn by the author. In such cases, your focus should turn to
summarising and evaluating the theme or themes of the material: What
is the author saying? What reasoning, logic, or arguments does he or she
use to say it? On what is the author’s reasoning and logic based? Can you
see any particular strengths or weaknesses in the author’s arguments?
Occasionally, you may find an author has written something in a
particularly skilful way, e.g. managing to phrase a complex idea, argument,
or conclusion in concise and clear terms. Similarly, you may sometimes
come across a couple of lines in a report which sum up the essence of the
whole article. If you find yourself in this situation it would do you no harm
to copy this down carefully somewhere in your summary, enclosing the
extract in quotation marks and noting down the relevant page number.
Aggregating literature material
As you continue with this process you will begin to find yourself sur-
rounded by dozens of literature sources containing a summary of a piece
of work related to, or important for, your own intended research. Just as it
is necessary to impose some kind of order upon your choice of key words
in the earliest stages of your literature search if it is to be focused and well-
defined, it is equally necessary to organise and group all your literature
notes in order both to maximise their value for your research and to min-
imise your workload. One way of organising your summaries is to code
or group each one according to the characteristics of the information it
contains. You may find that your original key words can, on the whole, act
as ‘pegs’ on which to ‘hang’ your summaries. For example, the author of a

review of the literature written about the use of online learning technolo-
gies in classrooms might code each summary according to one or more of
the many issues which arise when bringing new technology into schools:
L Articles dealing with pupils’ abilities and how pupils Learn.

U Articles about the User-friendliness of software, its scope, its aims and
the way it ought to look.
M Articles relating to the structure and content of additional Materials,
such as users’ guides and teachers’ notes to supplement the software.
T Articles dealing with Technical issues surrounding the software, such as
its compatibility with a school’s existing hardware.
E Articles about Educating pupils using software, for example, when to
use it or when not to use it.
R Articles about the technology’s impact on teacher and pupil Roles,
including the interactions between pupils, teachers, and computers.
These codes, categories, or groups can be used to identify and quickly

locate all your notes relating to one area within your topic of study. In
addition, perhaps most important for the novice researcher overwhelmed by
information, it should ease the burden of writing up your review by dividing
it into easy-to-handle, bite-sized pieces. Again, if you are utilising reference
management software to support your review process, you will be able to
apply multiple organising groups or categories to your reference sources.
Critically analysing the literature
How much trust should you place in the research you find? Even after you
have discarded those studies that appeared to be pertinent to your own
research but, on closer inspection, proved not to be, does each and every
piece of research you are left with deserve to be a part of your own inquiry?
If not, on what basis should you either include or exclude material in the
section of your own work which deals with related, previous research?
In short, you may have to make some evaluative decisions. In order
to do that, you have to establish your own set of criteria for judging the
adequacy of the material in front of you. As authors base the conclusions
of their studies (at least in theory!) on the outcomes of analyses of the
data they have collected, any critical evaluation ought to include as its
focus a thorough scrutinisation of a study’s methodology and results

sections. You may find instances where data have been collected or
recorded unreliably or erroneously. You may also discover that results
or analyses have been calculated incorrectly, and that conclusions have
been made on the basis of those miscalculations. Such errors do occur –
researchers are not an infallible breed. Obviously, the extent to which you
feel confident in your own ability to make calculations and recalculations
of others’ data to check their reliability and authenticity will depend on
your background and experience of these situations, but even the least
confident of novice researchers should be able to spot intuitively any
reported values or measurements that seem spurious, or at least a little
odd. Can the results be trusted in your opinion? Do you think the study
was carried out in a sufficiently careful manner? After considering just
these few basic questions you ought to be able to do one of three things:
● Include the study in the literature review section of your own work.
● Exclude the study because it ‘fell at the first fence’.
● Reserve judgement as to the trustworthiness of the study until you
are able to make a more informed decision, perhaps based on a
wider range of criteria for judging research quality.
Being aware of bias
Even at this stage you should be aware of something called confirmatory

bias (Peters, 2022). Researchers – as well as being fallible creatures – do
not live in a vacuum. We have been known to have biases and predispo-
sitions towards certain points of view and certain outcomes of studies
rather than others. This, if not sufficiently borne in mind, could lead your
evaluation of another’s research to be coloured or distorted by its prem-
ise, outcomes, or conclusions. Experiments have shown that a reviewer’s
predispositions towards a review’s results can influence his or her judge-
ment about the quality of a piece of research. In the past, reviewers have
accepted material which, despite containing questionable and dubious
methodology, has supported their own intuitions, while rejecting sound
and well-grounded research that advances counter-intuitive conclusions
(Button et al., 2016).
To help you to critically assess the material you are collecting, you
should consider the following questions:
Does the material go into sufficient depth?

Does it provide you with enough information about, for example, the
reasons why the research was conducted; the context or location in
which the research took place; the methods employed; and the results
obtained? Do you get the impression the author has included as much
detail in the write-up as he or she was capable of, or do you feel that
there have been certain omissions?
Are there any inconsistencies?

For example, are there inconsistencies in the way the author refers to, or
provides information about, the size(s) of the population(s) studied?
Are references to the initial sample and the achieved sample made
consistently? Confusing the number of people originally contacted to
partake in the research and the number who actually responded and
took part will produce inaccurate results, occasionally skewed in favour
of the researcher! Does the researcher inform you to your satisfaction
of details about response rates, the sizes of sub-samples, the number
of drop-outs and those unable to be contacted (sometimes referred to
as the attrition rate), and the total on which any percentages are based?
Where did the author obtain this information?

Is it clear how and from whom information presented to the reader as fact
was obtained? Which questions were asked? Of whom? Were there
any attempts to obtain corroborative evidence from another source?
Do you sense any assumptions made by the author? In other words,
has he or she accepted some aspects of the research blindly which you
would have liked to have been investigated further?
Are the author’s claims reasonable?

Do you feel that too much is being claimed on the basis of the evidence in front
of you? Have the author’s analyses been adequate? When something is
referred to as ‘significant’, is it? How has the author measured significance?
Do you consider there to be equally plausible explanations for the results
of the research that the author has failed (or worse, refused) to consider?
ACADEMIC
In terms of bias, academics might be interested in ensuring the

depth and scope of the research work. Referenced or cited con-
tent might be one of the most important elements for them to
ensure the content is representative and free from bias.
Industry
From a commercial perspective, industry might be concerned
that the research reporting includes an advanced critical anal-
ysis of the research data. If a new product or service is to be
launched following the research work, an industrial sponsor
might need to be confident that background work has objec-
tively summarised the work of competitors.
Public sector
From a public sector perspective, research work might need to
be assessed and evaluated to ensure that this is free from polit-
ical influence.
Society
Third sector organisations, charities and groups are usually con-
cerned that research work is objective and free from discrimi-
natory biases.
Collecting other research data
Fundamental types – quantitative and qualitative
We have already, in Chapter 1, outlined the key traditions or paradigms

that inform the development of a great deal of research work undertaken
in the social world. These traditions also have some influence over the
research tools or instruments deployed to explore research questions.
In turn, these tools or instruments control the types or forms of data
collected. Broadly speaking, the research data you collect will be either
quantitative or qualitative in nature. Both of these fundamental data types
or forms have value (and limitations); they provide support in providing
evidence to answer specific research questions.
Quantitative data focus on recording and understanding truth typically
through the use of explanatory models or theories. It is often reductive in
nature and relies on hypothesis testing. Qualitative data, on the other hand,
is more broadly focused. It is centrally interested in meaning and exploring
this in context and practice. One core aim of qualitative data is to support
contextualised and situated knowledge (Braun and Clarke, 2021, p. 6).
Which tools or instruments?
There are a wide range of potential data collection devices or instruments

you can utilise for your research work – each of these are either quantita-
tively or qualitatively framed in terms of the data they collect and present
for analysis. Some tools also have the potential to collect data that are
both quantitative and qualitative (such as a survey that captures ratings
or grade-type data as well as open-ended comments or reflections). We
identify some of the most popular data collection devices below and dis-
cuss their utility as data collection tools and instruments to help support
your research project work:
Experiment-based research
Experimental research is the core approach for positivist researchers inter-

ested in testing and control of the research space or environment. As such,
it is commonly viewed as one of the most rigorous of all research designs
and approaches to collecting research data. In the purest experimental
research design, one or more independent variables are manipulated by
the researcher; subjects or participants are then randomly assigned or
attached to different variables, and the results of these assignments or
attachments are observed.
EXPERIMENT-BASED RESEARCH AND

RANDOMISED CONTROL TRIALS (RCTS)
Randomised Control Trials (RCTs) originated in clinical settings

and are known as the ‘gold standard’ of medical and health
research. They are a form of experiment-based research with two
or more randomly selected groups (an experimental group and a
control group) in which the researcher controls or introduces an
intervention (such as a new training or development programme)
and measures its impact on the dependent variable on at least
two occasions (usually termed pre-and post-test measure-
ments). RCTs are often used for addressing evaluative research
questions, which seek to assess the effectiveness of program-
matic and policy interventions in developmental settings.
One identified strength of experiment- based research is its

recognised ability to link cause and effect through variable manipulation.
The technique also adapts variables, through modelling and statistical
calculations, to be able to control for (and limit) the effects of spurious
or unrelated variables. Experimental research is applicable in social
research when you might wish to determine a causal relationship
between variables (Dunning, 2012). To do this you would select the
experimental group of participants or subjects (where you can apply a
specific treatment or variable) and you would compare these participants
to another group of participants who had not been exposed to the same
treatment or variable.
Sometimes it is not practically possible to conduct research work
that is experimental-based in its purest form. This happens when, for
example, it proves difficult to randomly assign participants to either a
participant (treatment) group or a non-participant (control group) (White
and Sabarwal, 2014). Indeed, it is often seen as unethical to arbitrarily
determine who should receive an intervention and who should not
(Cook and Thigpen, 2019). Where this happens, researchers who wish to
utilise some form of experimental design in their work turn to a less-rigid
definition and practical application. A quasi-experimental research design
allows the researcher to identify a comparison group that is as similar as is
possible to the participant or treatment group. This flexibility in approach
makes the technique much more attractive to social scientists who have
labelled the approach ‘field experiment’ research (McIntosh-Scott et al.,
2014).
To be categorised as an experimental data collection design, research
must include:
(a) An intervention or treatment that can be observed – this could include

an education or training programme, undertaking an exercise regime,
agreeing to carry out a range of tasks or a test.
(b) A control mechanism – included here would be a suitable comparator
group of participants (who are not part of the intervention or treat-
ment). These act as a controlling device and help to reveal and elimi-
nate supplementary variables that are unimportant for the purposes
of the research work.
(c) Randomisation – this involves the researcher randomly (where pos-
sible) assigning participants to either the treatment or intervention
group or the control group. Doing this removes the issue of selection
bias and supports the development of balanced and comparable
groups.
Survey-based research
Surveys are perhaps one of the most popular research instruments

through which to collect research data. They are an accessible option for
researchers who are eager to understand what customers, service users,
and clients think about products or services. They help businesses make
better business decisions and help policy-makers to shape and adapt
policies. This type of research has a long history of supporting diverse
types of research investigations. Surveys have traditionally been viewed as
essentially quantitative research tools because of their reliance on closed,
pre-formatted question types. However, the use of open-ended elements
and free-text response options enables qualitative content to be captured
by them.
Open-ended and closed-ended questions

Open-ended questions are questions that allow someone to give
a free-form answer. One of the advantages of using open-ended
questions in survey-based research work is that they do not
restrict the respondent to a predefined set of responses. Closed-
ended questions are those where all responses are predefined
and categorised to enable the respondent to provide a response
(Hyman and Sierra, 2016).
Multiple-choice and scale questions

Many surveys include questions which provide a number of
pre-defined responses. This allows the researcher to hold some
control over the responses given. However, the construction and
piloting of multiple-
choice questions usually requires careful
thought to ensure that all or most responses possible are cov-
ered (Johnson and Morgan, 2016).
Figure 3.1 Examples of open-ended questions

Figure 3.2 Examples of multiple-choice questions
There are many commercial providers who can support the online devel-
opment of your survey questions, the collection of the data, and even its
synthesis and analysis. An online survey is a method for extracting infor-
mation about your research topic from an individual or a group of indi-
viduals. It consists of structured survey questions that are, usually, well
presented to guide and encourage your participants to respond. Because
of this, survey-based research is extremely useful when you are required
to collect data from a large number of respondents.
Research surveys consist of a number of standard elements. These
include: An introduction, a statement identifying how data will be used, an
indication of the number of questions (or how long the survey might take
to complete), and any incentives that are being offered to respondents to
encourage them to complete the survey.
IMPROVING RESPONSE RATES IN ONLINE

SURVEYS – SOME TOP TIPS
● The length of time its takes to complete the survey has

a direct impact on response rates and drop-out rates, so
keeping the questionnaire below 15 minutes (and ideally
nearer to 5 minutes) is a key aim.
● However, with online questionnaires – whatever the length –

you need to actively consider the respondent experience of
completing the survey to manage their motivation to give
considered answers.
● Keep the words to a minimum to encourage respondents to
read them.
● Edit out superfluous language that is a carry-over from the
text-heavy style needed in interview-based surveys.
● Drop key parts of the question into the response lists. This
helps to maintain the focus and attention of the respondent.
● Explore question approaches that will draw the respondents
in by, for example, creating situations they can relate to or
associate themselves with.
(Brace and Bolton, 2022)
The introduction section of the research survey is where the main

purpose of the research work is usually summarised, in accessible terms
relevant to the respondent. Usually, the main aims and objectives of the
research work are covered here. Usually, an introduction also includes
a data protection statement outlining how long respondent data will be
held for, how it will be analysed, and how personal data will be treated.
The collection and protection of identifiable information, which includes a
respondent’s name, job role/title, or another identifier should be a central
part of your research ethics processes. If you are conducting your project
work on behalf of a company, college, or university you will need to ensure
you comply with any guidance issued centrally on this. Of particular
relevance, when collecting and storing personal data, are the rules and
guidance presented in GDPR legislation.
GDPR
On 25 May 2018, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)

became law across the European Union. This legislation requires
that any personal data collected as part of research survey
work (or any other research activity) should be held securely.
In addition, the legislation demands that respondents should be

told how their data are to be used, for how long it will be held,
and how they can request access to it .
(Foulsham, Hitchen and Denley, 2019)
It is good practice to provide an indication, up front, to potential

respondents identifying how long a survey might reasonably take to
complete. Often, this is presented as something similar to: ‘This survey
should take around 10–15 minutes to complete’, or ‘There are four sections
to the survey, each section comprising between 3 and 4 questions’.
ROUTING AND PIPING
Routing allows you to direct a respondent through your survey

based on the answers that they give. If a respondent provides a
particular answer, then they are directed to a particular page in
the survey. They are very useful devices for directing respond-
ents to relevant sections in a survey, allowing them to skip ques-
tions they don’t need to answer. Sometimes routing in an online
survey is called ‘skip logic’ or ‘branching’. This technique is used
extensively in large-scale survey work.
Piping is a survey technique whereby a previous response is
included in a subsequent question. An example of this might be:
‘Can you please tell us why you thought our service was poor?’ –
where ‘poor’ was the response to the previous question: ‘Tell us
about our service’.
Offering incentives to respondents is a way of acknowledging,

and valuing, the contribution that respondents are making to your
research work. They can include gift vouchers for each respondent who
completes the survey (for research projects with large budgets), but
often include placing a respondent in a prize draw following completion
of your survey.
ADVANTAGES OF USING A SURVEY

FOR YOUR RESEARCH WORK
● Low cost to develop and deploy.

● Easy to get information from a lot of people very quickly.
● Respondents can usually complete the questionnaire when
it suits them.
● The analysis of answers to closed questions is fairly
straightforward.
● Less pressure for an immediate response.
● Respondents are usually anonymous (and therefore more
honest?).
Research interviews
Interviews can vary in their structure and formality. They are flexible in that
they can be carried out over the phone, online (via Teams, Zoom, Skype
etc) or face-to-face. They can be focused on a given set of pre-defined
questions that are covered in turn (known as a structured interview), or
they can focus on a pre-defined theme or area and allow a discussion to
take place between researcher and interviewee on that theme (known as
an unstructured interview). In many interview situations, a mixture of the
two approaches is used, where some structured questions are asked fol-
lowed by the exploration of general themes related to those questions. It
is important when planning your interview to consider the information the
interviewee might reasonably need to know, the location of the interview,
whether you would like to record the interview, how the interview is going
to be used in your write-up or transcription and analysis.
Before the interview
Prior to the interview, you should have informed your interviewee on the
area of research, either by telephone or by letter or email, and given a
guideline on the anticipated length of interview. If the interview is to be
audio-recorded, then consent should be sought. The respondent should
be advised of the potential audience of the research. They should also

be given appropriate assurances about anonymity and confidentiality.
Sometimes, when collecting interview data, your interviewees may wish
to verify and check their responses (by viewing any transcript or notes you
produce). This allows interviewees the option to clarify what they said, and
also to provide greater detail on their responses. However, it should be
carefully managed as a research device as data may become sanitised or
‘cleaned’ in some way by interviewees (Caretta and Pérez, 2019).
MEMBER CHECKING INTERVIEW DATA
Member checking, also known as participant or respondent val-

idation, is a technique for exploring the credibility of results.
Data or results are returned to participants to check for accu-
racy and resonance with their experiences.
(Birt et al., 2016, p. 1802)
Setting up the interview ‘space’
The interview setting should be carefully chosen, with minimum outside

or distracting noise. This is easier to achieve if you are carrying out the
interview in a face-to-face setting, but can be more challenging if you are
asking someone to participate in a Teams or Zoom call. In a face-to-face
setting, try to ensure that no interruptions are likely to take place and that
chairs are carefully placed in the room at a comfortable distance apart. If
an audio-recorder is being used, you should familiarise yourself with its
functions. It is often helpful at the planning stage to pilot your interview
with a friend or colleague who can provide constructive feedback on your
questions and interviewing performance.
Conducting the interview
Your interviewee should be made to feel comfortable, so begin the inter-

view by thanking them for cooperating and assisting with your work. This
helps to establish a relaxed attitude.
Any encounter between two people involves conscious and

unconscious elements. Besides the verbal aspects of the interaction, non-
verbal communication also affects the encounter in both obvious and
more subtle ways. Both body language and eye contact are important,
and you may wish to record or note an interviewee’s body language or
eye contact when you cover a particularly important question or theme.
For example, they may adopt an aggressive pose when answering
questions covering subjects they feel strongly about. It may also be useful
to occasionally mirror the interviewee’s body language to encourage
rapport.
If audio-recording an interview you should secure consent from the
interviewee prior to the scheduled interview session. It is helpful to set up
the audio-recorder (on a table, with an attached microphone if necessary)
prior to the interview so that you and the interviewee are not distracted
by its presence. Also, when conducting interviews, it helps interviewees to
relax if initial questions are relatively easy to answer. Contextual questions
such as: ‘Tell me what it’s like to work here?’, ‘What do you enjoy about
your work?’, and other questions like these are usually safe positions to
start from. A typical interview guide or schedule is provided below. This
is taken from a research project exploring career decisions for healthcare
professionals. Each question is open and exploratory, encouraging an in-
depth response from the interviewee.
EXAMPLE GUIDE/SCHEDULE – A CAREER

IN MEDICINE
Why did you decide to go into a medical career?

What education, training, or other preparation did you need to
become a medic?
What are you working on now and what is enjoyable about it?
Tell us what a typical day/week involves for you?
What do you spend the most time doing?
What continues to inspire you or hold your interest in medicine?
What would you say to those interested in following your career
path?
Is there anything else you think I should know?
Without use of an audio-recorder some method of creating an account of

the event is necessary. Taking notes is one possibility, but this may be dif-
ficult to maintain whilst giving full attention to the content of the interview.
If you do take notes, attempt only to note key points made by the inter-
viewee rather than trying to capture everything they say. Your notes should
act as a reminder of what was said at the time.
As the interview draws to a conclusion, it is useful to ask the
interviewee if they have anything to add that has not been addressed
by any of the questions or their responses. This helps avoid a situation
where the respondent is prompted to add to the interview following the
conclusion of the interview. All interviews should conclude with a heartfelt
message of thanks from the interviewer. Interviewees are sharing some
of their precious time with you and answering your questions, without
their support your research would not be as rich or thorough. You should
acknowledge this in your expression of thanks at the end of the interview.
BENEFITS OF THE RESEARCH INTERVIEW
● Very useful for collecting in-depth information about a topic

or subject.
● Can be an easier way than other approaches to collecting
potentially sensitive information.
● Interviews are usually flexible research tools and can be
reactive to responses from interviewees.
● Interviewees are not required to write their responses.
● Interviewers can record non-
verbal behaviour from the
interviewee (body language etc.).
Focus group interviews
There can be few individuals who have not heard of focus groups (some-
times referred to as discussion groups or group interviews). Political
parties rely on them, market research agencies use them, and television
companies are reported to amend their programmes following an analysis
of focus group responses. Although historically conducted in a face-to-
face setting, more and more focus groups are now being carried out as
an online activity (Kaufman et al., 2022). Whilst the traditional model of
a single face-to-face focus group is still very popular, recent review work
in the area has identified a range of permutations, including mini-focus
groups, groups with multiple moderators, and two-way focus groups
(Nyumba et al., 2018).
DEFINING FOCUS GROUPS
The focus group is a unique research instrument in terms of its

purpose, size, composition, and procedures. The central aim of
such a group is to better understand how people feel or think
about an issue, idea, product, or service. Focus groups are
essentially used to gather opinions.
(Krueger, 2015, p. 26)
The process is based on the principles of self-disclosure, grounded

in a comfortable environment, a particular type of questioning, and the
establishment of focus group rules. Generally numbering between seven
and ten individuals, groups have been conducted with a minimum of
four. Beyond twelve participants, the group tends to fragment. The mix
will probably consist of strangers, or people slightly acquainted with
one another, but there will be similarities between them that bring
them together as a group. The discussion in a focus group is led by a
moderator or facilitator who introduces the topic, asks specific questions,
or suggests themes for discussion. It is the moderator’s role to control
the flow of the discussion and encourage all present in the session to
make a contribution. Sometimes, there are dominant voices or opinions
in the group, and it is the job of the moderator or facilitator to ensure that
everyone can contribute irrespective of their view.
ADVANTAGES OF USING A FOCUS GROUP
● Can receive a wide range of responses during one meeting.

● They help researchers to find out more about what people
think by encouraging discussion.
● They are useful in allowing participants to explain percep-
tions of an event, idea, or experience.
● Participants can ask questions of each other and build on

the comments of others.
● They are usually informally set, thereby encouraging partic-
ipants to contribute to discussions.
● Participant interaction can be explored as part of the analy-
sis process.
In some situations, it might be useful to have two moderators for a focus

group. One may attend to the questions, and the second may provide very
specific subject or specialised expertise on the core topics of the focus
group (this might be very useful in a medical or health setting, for example)
(Krueger, 2015, p. 524). Compared with one-to-one interviews, the ques-
tioner in a focus group interview situation plays the role of a ‘facilitator’,
rather than a ‘director’ of the proceedings. Once the general topic for dis-
cussion has been fixed to everyone’s satisfaction, he or she is responsible
for shaping and steering the path the participants themselves have chosen
to tread. In contrast to one-to-one interviews, the job of determining the
precise content of the discussion within the boundaries of the topic as a
whole is deliberately left to the participants. The reasoning behind this lies
in the implication that those aspects of the topic most important, mean-
ingful or relevant to the participants will emerge first in the discussions. It
is important that the moderator or facilitator encourages comments of all
types, both positive and negative, taking care to avoid making judgements
about responses and controlling body language communicating approval
or disapproval (Robson and McCartan, 2016).
The focus group checklist
Focus groups require careful planning and management and can therefore
take up a lot of research time and effort. We’ve devised a useful checklist
of factors to consider and account for to help make them run smoothly:
1. Make sure the venue is suitable (Is it available when you need it? Will
it be free from external noise and disruption for the duration of your
meeting?). If you are holding an online focus group practice with the
software you are going to use so that you are comfortable with it.
2. Check you can record voices so that the quality is suitable for your
own analysis and transcription purposes.
3. Contact your participants and confirm their availability to attend.
Over-recruit so if you’d like six to attend, try to recruit ten to ensure
you have enough participants. Contact your participants the day
before the session to confirm their attendance (either via email or
phone).
4. Be available at the venue (either online or face-to-face) early so that
anyone who has arrived early or has logged on early knows you are
there to welcome them.
5. When the focus group begins greet the participants, say who you are
and introduce the purpose of the focus group. Be clear to indicate
how long the session will last. Provide information relating to con-
fidentiality and anonymity before seeking approval to begin with
audio-recording of the session.
6. When asking questions or raising topics for discussion, observe group
dynamics and make written notes to accompany your audio-recording.
7. At the end of the session, thank participants for their contributions
and provide contact details of the research team so that they can fol-
low up with any additional contributions they may have to the discus-
sion. This also provides them with a further opportunity to ask you
additional questions about the research.
Observation as a data collection tool
With some research approaches, you may be required to observe directly

the activities of members of a particular social group with a view to pro-
viding an accurate description or evaluation of those activities. This is
known as ethnography. Essentially, there are two forms of ethnography –
participant and non-participant observation. With participant observation,
you as researcher are a part of the situation you are observing. For example,
you could be involved with a meeting you are recording for your research,
or you may be exploring the way your work environment changes due to
the introduction of new working practices. Non-participant observation
involves you, as a researcher, being more detached from the meeting you
are observing. For example, you may be present at the meeting but, as a
non-participant, you will have no input or effect on the meeting. Recent
expansion of digital approaches to interacting, communicating, and work-

ing has led to refinements in ethnographic methods, including specific
rules and practices adopted by researchers when engaged in ‘digital eth-
nography’ (Pink et al., 2016), and approaches that target the internet as a
data source (Hine, 2020).
ETHNOGRAPHIC RESEARCH
Ethnographic research focuses on observing social interaction

in a space or environment. This form of research provides an
in-depth account of people’s views, understandings, reactions,
and behaviours. It allows the researcher to be immersed in the
world of those they are researching. They can begin to under-
stand the world from the perspective of those being observed.
The emergence of ‘rapid ethnographies’, providing timely and
in-depth understandings of social worlds and environments, are
popular in fast-changing settings such as healthcare.
(Vindrola-Padros and Vindrola-Padros, 2018)
Types of data collected: passive and contextualised
There are two fundamental approaches to data collection within the

observation or ethnographic approach. You can collect data in a passive
sense (working as a non-participant observer), or you can collect data in
a more direct way (with an alignment to a participant observer) by asking
questions and contextualising or framing your observations.
Devices or collection instruments to support passive or non-
participant observations include taking written notes, creating sketches
or situations or environments (such as a teaching space, factory floor,
meeting room etc.), capturing audio or video of interactions or behaviours.
Contextualised approaches are more direct and intrusive devices for
collecting observation data and include scheduled review or observation
meetings, one-to-one interviews, or group discussions.
When recording your observations, note the context of the event. A
general description of the time, place, setting, and participants is a valuable
adjunct to any data collection. Sensitivity to the atmosphere and noting
any key events, which may include the late arrival of a particular person,
helps contextualise activities. Charts and seating plans will help to identify
participants in a group setting, but beyond the physical environment
some form of observation reference guide might be useful. Whatever the
device or approach used, it is often difficult to narrow down the focus of
observations to something meaningful that supports the broader research
aim or focus. Observation frameworks are often useful in this situation;
they help shape and direct our efforts. The one below forms the basis of a
research project investigating an organisation’s practices and behaviours
following the implementation of new working practices.
WHAT TO OBSERVE: AN EXAMPLE FRAMEWORK

FROM AN ORGANISATIONAL STUDY
1. Observing time and space. Areas of interest here might be:

How is time organised in the setting and who makes deci-
sions about this? How is the space organised and who con-
trols or manages this? Are all business spaces organised in
the same way or do some receive special attention? What
types of activities are promoted at different times of the
day and in different places? Are there any tensions and
conflicts due to time and space management; if so, how do
these tensions manifest themselves?
2. Objects and materials. What are the physical objects
present – machinery, equipment, furniture, food, decora-
tions, signs, images, computers etc.? What is used, what is
not used? How are objects used and interacted with? Are
some objects used by all and some only by a few?
3. Actors and participants. Who interacts with others in the
space or environment? Are people generally content with
their roles and activities? Do they look and behave in a way
that I’d expect? Who is behaving differently or stands out
in the setting? What is the status of different people? Is
there a variety or rather a homogeneity of appearances and
behaviours?
4. Interactions. What can I observe that people are actually
doing in the setting? What tasks are begin performed
and how regularly? What do I observe about non-verbal
behaviour and is this present in particular areas? What do

people talk about and it what way? Are comments posi-
tive, negative, or neutral? How are differences in power
expressed, reproduced, negotiated, or challenged?
5. Routines. What happens regularly and who carries out
these regular tasks? What happens less frequently and who
is responsible for these? Are there any ritual behaviours
expressed in the setting? Who is responsible for routine
and ritual behaviours, and how are they expressed? Are any
comments made about these behaviours? If so, by whom?
Adapted from: Ciesielska, Wolanik Boström
and Öhlander (2018, p. 37)
ADVANTAGES OF USING OBSERVATION
● It provides direct evidence of the event or process under

investigation.
● You can observe behaviours and reactions to events.
● You are the key research instrument or device and can col-
lect large amounts of data quickly and with limited or no
technical support.
● The data you collect can provide insights into the complex
realities of the setting being observed.
A note on using social media as data collection

tools
When the first edition of this textbook was written over twenty years ago,
using social media to harvest or collect research data was limited. Now
millions of people daily consult social media feeds and contribute posts,
tweets, or upload images and video content (Snelson, 2016). All of these
data are potentially rich sources of valuable material for research work
(Bik and Goldstein, 2013). Recent work in the area of social media use
for research purposes identifies that data from such sources can be flex-
ibly collected and formatted, although some platforms are recognised as
being more useful for specific opinion/behavioural research projects than
others. Reviews of users and content accessed have also been illuminating
in revealing the types and kinds of individuals accessing some of the larger
social media platforms such as Facebook (Wilson, Gosling and Graham,
2012) and Twitter (Sloan et al., 2015).
Social media Advantages Disadvantages

platform
Twitter One of the largest micro- Limited number of
blogging platforms where characters in a tweet
users generate tweets, Presence of many Twitter
retweet, and like postings. bots with indiscriminate
The use of hashtags and automatic posts.
Twitter handles increases Some limited use in non
the engagement of the Anglophone countries.
account holders.
Photo- and video-sharing
services make the platform
attractive for education and
live streaming of meetings.
Facebook Billions of daily users Mostly used for personal
worldwide. communications.
Actively used for live Presence of bots with
streaming meetings, and indiscriminate posts.
interconnecting with Zoom, Potential bias to posts and
YouTube, and other video- likes to posts.
sharing sites.
Instagram Platform primarily used for Used for personal and
sharing photos and videos. professional
Easy for users to access communications.
and share content. Informal style of
Embraces visual communication not suitable
approaches to for all research topics.
communications rather
than focusing on text-
based methods.
Example social media plaorms and their use as data collecon devices (adapted from
Zimba and Gasparyan, 2021, p. 70)
Figure 3.3 Advantages and disadvantages of social media platforms as data collection
devices
Rapid access (often in real time) to social media data reveal one of its
major advantages over other data collection tools or instruments you may
wish to use. Using social media collected data it is possible to generate
population level, and actionable, data in near real time; this is very useful
for time-sensitive research work. Therefore, using automated technological
tools you can collect, clean, store, and analyse extremely large volumes of
social media data very quickly (Edwards et al., 2013).
COLLECTING SOCIAL MEDIA DATA – DISCOVERTEXT
DiscoverText (https://discovertext.com/) is a web-based collab-

orative text analytics system that allows researchers to access
and download data from social media feeds, including Twitter
and other sources. DiscoverText was released in 2009 and ena-
bles analysis of diverse medium-and large-scale text data and
associated metadata. It combines human interpretation and
machine-learning principles to perform text classification. It has
been used across a wide range of areas of research interest,
including the impact of the 2020–2022 Covid-19 pandemic on
home-based learning.
(Chia, Ma and Tay, 2022)
The increase in the use of social media platforms as research data

collection devices has influenced the emergence of a new approach
to social research, termed Netnography. This is a research design that
adapts ethnographic (essentially observational) research techniques to
study the cultures and communities that are emerging through online
communications. In a similar way to ethnographic research work,
netnography focuses on human experiences and cultural understanding;
is grounded in deep appreciations of the context of people’s everyday
lives; explores social systems and shared meanings; and is informed by
the self-awareness or reflections of the researcher (Kozinets, 2020, p. 15).
Summary
This chapter has provided detail on the various tools, instruments, and
devices you can use as a researcher to help collect and collate data. The
research literature review is often overlooked as a data collection source,
but this is a valuable component of any socially framed research project. A
competent review of published material allows you to frame your work in
context and enables you to relate your work to that of others.
We identified that other research tools or devices you can employ

for your project work are essentially quantitative or qualitative in nature.
These fundamental characteristics influence the approaches used to
collect data with our list of tools or devices. Experiments are useful for
collecting statistical data and are usually limited to specific philosophical
traditions in research. Survey-based research work is one of the most
often utilised approaches in research work and, through online methods,
collect vast amounts of data quickly and easily. Interviews and focus group
approaches are more flexible and organic in nature and can be useful for
contextualising topics of research interest. Observation or ethnographic
approaches are useful mechanisms through which to immerse ourselves
in the world of those we are researching. Finally, we considered the value
of tapping into social media tools and devices to identify rich and valuable
sources of research data.
References
Bik, H. and Goldstein, M. (2013) ‘An introduction to social media for scien-
tists’, PLoS Biology, 11, p. e1001535.
Birt, L., Scott, S., Cavers, D., Campbell, C. and Walter, F. (2016) ‘Member
checking: A tool to enhance trustworthiness or merely a nod to valida-
tion?’, Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), pp. 1802–1811.
Boote, D. and Beile, P. (2005) ‘Scholars before researchers: On the cen-
trality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation’,
Educational Researcher, 34, pp. 3–15.
Brace, I. and Bolton, K. (2022) Questionnaire design: How to plan, struc-
ture and write survey material for effective market research. 5th/Ian
Brace, Kate Bolton. edn. London: Kogan Page.
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2021) Thematic analysis: A practical guide.
London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Bruce, C. S. (1994) ‘Research students’ early experiences of the disserta-
tion literature review’, Studies in Higher Education, 19(2), pp. 217–229.
Button, K. S., Bal, L., Clark, A. and Shipley, T. (2016) ‘Preventing the ends
from justifying the means: Withholding results to address publication
bias in peer-review’, BMC Psychology, 4(1), pp. 59.
Caretta, M. A. and Pérez, M. A. (2019) ‘When participants do not agree:
Member checking and challenges to epistemic authority in participa-
tory research’, Field Methods, 31(4), pp. 359–374.
Chia, I., Ma, N. and Tay, J. (2022) Conducting Social Media Research
Using an Online Forum: Researching Parent’s Perspectives on Online
Schooling During the COVID-19 Pandemic. London. Available at:
https://methods.sagepub.com/case/social-media-research-online-
forum-parent-perspectives-online-schooling (Accessed: 14 August
2022).
Ciesielska, M., Wolanik Boström, K. and Öhlander, M. (2018) ‘Observation
methods’, in Ciesielska, M. and Jemielniak, D. (eds.) Qualitative method-
ologies in organization studies. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 33–52.
Cook, C. E. and Thigpen, C. A. (2019) ‘Five good reasons to be disap-
pointed with randomized trials’, Journal of Manual & Manipulative
Therapy, 27(2), pp. 63–65.
Denney, A. and Tewksbury, R. (2013) ‘How to write a literature review’,
Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 24, pp. 218–234.
Dunning, T. (2012) Natural experiments in the social sciences: A design-
based approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Edwards, A., Housley, W., Williams, M., Sloan, L. and Williams, M. (2013)
‘Digital social research, social media and the sociological imagination:
Surrogacy, augmentation and re-orientation’, International Journal of
Social Research Methodology, 16, pp. 245–260.
Fink, A. (2013) Conducting research literature reviews: From the internet to
paper. 4th edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Foulsham, M., Hitchen, B. and Denley, A. (2019) GDPR: How to achieve
and maintain compliance. 1st edn. London: Routledge.
Giles, J. (2005) ‘Internet encyclopaedias go head to head’, Nature,
438(7070), pp. 900–901.
Hine, C. (2020) Ethnography for the Internet: embedded, embodied and
everyday. 1st edn. London: Routledge.
Hyman, M. and Sierra, J. (2016) ‘Open-versus close-ended survey ques-
tions’, NMSU Business Outlook, 14, pp. 1–5.
Johnson, R. L. and Morgan, G. B. (2016) Survey scales: A guide to develop-
ment, analysis, and reporting. New York: The Guilford Press.
Kaufman, M. R., Wright, K., Simon, J., Edwards, G., Thrul, J. and DuBois,
D. L. (2022) ‘Mentoring in the time of COVID-19: An analysis of online
focus groups with mentors to youth’, American Journal of Community
Psychology, 69(1–2), pp. 33–45.
Knopf, J. W. (2006) ‘Doing a literature review’, PS: Political Science &
Politics, 39(1), pp. 127–132.
Kozinets, R. V. (2020) Netnography: The essential guide to qualitative

social media research. 3rd edn. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Krueger, R. A. (2015) Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research.
Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. 5th edn. Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
McIntosh-Scott, A., Mason, T., Mason-Whitehead, E. and Coyle, D. (2014)
Key concepts in nursing and healthcare research. SAGE key concepts
Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
Nyumba, T. O., Wilson, K., Derrick, C. J. and Mukherjee, N. (2018) ‘The use
of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of
application in conservation’, Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9(1),
pp. 20–32.
Peters, U. (2022) ‘What Is the function of confirmation bias?’, Erkenntnis,
87(3), pp. 1351–1376.
Pink, S., Horst, H., Postill, J., Hjorth, L., Lewis, T. and Tacchi, J. P. (2016)
Digital ethnography: Principles and practice. London: SAGE
Publications Ltd.
Ridley, D. (2012) The literature review: A step-by-step guide for students.
2nd edn. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Sloan, L., Morgan, J., Burnap, P. and Williams, M. (2015) ‘Who tweets?
deriving the demographic characteristics of age, occupation and social
class from Twitter user meta-data’, PLoS One, 10, p. e0115545.
Snelson, C. L. (2016) ‘Qualitative and mixed methods social media
research: A review of the literature’, International Journal of Qualitative
Methods, 15(1), pp. 1609406915624574.
Vindrola-Padros, C. and Vindrola-Padros, B. (2018) ‘Quick and dirty?
A systematic review of the use of rapid ethnographies in healthcare
organisation and delivery’, BMJ Quality & Safety, 27(4), pp. 321–330.
White, H. and Sabarwal, S. (2014) Quasi- Experimental Design and
Methods: Methodological Briefs – Impact Evaluation No. 8. Available
at: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ucf:metbri:innpub753
Wilson, R. E., Gosling, S. D. and Graham, L. T. (2012) ‘A review of facebook
research in the social sciences’, Perspectives on Psychological Science,
7(3), pp. 203–220.
4 ANALYSING YOUR
DATA
David Wilkinson
● Dealing with data.

● Analysing qualitative data.
● Content analysis.
● Narrative analysis.
● Discourse analysis.
● Grounded theory.
● Analysing quantitative data.
● Descriptive tools and techniques.
● Describing data.
● A note on inferential analysis.
● Presenting your data.
● Dealing with ever-increasing amounts of data – the role of data visualisation.
Dealing with data
It is often said that by the time you reach the analysis stage of a research
project, all the hard work has been done. Earlier chapters have guided
you through the potential minefields of research traditions and developing
research questions, reviewing the literature and deciding on appropriate
research tools or instruments. The purpose of this chapter is to assist with
interpreting and analysing the data you have collected. Data come to us in
DOI: 10.4324/9781003180159-4
Analysing your data 83
many shapes and forms. The role of analysis is to bring data together in a
meaningful way and enable us as researchers to interpret or make sense
of it for ourselves and those we are reporting to.
Coding and classifying data
Before analysing data, it must be classified or coded in some way. In doing

this, we are preparing the data for analysis. Some people refer to this as
cleaning or organising data. For example, data could be organised by
entering it into a spreadsheet or grouping it into batches relating to the
date it was received. Another method of coding would be to convert the
responses in a questionnaire into, for example, numeric form.
The data devices, tools, and instruments we have covered in this
textbook collect data that are either quantitative (numerically-based) or
qualitative (visual or text/word-based). Some devices, such as a survey
using both open-ended and closed questions, allows for the collection of
both data types. Other research tools, such as experiment-based research,
rely solely on quantitative data types or sources. These fundamental
classifications of data type dictate the analysis tools and techniques we
have available to us as researchers.
EXAMPLES OF QUANTITATIVE AND

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH DATA
Quantitative data
● Number of students enrolled on a training programme.
● Trends in sales figures.
● Imports of cars into the UK from other parts of the world.
● Number of travellers per year using a particular airport.
● Vaccinations administered by doctors across a period of
years.
Qualitative data
● Attitudes of a group of people towards euthanasia.
● A museum visitor’s interpretation of a painting.
84 Analysing your data
● The interaction of children in a playground.

● Documents tabled at a meeting.
● Social media images/video of a music concert.
Analysing qualitative data

Qualitative data are often collected through research interviews, focus
groups, and observations. Qualitative data can also be collected via open-
ended questions asked in survey-based research work. They enable the
voices of those being researched to be heard (Creswell and Creswell,
2018; Chandler, Anstey and Ross, 2015). Qualitative data are usually ana-
lysed by subjecting it to some form of coding process.
In order to provide some structure and meaning to qualitative data
it must be coded or cleaned up in some way. For example, an interview
may (and usually will) produce a great deal of information relating to given
topics. How do we sort this? How are we going to compare it to other
interviews? How do we draw themes from it? We present a number of
approaches, below, to deal with the analysis of essentially qualitative data.
Content analysis
An often-used tool to aid the sorting and analysis of qualitative data is to

assess its content through a structured process. This technique is used
in many research organisations as a way of classifying data and drawing
themes from it. For example, a theme may emerge, from a number of
interviews with musicians, that playing a musical instrument began as a
hobby for them whilst at school. This type of response to the question:
‘When did you first show an interest in music?’ could be categorised as
Statement from Code

(A) As a child I loved to sit with the teacher at the piano and listen Child
to her play.
(B) Following a car accident, I spent a great deal of time in Hospital
hospital, and I found music helped pass the days.
(C) I joined a music club at college. College
Figure 4.1 Sample categories that may emerge from the data when exploring
important memories linked to music
‘school’. The number of categories or themes which may emerge from

your data will depend on a number of variables such as the amount of
data collected and the breadth of views.
As you begin to code your data you will discover that many categories
will initially be created. However, the purpose of creating these categories
is to reduce the data – so categories may need to be subsumed into
super-categories in order for the reader to digest the information quickly.
As an example, statements ‘A’ and ‘C’ in the samples within Figure 4.1
could be placed in the super-category of ‘During time spent in education’.
The number of categories will depend on the amount of data you have
and the requirements of those reading the eventual report. For example,
if they are concerned with detail, more categories may be necessary,
whereas if they want a broad overview, fewer categories may be more
appropriate. When developing codes, it may be useful to take a sample
of your interviews and then develop a coding frame from them. A good
yardstick is to attempt to develop a framework from approximately 20–30
per cent of your interviews. However, if this involves a great number of
interviews, you may notice recurrent and similar themes emerging by
transcript 7 that are not expanded upon in subsequent transcripts. If This
is the case, you will need to exercise your discretion as to whether the
analysis of further transcripts is appropriate.
1 Select a sample of your interviews.
2 Read through the sample transcripts several times.
3 Identify an exhaustive list of emerging themes/categories and

number these so that you can reference them quickly and easily.
4 Group linked categories into super-categories. An example of a super-

category might be ‘sport’, and categories within this might include ‘football’,
‘tennis’, ‘swimming’.
5 Create a coding frame reference by providing examples from the

interviews of all your themes/categories into one document or spreadsheet.
6 Apply your coding frame to each of your remaining interview transcripts.
Figure 4.2 Analysing content: Stages in developing a coding frame

Carrying out a content analysis of your data usually involves a number

of stages, in order to establish content categories as well as defining the
value and impact of the categories or themes that emerge through the
process. We’ve identified, below, the key stages involved in developing
a robust coding framework through which to analyse the content of
qualitative data sets.
Concept-driven and data-driven coding
Researchers can prepare for the analysis of qualitative data with categories
or classifications pre-defined. These may be dictated by a research spon-
sor or client for example. Pre-defined categories may also be based on
understanding of the topic or research environment by the researcher, e.g.
where the literature in the field of study may direct a researcher towards
certain topics or themes. Pre-defined categories or focal points for codes
within the data is often referred to as ‘concept driven’. The alternate, where
categories or codes emerge through analysis of the data, is termed ‘data
driven’ (Bouvier, 2022).
Guides to help you code
There are many coding guides or frameworks that researchers can draw
from in order to provide meaning and context to categorisations and
classifications. For example, affective approaches to coding explore peo-
ples’ emotions, values, and conflicts, as well as other subjective qualities
of human experience. Other mechanisms for coding also include evalu-
ative codes that might assign some element of value judgement about
merit, worth, or significance of particular experiences or events (Saldaña,
2015).
Qualitative data analysis software
Analysing qualitative research materials requires researchers to become

immersed in their data in order to fully explore and appreciate its con-
text and meaning. This process of becoming immersed in the data can
be enhanced through using qualitative data analysis software. Although

some believe that this is a fairly recent advancement in working with such
data, some of the leading experts in qualitative data analysis recognised
its potential and value decades ago. For example, the work of Miles and
Huberman in the early 1990s articulated that the flexible, recursive, and
iterative capabilities of software packages provided advanced opportu-
nities for researchers to rapidly assess and re-assess rich text-based data
sets (Miles and Huberman, 1994). Since this time, a number of advanced
software packages have been developed to support qualitative research-
ers in dealing with the process of coding, classifying, categorising, and
valuing data.
NVIVO (https://www.qsrinternational.com/nvivo-
qualitative-data-analysis-software/home)
NVivo is a software program specifically designed to support the

analysis of qualitative data. It has the ability to store multiple
types of data within its system. These can include text-based
files from interviews, focus groups, open-ended responses
from surveys, social media posts, and textbook/journal article
content. It can also hold other types of qualitative data such
as audio, video, and image data. The software acts as a filing
cabinet for all qualitative research data and, through extensive
coding and classification procedures, can produce rapid assess-
ments of large data sets.
(Bazeley and Jackson, 2019)
Narrative analysis
When dealing with qualitative research data, researchers are often tasked
with telling a story with the data. Some tools or instruments (such as
research interviews, focus groups, observations) contain rich stories or
accounts. These can concentrate on an experience of a shopping visit,
or the view on the level of service in a hotel following an overnight stay
for example. A narrative analysis of data in situations like this allows
researchers to better understand the overall experience and to explore
the underlying elements that contributed to it (Clandinin, 2007; McIntosh-

Scott et al., 2014). Narrative analysis has become a useful tool in visually
interpreting research data as the process helps to structure and blend lan-
guage, numbers, and graphics into accessible, widely understood outputs
(Durante, 2019).
Narrative analysis differs from other ways of dealing with qualitative
data in that it embraces a distinct set of themes that define it as a valid
analytical device. These include:
● Narrative analysis maintains an interest in people’s lived experi-

ences and an appreciation of the explanation of the nature of that
experience.
● Within this approach there is a desire to empower research partici-
pants and allow them to contribute to determining what are the most
salient themes in an area of research.
● Narrative analysis has an interest in process and change over time.
● Narrative analysis concentrates on the self and representations of
the self.
● Within narrative analysis there is an awareness of the effect of
the researcher as storyteller.
(Elliot, 2005, p. 6; Phoenix, Smith and Sparkes, 2010)
Narrative analysis has a central focus on the story and the presentation of
the story. The stories are analysed to reveal interpretations and perspec-
tives on the social world (Mannay, 2015). In essence, they are concerned
with the meanings and ideology the story conveys; the techniques and
communicative devices the storyteller uses; and how the story links with
the cultural and historical context within which it is told (Denscombe,
2017, p. 292)
Digital narrative – digital storytelling
Narrative analysis is commonly produced as written accounts of expe-

riences and interpretations of the social world. However, digital (visual)
narrative or storytelling is a powerful tool to help explore understandings
and perspectives from the position of participants in a research project
(Alexander, 2017). Purists in storytelling technique cite Joe Lambert as
the guru of this research or evaluative device. He developed seven steps

for effective storytelling that help subjects/participants to engage with
the process of telling their own story and exposing the impact that it has
secured. Using this process, the control and ownership of the data used
to produce the story, and the telling or sharing of the story, is assigned
to the participant. This affords the researcher the role of storytelling guide
and facilitator – helping the participants to explore what is important to
them in the story (Lambert, 2018). The technique has been used in a
number of settings to provide a ‘voice’ for those being researched and
allows stories to be told that are related to real-life, lived experience.
One example of this is the toolkit designed by Action for ME (Myalgic
Encephalomyelitis or Chronic Fatigue Syndrome). This workbook pro-
vided M.E. sufferers with the tools, and the confidence, to tell their sto-
ries so that it helped others to understand the impact of M.E. (Action for
M.E., 2014)
Discourse analysis
Discourse analysis attempts to unpack text and language by setting it

within a social, cultural, and political framework. This makes it different
from other forms of analysis we might use with qualitative data, as it not
only identifies what is within the data but also brings into focus what is
absent. It includes explicit evidence, but also considers what is not said
(and implied) (Denscombe, 2017, p. 289).
Discourse analysis is particularly useful for specific forms of
research endeavours. For example, you might wish to explore or
examine the effects and impacts of different kinds of language used
in a particular environment or setting. You may be interested in the
cultural codes, rules, and conventions that are present when groups or
individuals communicate. Another valuable use for discourse analysis
would be to examine how language use is linked to its social, political,
and historical context. This was the focus for work that explored the
UK’s decision to withdraw from the European Union in January 2020.
Here researchers examined how discourse influenced the decision to
withdraw and what discourse emerged as a result of it (Koller, Kopf and
Miglbauer, 2019).
FRAMEWORK FOR DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
Discourse analysis is based on three stages:
1. Analysis of the text – including the exploration of language

and how it is structured in the setting being analysed.
2. Analysis of practice – which includes how those being
researched produce, assess, interpret, and consume text.
3. Analysis of social context – which includes exploring issues
linked to power embedded in the text, and how this impacts
locally and in wider society.
(Fairclough, 2003)
Critical Discourse Analysis
One feature within all applications of discourse analysis as a research

analysis tool or device is its concentration on what people say in social
and cultural contexts. A central aim, therefore, is to focus on how lan-
guage is used in real-life situations. There are a number of modes through
which discourse analysis can be explored; one of the most popular is
Critical Discourse Analysis. There are two dimensions to Critical Discourse
Analysis: The event or topic being examined (e.g. equality and diversity),
and the way language is used within a particular social institution (e.g. in
a school or college setting). In essence, the approach is ‘critical’ because
it compares the researched study of language with a study of its context
(and this can be societal, political, economic, for example) (Bloor and
Bloor, 2007).
ADVANTAGES OF DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
● Discourse analysis helps researchers uncover the motiva-

tion behind a text by allowing them to view a problem from
different perspectives or vantage points.
● As a research device it is useful for studying the underly-
ing meaning of a spoken or written text as it considers the
social and historical contexts.
● As a structured mechanisms for assessing text or language

used it allows researchers to better understand the function
of language and how discourse can be used to foster posi-
tive social change.
(Wooffitt, 2005; Rapley, 2018)
Grounded theory
Grounded theory is a research tool or instrument that can be used to

analyse qualitative data (although it can consider, as part of the process,
quantitative data such as performance-related information and health-re-
lated metrics). It is centrally concerned with the emergence of patterns in
data, and the subsequent development of theories from that data. As an
approach to research, it was developed in the US by Glaser and Strauss
in the 1960s (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). This method of analysis con-
centrates on formulating a theory around data, thereby ‘grounding’ the
research in actual data. Then additional cases can be examined to see if
they are relevant and can add to the original theory (Urquart, 2012).
Since its introduction as an approach to dealing with essentially
qualitative research data, grounded theory methodology has been adapted
and now has multiple variants all with unique interpretations of how theory
can be ‘grounded’ in the data it emerges from (Bryant and Charmaz, 2019).
Despite amendments and changes to the theory over the last half-century,
all approaches agree that: (1) theory construction is a central element
of grounded theory, (2) the operating principles of grounded theory
differ from those typically associated with quantitative research, and (3)
grounded theory emerges from rigorous data analysis, not from adopting
theories that are already in existence (Corbin and Strauss, 2014).
A GROUNDED THEORY FRAMEWORK

FOR ANALYSING DATA
1. Data should be collected and analysed simultaneously.

2. Data should be analysed separately from a traditional litera-
ture review as this may introduce bias in theory generation
from the data (Glaser, 1998).
3. Researchers should endeavour to create analytic catego-

ries early in the research process.
4. Analysis should begin early in the process and continue
throughout.
5. Take samples from data collected in order to develop multi-
ple ideas and generate meaningful theory.
(Charmaz, 2015)
Analysing quantitative data
Quantitative data are produced by closed questions in surveys, data pro-

duced via experiment-based research, and the conversion of respondent
data to numeric form. Quantitative data can be analysed in a number of
ways, including describing characteristics of the data (descriptive anal-
ysis), and drawing conclusions from the data and making judgements
about it (inferential analysis). We provide some of the traditional methods
below of dealing with research data typically collected and collated for
most socially-framed research projects.
DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF DATA
As the name suggests, this type of analysis describes data. With

descriptive techniques you can summarise, codify, and visualise
collected data in ways that allow you to show patterns in the
data. Descriptive analysis of data usually precedes subsequent
inferential analysis of data.
INFERENTIAL ANALYSIS OF DATA
Inferential analysis of data utilises more advanced tools and

techniques to interrogate and explore data than are provided
by descriptive methods. Inferential techniques are often used to
compare the differences between groups studied in a research
project (for example, those who have undertaken a training pro-

gramme, compared to those who have not). Inferential statis-
tics can be powerful when used to make generalisations about a
larger population (such as all university students), based upon a
smaller number of research project participants or subjects (in
this case, a selection of university students).
Quantitative data analysis software
There are numerous software packages available to help support the anal-
ysis of quantitative data. They can help you to describe your data, find pat-
terns in it, test it to ensure it is representative of similar or wider groups of
respondents, and produce visualisations from it. Microsoft Excel provides
solid and useful functionality for researchers who are required to deal
with numeric research data. Data analysis add-ins allow more advanced
descriptive analyses of data to be carried out. In addition, some of the
standard statistical (inferential) analysis techniques can also be deployed
via Excel. The standard statistical package used historically in social sci-
ence research work, to deal with quantitative data, is Statistical Package
for Social Sciences (SPSS).
SPSS (https://www.ibm.com/products/spss-statistics)
SPSS means ‘Statistical Package for the Social Sciences’ and

was first launched in 1968. Since SPSS was acquired by IBM in
2009, it has been officially known as IBM SPSS Statistics, but
most users still just refer to it as ‘SPSS’. It is a combined suite
of software programs that analyses data related to research
projects typically carried out in the social sciences. It offers a
fast-visual modelling environment that ranges from the smallest
to the most complex models. The core functionalities offered in
SPSS are:
● Statistical analysis of quantitative data, including frequen-

cies, cross-tabulations and associated bivariate analysis.
● Modelling from data, enabling researchers to build and vali-

date predictive models using advanced statistical procedures.
● Text analysis, providing an opportunity to link and code
numeric data with open-ended elements in surveys and
interviews to provide additional context to the analysis.
● Visualization designer, allows researchers to use their data
for a variety of visual representations.
(Pallant, 2020; Field, 2017)
All of the software packages available can potentially save valuable

researcher time and produce analyses that accurately inform, support, and
guide analysis. It can be easy to be blinded by the power of such packages
and not fully understand the mechanics of the analyses they perform. For
this reason, we’ve outlined below how to perform some of these ‘by hand’
in the sections exploring descriptive statistics. We have also explained
some of the less complex processes and formulations conducted by
inferential analysis techniques.
Academic
Often, academic researchers work from a particular discipline
area or perspective. This, in turn, influences the approach to
analysis they adopt in their work.
Industry
Commercially driven research work is heavily influenced by the
impact on the ‘bottom line’ and might often favour quantitative
indicators of research effect or impact.
Public sector
Public sector research has historically veered from being tied to
a particular approach to collecting and analysing data (whether
that be quantitatively based or qualitatively focused). The impor-
tance is often influenced by the type and scope of research work
being carried out.
Society
To have impact and resonance in societal terms, research is
often converted to a narrative or story. This allows research
work to connect with users and report readers.
Descriptive tools and techniques
There are many ways to analyse quantitative data. A key concern here will
be a reference to the knowledge of your audience. For example, an inves-
tigation of admissions into hospital could be conducted by collecting and
presenting data on the number of admissions in a given year. However, the
analysis might include a breakdown of admissions by gender and a compar-
ison of recent years (see the examples below). These data may have been
collected as part of a larger research project examining the management
and performance of Paperfield Hospital, or they could have been obtained
from a nationally available database relating to hospital admissions.
Figure 4.3 Charts showing admissions to Paperfield Hospital (year and gender)
Another way of reporting or analysing these types of data would be to

indicate the percentage of male and female admissions in particular time
periods, as displayed in the charts below. This presents a useful and visual
way of showing any increase or decrease in male and female admissions.
Figure 4.4 Admissions to Barnswell Hospital (2022 and 2023 compared)
Essentially, the types of interpretation charted and visualised

above provide a mechanism through which to describe your data. They
provide a way of reducing data into accessible and easy-to-understand
summaries. Further exploration of the headline information presented
above might reveal various sub-categories or classifications of the data –
such as duration of admission, department admitting the patient, doctor
in charge of the patient, site of admission, and so on. This may well be
useful and informative, but it could confuse those reading the output of
your research if they are merely concerned with the number of patients
admitted. For those who are interested in the detail of the numbers
admitted to hospital, you may wish to produce a separate report or a
technical addition detailing the additional breakdown of the data. For
example, you may wish to explore your data further to establish the ages
of those admitted. Suppose that 50 women were admitted into a small
department in Paperfield Hospital in 2022 and the data relating to their
ages are made available to you. It might look like the data set below.
What can you do with these data? When they are simply presented
as in Figure 4.5, they are difficult to interpret. You could begin by taking
the data and listing the ages from the highest to the lowest. However, this
would not add a great deal to the analysis of the data (although it would
50 49 33 38 60 63
64 70 81 45 26 20
19 45 58 56 22 33
45 47 84 30 28 29
37 42 41 62 26 30
46 48 45 39 25 66
45 50 49 33 38 60
63 64 70 81 44 26
20 19
Figure 4.5 Age of admissions (female) to Department A in 2022
allow you to quickly establish the oldest and youngest female admitted).
A helpful way to present the data would be to produce a ‘tally chart’
indicating how many times each age appears on the list. This can reveal
some interesting information about the data.
Age 19 20 22 25 26 28 29 30 33 37 38 39
Number of 2 2 1 1 3 1 1 2 3 1 2 1
patients
Age 41 42 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 56 58 60
Number of 1 1 2 4 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2
patients
Age 62 63 64 66 70 81 84
Number of 1 2 2 1 2 2 1
patients
Figure 4.6 Tally chart of female admissions to Department A in 2022

Whilst producing a tally chart (or frequency chart, as it is also known)

helps you to analyse the age data, it still remains difficult to draw any
useful meaning from it. Reducing the data further into larger categories
or ‘chunks’ may help, and the use of age ranges may assist with this.
When grouping data into ages you can cluster them in a number of ways.
However, it is customary to use five-year categories, as shown in the
example below.
Age 19 to 23 24 to 28 29 to 33 34 to 38 39 to 43 44 to 48 49 to 53
Number of 5 5 6 3 3 9 4
patients
Age 54 to 58 59 to 63 64 to 68 69 to 73 74 to 78 70 to 83
Number of 2 5 3 2 0 3
patients
Figure 4.7 Grouping of ages – female admissions to Department A in 2022
Describing data
The categorisation (or ‘chunking’) of the data in the above examples now
allows us to see that, of the women admitted to this department, more
were aged between 44 and 48 than any other grouping. This statement
refers to the age range with the most occurrences. This is also known as
the mode age range.
The mode, the median, and the mean
If you were interested in establishing the age range that was the centre
of all your ranges, this is known as the median age range. To find the
median, you would list your ages from highest to lowest and count from
each end until you reached the middle. In this case the median age is
45. Where there is an even number of values (ages in this case), the
median is the average of the two mid-points (45 + 45 divided by two
equals 45).
THE MODE
The mode of a group of data is the most frequently occurring

value. For example, in the results of an examination, it would be
the most often occurring grade.
THE MEDIAN
The median is the value that separates the upper half of a list
of values from the lower half. The median is, therefore, the mid-
point in an ordered list of values.
Whilst this is a useful exercise in determining the middle value, it is

still a time-consuming exercise to perform. First of all, you need to rank
or list your ages in order and then you must establish your middle point.
Another way of calculating the middle of a set of ages (or values) is to use
the mean value. The mean, or average as it is also known, is calculated
by adding together all the ages and dividing that result by the number of
women admitted. Therefore, the total of all the ages is 2264 divided by
the number of women admitted (50) equals 45.28. The mean, or average,
age for the women admitted to this department in 2022 was 45.
The mode, median, and mean are all known as measures of central
tendency. They provide single values that best describes the group.
MEAN
The mean is defined as the sum of the values divided by the total
number of values. For example, the mean following exam results
would be:
Exam result 45 67 70 55 42 78 59 Total

Mean = 45 +67 +70 +55 +42 +78 59 = 419
We then devide the total (419) by the number of results (7) =

59. Mean exam result = 59
Following this, you may wish to explore further the frequency of ages
of female admissions during 2022. A visual way of doing this would be to
develop a frequency distribution graph, as shown below. Microsoft Excel
can produce these very easily, as can SPSS and other quantitative data
analysis software packages.
Figure 4.8 Frequency of ages of female admissions during 2022
This chart shows that most of the women admitted to Department A

were under 46 years of age. You will notice that there is more activity in
the chart between the ages of 19 and 46 (there are more of the female
admissions falling within these categories). This is known as a skewed
distribution, whereby the results are grouped to one side of the chart or
graph. In many studies, researchers might expect to find a distribution of
data where most of the values group around the middle of the chart or
graph. This is known as a normal distribution. If this were the case you
would notice that the figures for the mode, the median, and the mean
were all similar in value. As an example, you might expect a normal
distribution to occur when looking at the exam results of undergraduates.
This might look something like Figure 4.9.
Figure 4.9 Distribution of exam results
Standard deviation
From normally distributed data you can measure the distribution of values
around the mean. Using the exam score example, this would be useful
as it would allow you to establish the degree of dispersion or difference
between the scores. If the standard deviation is large then the scores vary
considerably, whereas if the standard deviation is small then the scores
are more tightly clustered and closer together.
The standard deviation is a key basic statistical technique, which
forms the basis for many more advanced techniques. In essence, the
standard deviation provides an average of all the deviations from the
mean. There are a number of ways to calculate the standard deviation,
most software packages utilise a formula and process similar to the one
outlined below.
Figure 4.10 Working out standard deviations
Having established the standard deviation for the exam scores, we

can see that there is some dispersion among the results. In addition, if
the distributions of scores are normal (as shown in Figure 4.11 below),
certain statements can be made about the results. In a normal distribution
the range from –1 standard deviation to +1 standard deviation contains
68 per cent of the results, the range from –2 standard deviations to +2
standard deviations contains 95 per cent of the results, and the range
from –3 standard deviations to +3 standard deviations contains 99 per
cent of the results. The standard deviation is a useful way of comparing
across different sets of data. For example, it could be used to compare
the variability in different exam results – such as Law and Accountancy –
among a cohort of students. It is also used as a basis for many more
detailed statistical analyses of your data – for example, inferential analysis
discussed later in this chapter.
Figure 4.11 Distribution of exam results showing standard deviation
STANDARD DEVIATION
The standard deviation is a tool used to measure dispersion.

The standard deviation shows the relation a set of values has
to the mean. Assuming that the distribution of scores is normal,
certain statements can be made about the data (69 per cent of
values fall within 1 standard deviation of the mean, 95 per cent
lie within 2 standard deviations of the mean, and 99 per cent lie
within 3 standard deviations).
Associating data
You may find that with some of your data you wish to explore possible rela-
tionships between two different sets of data (or variables, as they are also
known). This is often referred to as correlation research. There are numerous
techniques available for exploring the relationships between variables.
Two of the most commonly used methods for exploring relationships
between variables are Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation Coefficient
and Spearman’s Rank Order Correlation Coefficient. Both of these
analyses indicate whether an association is positive (with a maximum
value of +1) or negative (with a maximum value of –1). It is usually the case
VARIABLES
A variable is one of the factors in your data. For example, height,

weight, or test scores might be variables. Variables can be either
independent or dependent. A dependent variable is one that you
would expect to see change following an increase or decrease
in an associated independent variable. For example, you might
expect to see a change in exam results (dependent variable) fol-
lowing an increase in lectures attended (independent variable).
that scatterplots are used to show the results of the analysis. The example
plots here show three types of relationship between the number of hours
of TV watched and the age of the viewer. In the first example there is a
strong positive relationship, represented by plots moving upwards as they
progress from left to right. The second example shows a strong negative
relationship between the two data sets, indicating that (with this particular
sample of data) older viewers watch less TV. This is demonstrated by the
plots moving in a downward direction as they progress from left to right.
The final example does not appear to show any relationship between the
two data sets as the plots do not move upward or downward as they
progress from left to right.
Figure 4.12 Positive relationship (correlation) between two data sets

Figure 4.13 Negative relationship (correlation) between two data sets
Figure 4.14 No relationship (correlation) between two data sets
Formula for correlating data
The detailed formula of correlation research is not discussed here, but

there are a number of excellent reference sources to help guide you
through analysing your data using this, and other descriptive techniques
(Winston, 2022; McFedries, 2019; Pallant, 2020). A simple example
which outlines the formula and processes involved would be to explore

the potential of a relationship between exam scores and the number
of lectures attended. Using the Pearson Product Moment Correlation
Coefficient approach (R), the analysis would be structured around using
the formula shown in Figure 4.15.
Figure 4.15 An example using Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation Coefficient

approach (R)
The above manual calculation and assessment of correlation shows

that there is a strong positive correlation between the two variables of
exam score and the number of lectures attended. We probably expected
this to be the case, and it is pleasing that the data confirmed this for us.
However, researchers must take care when performing correlation analysis
on collected data. The appearance of a relationship does not necessarily
mean one exists – it does not indicate causation. In other words, correlation
does not prove that one variable causes another to alter in value.
A descriptive analysis or report of your data is a useful way of
introducing the data to the reader. From a general analysis you can move
on to a more detailed examination of your data (if this is appropriate,
given the requirements of the reader or user of your research). Questions
posed here may include: ‘What are the data saying?’ and ‘What do the
data mean?’ Interpreting or questioning your data in this way often leads
to making judgements or inferences about it, or (more often) the wider
population from which it is taken from. These kinds of questions and
interests are explored through the use of inferential data analysis.
A note on inferential analysis
An inferential analysis of your data assists you in making conclusions about

the data by performing certain operations on it. With inferential analysis you
are inferring from your sample data (e.g. the exam scores) what the pop-
ulation scores are (say, the scores for an entire group of undergraduates).
SAMPLE
A sample is a selection which is taken from a group; it is usually

considered to be representative of that group. As a result, the find-
ings from the sample can be generalised back to the larger group.
POPULATION
A population is a group who share the same characteristics. For

example, a population could be members of a club, nurses, stu-
dents or children.
The major difference between inferential analysis and descriptive

analysis is that with descriptive techniques you are merely describing
the data as it is represented to you. With inferential analysis, you test
or perform some operation on the data in order to make conclusions
about it.
Statistical significance
One popular method of inferential analysis is to make judgements of

the probability that the difference in, say, the mean scores in a law
exam for a sample of male and female students is one that is repre-
sentative of all male and female students on the law programme; or
whether it is down to chance. In this way, we are said to be testing the
significance of the difference in exam scores. In statistical terms, when
we test for significance, we must first make a statement or hypothesis
about the data.
HYPOTHESIS
A hypothesis is a proposition or statement you wish to test with

your data. They are commonly referred to as null hypotheses.
These are negative statements which have to be disproved in
order to validate the statement made.
For example, the hypothesis for the exam score instance could be:
‘There is no significant difference in male and female exam scores’. This
statement is known as a non-directional hypothesis because it merely
puts forward that no difference exists. The statistical tests to perform
on this type of hypothesis are called two-tailed tests. However, if the
hypothesis were stated as ‘males perform better than females in exams’
then the hypothesis becomes directional, and a one-tailed test is
required. The requirements of a one-tailed test are stricter than those for
a two-tailed test, as the latter is only concerned with proving a difference
exists, while the former is concerned with exploring who the difference
favours.
Testing for significance
There are a number of statistical tests available to researchers when

exploring hypotheses. These include the t-test, Analysis of Variance
(ANOVA), and the Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA). These are more
advanced statistical techniques and, although they are not detailed here,
they are explored in traditional statistical texts (Pallant, 2020; Field, 2017;
Rowntree, 2018).
Presenting your data
As this chapter has shown, data can be presented in a variety of ways.

When you report your data, it will be in one of two main forms: A
table or a chart/figure. Tables often reproduce raw data. They should
be clear and uncluttered. In research reports, tables are often used to
present findings, emphasise a point made in the text or act as the start-
ing point for a discussion or analysis of some aspect of the data. Even
if your report has only one table, it should be clearly labelled with a
title and reference number. Some organisations and institutions have
a particular ‘house style’ for the presentation of data, so you may need
to check this.
STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE
Statistical significance refers to how much, for example, exam

results for a group of students could be down to chance alone.
If the results cannot be explained by chance, it is assumed that
another factor, such as number of lectures attended, had an impact
on the results. One of two significance levels are usually applied
when testing for statistical significance – 0.05 and 0.01. These lev-
els indicate degrees of confidence in the assumption that chance
was not the cause. Whilst 0.01 is the stricter of the degrees, both
can be understood as producing statistically significant results.
Charts or figures are more graphical representations of your data or

the results of some analysis of it. These presentational tools also require
careful and clear labelling. Presenting your data as a figure or chart may
include constructing a histogram, bar chart or pie chart of your data.
These, as shown earlier, are often used to present descriptive analyses
of your data. More complex analyses of your data, such as an exploration
of correlation, are best presented as scatterplots or line graphs.
TIPS FOR PRESENTING DATA
● Remind the reader of the research question or questions

when presenting data. This helps provide focus.
● Move from the general to the specific. For example, indicate
general findings before moving on to the more specific and
detailed elements.
● Keep linked data together in your report and deal with them
in one chapter or section if possible. This aids the flow and
structure of your report.
● Keep tables and figures simple! Any detail should be pro-
vided in an accompanying key, or in an appendix at the back
of the report.
Dealing with ever-increasing amounts of data –

the role of data visualisation
The total amount of data created, captured, copied, and consumed
globally is forecast to increase rapidly, reaching 64.2 zettabytes in 2020
(a zettabyte is one billion terabytes) (Statistica, 2022). In order to make
data accessible and useful, it must first be processed and prepared for
general consumption. Preparing and condensing data for more gen-
eral consumption is the purpose of data visualisation. At its simplest
definition data visualisation is the graphical representation of data
(Boy, Detienne, and Fekete, 2015; Knaflic, 2015; Kosara and MacKinlay,
2013).
Data visualisation has the power to communicate complex
information in an understandable, easy-to-access way and can allow
users to interrogate it to suit a particular need (Durante, 2019). It has
historically tended to focus on exploration and analysis, but now data

can be deployed to tell rich stories through visual and imaginative ways
(Feigenbaum and Alamalhodaei, 2020; Telling, 2017; McCandless, 2022;
McCandless, 2021). It is generally recognised that data storytelling doesn’t
necessarily have to follow a linear sequence of storytelling; it can also be
achieved through interactivity inviting verification, new questions, and
alternative explanations (Segel and Heer, 2010).
FIVE STEPS OF EFFECTIVE DATA VISUALISATION
1. Analysing: Understand the data and what it is telling you.

Avoid data pitfalls. Check the sources of your data – are they
reliable?
2. Building: Determine your goal and clarify who you are cre-
ating the visualisations for. Think about your audience and
how they deal with data and usually consume it.
3. Designing: Choose appropriate colour palettes (making
sure they are colour-blind-friendly. Put labels on all of your
charts, use widely accessible and readable fonts.
4. Telling: Use storytelling to engage and encourage the
reader. Use annotations where needed to give the reader/
viewer additional context and meaning.
5. Sharing: Use the right tools for displaying data and make
as much of it as shareable as possible. Dedicated web-
sites make distributing and sharing visualisations much
easier.
(Dijk, 2022)
Summary
Research data are collected in a variety of forms. In this chapter, we have

identified a number of ways that it can be processed and analysed. We
have categorised analytical tools or techniques as either essentially qual-
itative or quantitative as these relate to the type of data collected (visual,
text, audio-based for qualitative, numeric for quantitative). Content anal-

ysis is a popular method for dealing with qualitative data and converting
it to meaningful codes and categories. Narrative analysis explores stories
in qualitative data; discourse analysis examines language and text use and
explores its context and meaning. Grounded theory is an approach to
analysing qualitative data that develops meaning and theory ‘grounded’ or
emerging from the data.
Quantitative data analysis tools have been presented that include
descriptive tools or techniques. These seek to manage and reduce data
by processes that include categorisation and classification. Typical ways
to group and classify data include frequency counts, proportions or
percentages, data distributions and deviations from the average or mean.
Inferential analysis and making value judgements about data have also
been briefly discussed.
Finally, the chapter closes by looking at the emerging field of data
visualisation, the creation of accessible charting and visual representation
of complex data. In their work dealing with large and complex data sets,
data visualisation experts have created innovative approaches to present
data in meaningful and accessible ways.
References
Action for ME (2014) Digital storytelling toolkit. Keynsham: Action for ME,
p. 46.
Alexander, B. (2017) The new digital storytelling: Creating narratives with
new media. 2nd edn. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Bazeley, P. and Jackson, K. (2019) Qualitative data analysis with NVivo.
3rd/edited by Pat Bazeley, Kristi Jackson. edn. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
Bloor, M. and Bloor, T. (2007) The practice of critical discourse analysis: An
introduction. London: Hodder Arnold.
Bouvier, G.A. (2022) Qualitative research using social media/Gwen
Bouvier and Joel Rasmussen. 1st edn. London: Routledge.
Boy, J., Detienne, F. and Fekete, J.-D. (2015) ‘Storytelling in information
visualizations: Does it engage users to explore data?’, Proceedings of
the ACM CHI’15 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems,
1(February 2016).
Bryant, A. and Charmaz, K. (2019) The SAGE handbook of current devel-

opments in grounded theory. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Chandler, R., Anstey, E. and Ross, H. (2015) ‘Listening to voices and visu-
alizing data in qualitative research hypermodal dissemination possibili-
ties’, SAGE Open, 5, pp. 1–8.
Charmaz, K. (2015) ‘Grounded theory’, The Blackwell Encyclopedia of
Sociology, pp. 2023–2027. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.
Clandinin, D. J. (2007) Handbook of narrative inquiry: Mapping a method-
ology. London: SAGE.
Corbin, J. M. and Strauss, A. L. (2014) Basics of qualitative research:
Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 4th edn.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Creswell, J. W. and Creswell, J. D. (2018) Research design: Qualitative,
quantitative, and mixed method approaches. 5th edn. Los Angeles,
CA: SAGE.
University Press.
Dijk, D. V. (2022) A Guide to Effective Data Visualization: Datylon. Available
at: https://www.datylon.com/blog/guide-to-effective-data-visualization
(Accessed: 23 August 2022).
Durante, N. (2019) Data story: Explain data and inspire action throgh
story. Oakton, VA: Ideapress Publishing.
Elliot, J. (2005) Using narrative in social research: Qualitative and quantita-
tive approaches. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Fairclough, N. (2003) Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social
research. London: Routledge.
Feigenbaum, A. and Alamalhodaei, A. (2020) The data storytelling work-
book. London: Routledge.
Field, A. (2017) Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics: North
American Edition. 5th edn. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Glaser, B. G. (1998) Doing grounded theory: Issues and discussions. Mill
Valley, CA: Sociology.
Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L. (1967) The discovery of grounded theory:
Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Knaflic, C. N. (2015) Storytelling with data: The effective visual communi-
cation of information. 1st edn. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Koller, V., Kopf, S. and Miglbauer, M. (2019) Discourses of Brexit. 1st edn.
London: Routledge.
Kosara, R. and MacKinlay, J. (2013) ‘Storytelling: The next step for visuali-
zation’, Computer, 46(5), pp. 44–50.
Lambert, J. (2018) Digital storytelling: capturing lives, creating community/
Joe Lambert, Brooke Hessler. 2nd edn. London: Routledge.
Mannay, D. (2015) Visual, narrative and creative research methods:
Application, reflection and ethics. London: Routledge.
McCandless, D. (2021) Beautiful news. London: HarperCollins.
McCandless, D. (2022) Rhetological Fallacies. Available at: https://
www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/rhetological-fallacies/
McFedries, P. (2019) Excel data analysis for dummies. For dummies
4thedn. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
McIntosh-Scott, A., Mason, T., Mason-Whitehead, E. and Coyle, D. (2014)
Key concepts in nursing and healthcare research. SAGE key concepts.
Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M. (1994) Qualitative data analysis: An
expanded sourcebook. 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA; London: SAGE.
Pallant, J. (2020) SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data anal-
ysis using IBM SPSS. 5th edn. London: Routledge.
Phoenix, C., Smith, B. and Sparkes, A. (2010) ‘Narrative analysis in aging
studies: A typology for consideration’, Journal of Aging Studies, 24,
pp. 1–11.
Rapley, T. (2018) Doing conversation, discourse and document analysis.
2nd edn. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Rowntree, D. (2018) Statistics without tears: A primer for non-mathemati-
cians. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Saldaña, J. (2015) The coding manual for qualitative researchers. 3rd edn.
London: SAGE.
Segel, E. and Heer, J. (2010) ‘Narrative visualization: Telling stories with
data’, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 16(6),
pp. 1139–1148.
Statistica (2022) Volume of Data/Information Created, Captured, Copied,
and Consumed Worldwide from 2010 to 2020, with Forecasts from
2021 to 2025: Statistica. Available at: https://www.statista.com/
statistics/871513/worldwide-data-created/ (Accessed: 23 August
2022).
Telling, M. E. (2017) Digital storytelling toolkit. Keynsham: Action for ME.

Urquart, C. (2012) Grounded theory for qualitative research: A practical
guide. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Winston, W. L. (2022) Microsoft excel data analysis and business mode-
ling. 7th edn. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Press.
Wooffitt, R. (2005) Conversation analysis and discourse analysis: A com-
parative and critical introduction. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
5 WRITING IT ALL UP
Dennis Dokter
IN THIS CHAPTER WE COVER:

● Getting started: preparing your writing.
● Tips for getting started.
● Time management.
● Formatting and structuring your writing: an example.
● Fallacies (mistakes) to avoid when writing.
● Thinking about your audience when writing.
● Presenting your work to others.
● A note on ethics when writing up.
● Submitting your research report to others.
● Styling your report.
● Social media and publication.
● Storytelling.
● Visualising your data.
● Tone and voice.
Getting started: preparing your writing
An important factor related to research is ‘writing’ it down. This process

can come across as daunting as it is not solely applicable to people new
to the field. Even people with many years of research experience can
lack confidence in their work. It can also take different forms, depending
on what was the purpose of your research and which sector you might
represent.
DOI: 10.4324/9781003180159-5
Writing it all up 117
Academic
As an academic or student, you will often have to write papers,
articles, run tests, and write a thesis or dissertation. This chap-
ter will give you guidelines and tips on writing these while keep-
ing your audience in mind. It will also give tips on how you can
use new techniques to make your results more understandable.
Industry
From an industrial point of view, you will have to write reports
for your board or for managers. This chapter will give you the
initial information you need about how to get started in writing
it down. It is also relevant when you develop new products and
services and you want to explain it not only internally, but also
to an external audience.
Public sector
Within the public sector it is very common to write reports in
order to explain your decision-making process. This chapter
will give you a number of guidelines to make sure that enough
attention is being paid to keeping it understandable. It will also
provide the necessary tools to see how you can implement other
research results and make them relevant for your audience.
Society
As a foundation or charity, you might commission or do your
own research. This chapter will take an approach that can be
used both by novices and by more advanced researchers. It will
demonstrate how you can use different publication methods in
order to widen your audience. It will also give society in gen-
eral tips to look for when it comes to argumentative mistakes.
It will teach us how we can look more critical at (news) articles
and their claims so that we can assess the value and validity
ourselves.
Writing still remains one of the main ways to communicate research.

Whatever context you are researching in, some form of written output
will be required. For example, there are the more conventional reports,
118 Writing it all up
dissertations and scientific articles we might think of initially, but also think
of reports, product descriptions, and (social) media articles. New modes of
communication can then involve using video or sound such as in podcasts
or vlogs. For that reason, this chapter has been written to be applicable in
whatever research setting you may find yourself, it will give the right tools.
In a lot of the ‘how to do’ literature on research, there is limited
attention given to advice on the writing itself. However, as much as people
dread writing, they don’t want to waste valuable time reading about how
to do it. This chapter offers a concise and practical approach to the process
of writing as well as give examples of common fallacies, tone and voice,
your audience, and different forms of presenting your work to others. If
you adopt a more systematic approach to writing. It will also demonstrate
other modes of publication and showing the role of ethics while writing
and the potential of storytelling and data visualisation.
Tips for getting started
The first question is: when should writing begin? It is important to note
that you can start writing down as soon early as you can. It is not neces-
sary to start writing up after the data has been collected and analysed at
the end. This will make the process flow more easily and shows how your
research develops over time.
START WRITING EARLY
Writing up your research should start early and become a reg-

ular and continuing activity. It is also likely to be an iterative or
cyclical process. That is, you will draft a section or chapter, then
move on to some other activity and return one or more times to
redraft your original version. This is partly because as the total-
ity of the research thesis or report takes shape, what you have
written in subsequent sections affects what you wrote earlier
and necessitates changes in it. It is also the case that as your
research proceeds you find out more, read more and change
your mind about some things.
(Blaxter, Hughes and Tight, 2010, p. 223)
Many researchers experience motivational problems relating to

the writing process. It is easy to underestimate the length of time that is
necessary for writing, which can lead to problems with deadlines and the
quality of reports due to rushed writing to meet a deadline.
There is a link between ‘putting things off’, and a lack of confidence
because people put pressure on themselves to get the writing perfect
the first time. A lack of focus and knowledge of what is expected of
you add to this pressure. Allocating plenty of time in your workplan for
writing early on and throughout the process will reduce the amount of
stress towards the end. Start by writing something down on paper and
know that this will be of use to you in some kind of form later on. Use
bullet points as a way to identify topics and then build on that. When
having problems writing, it is a good idea to get your content laid out
and then write what you know without the aid of notes, literature, and
so on, and then build from that. This can help you to get the main themes
down on paper. Another useful idea to get you focused is to decide on
the number of words you will devote to each section based on the word
limit.
Even the most experienced of researchers don’t come up with the
ideal version first time round. If you schedule writing into your workplan
regularly, then it will gradually get easier.
An example for organising the write-up
When producing your written account of the research work your empha-
sis should always be on organising your information closely in line with the
structure of your report before writing. When determining what you want
to write, it is important to pay attention at organising your information
properly. The example below provides a good framework for the research
report-writing process.
Stage 1
Write a draft contents list and break it down into chapters or sec-
tions, or both. Then label your sources, data and any other infor-
mation in line with these. This labelling will be done continuously
throughout the whole process as you build up more references,

do more testing and developing, and capture more data through-
out the research timeline.
Stage 2
Think of your report as a whole and mark out the order of ideas
and the connections between them. If it is useful, draw a dia-
gram showing these connections separately.
Stage 3
Within each chapter or section, decide on the themes, draw
links, and number the themes to show the order in which they
will be placed. Then add these themes to your contents list. Next,
code each theme with a different shape and colour and mark
your sources accordingly. Then pile them in the relevant order
for each chapter.
Stage 4
You can start writing after stage 3, but if the report is particu-
larly lengthy, it can be useful to sketch the framework of what
you are going to write in the form of double page spreads. This
provides a useful structure to write into and can aid with the
logic and flow of your argument.
Stage 5
Writing. It wastes time to write in a less-focused way, hoping
that something will come together. Even after these stages it is
unlikely that you will be able to write the perfect version of your
report the first time round. Decide what you want to say briefly
under each section or heading and then build up the detail grad-
ually from that. Writing is a process of progressive refining, and
you should not underestimate the time it takes. Also, there is
no set way to sequence your argument, so you have to choose
the structure, linkages and cross-referencing that work best for
each report.
(Orna and Stevens, 2009)
Using the approach above helps you to arrange and cluster sources,
data, and information in such a way that you can concentrate your energies
on writing. Whether writing for an essay, journal, book, strategy, policy, or
report, this method can be applied to all types of writing outputs. Also,
it can be applied to either a manual or computer database of sources.
Do not see this framework to rigid but see it as something that can be
adapted to you own needs. Even when you are more experienced, this
method can help to improve the quality of your output.
Time management
Having established when to start writing, discipline has to come into play
in order to manage your research time efficiently and effectively in order
to meet the deadlines. Break down the writing into key stages accord-
ing to particular themes or sections and then set targets for each, setting
aside a specific amount of time for each task. Observe how much you
get written within this writing plan and then you can adjust it accordingly
(Bell and Waters, 2018). This method gives you more focus. Of course, if
you feel that you can add a lot more within each session then do so. Set
time frames are useful when you are having problems with discipline and
focus. In terms of appropriate time allocations, these are difficult to gauge
at first, but they will be easier to estimate with practice when you get more
of a feel for your pace of writing.
When working on large research projects, it is very common to be
working with multiple partners. These can be other colleagues from your
own organisation, but they could also be partners from other sectors; for
instance, when a company needs academic support for the development
of a new innovative product or when a charity is working with the public
sector to analyse societal challenges. When working together, knowing who
will contribute what to the research will help identify the relevant timeline
of the entire project which will also be the basis for your writing structure.
If you are writing the report with multiple people, it should be made
clear early on in the research who will contribute to each chapter or
section. When there is a general project leader, they could provide the
initial overview and divide the tasks of writing amongst the wider team
within a workplan. When there are multiple work packages, their individual
leaders can organise it within their team, as well as be held responsible
within the wider project. Then relevant deadlines can be set to increase
the chances of you all completing your tasks at the same time so that the
report can be pulled together without major delays.
GETTING THE MOST OUT OF MANAGING YOUR

TIME – SOME TIPS
● First, make sure that you work in a place where distractions

can be kept to a minimum because they reduce flow and
efficiency in your writing. If you think that interruptions will
be inevitable, then write a more detailed plan of key tasks
that you have to do within each writing session. Therefore,
you can keep track of what you are doing.
● Write regularly so that you gain momentum – it will get eas-
ier and quicker with practice.
● Consider the quality of time and effort that you are putting
in – keep focused – and don’t kid yourself that because you
have been sitting at your desk or computer for six hours
that you have achieved a lot. Keep reviewing the outputs of
your research sessions.
● Do the more difficult subjects or tasks at the time of day
that you know you work best. For some this is in the morn-
ing. A lot of my ideas unfortunately tend to flow most rap-
idly in the early hours of the morning!
● Another time-saving tip: if you have access to a PC or a word
processor is to write the bulk of your work at the computer.
This will save a lot of time compared to writing hand-writ-
ten notes and then typing them in word for word. This may
seem strange at first, but not only will it save time but also
mean that you can keep a closer eye on the word limits and
cut and paste sections easily.
Whilst acknowledging that drafting and redrafting will play a part, aim to
get each section to a good standard first time. It is always worth trying to
produce the final version at the first attempt. To write with the idea that
what is written will be redrafted encourages a degree of carelessness,
which can produce drafts that require complete revision. On the other
hand, if you aim to get it right first time, there is every chance that all that
will be required is minor amendment. This is as much an attitude of mind
as a matter of style.
Formatting and structuring your writing:

an example
It is important to have make sure that what you are writing down happens in
a structured manner. Below are some general guidelines that can be adapted
depending on the requirements of your audience, and the nature, detail,
and context of the research being undertaken. These guidelines will offer a
detailed breakdown of how a report should be structured and are based on
a typically used and styled format. They are presented as a comprehensive list
of sections that follows the academic model but can be adapted to suit the
purpose of the research. In short, a write-up always consists of a preliminary
part, the main text and the end matter (Bell and Waters, 2018). These checklist
and guidelines are not only useful reminders of what needs to be done; it also
promotes self-regulation and focus (Jagaiah, Howard and Olinghouse, 2019).
Preliminary part
Preliminary sections of typical research reports include the following

elements:
Title
This should reflect the contents of the report but has to be brief. Some
researchers find it necessary to include a sub-heading in order to give
more detail.
Abstract
This is a one-page summary of the work of approximately 250–300

words. It should give the broad aims of the work and conclusions. People
often only read this to see if the report will be of any use and so it needs
to be written well.
List of contents
List paragraphs or, if it is a lengthy report, each chapter and paragraph. The
appropriate page numbers should also be given.
Lists of figures and tables
On the figures/tables themselves make sure you acknowledge the

sources, and label axes on graphs, etc. correctly.
Preface
This is a personal statement from the author who mentions something

about the events leading up to the research and the significance of it.
Acknowledgements
Acknowledge the people who have supported you during the research.
Also acknowledge those people or organisations that have cooperated
with it (Denscombe, 2017).
Do not be alarmed by the long list presented here. As mentioned
before, this is more of an example of a comprehensive list that you might
use for a comprehensive report as a researcher for a university, not an
obligated one. For instance, when you are doing a small market research
as a company, e.g. examining how certain roads might become safer as a
city council or trying to investigate why certain citizens are more at risk for
homelessness as a charity, it might not be necessary to have a preface and
acknowledgements. This preliminary part is mainly to provide an overview
of what will be in the report and set the scene for the context in which it
was written.
It is within the main text that you want to give a proper introduction.
This should given an account of: what work has been done before; why
you had to do the research; how you did it; what your end results are; and
what you intend to do with the results. This is the bulk of the work and
here is where you will spend most of your time.
The main text
The main body of the research report contains the substance of the
research effort. It covers a number of sections you might typically expect
to see. These are:
Introduction
Give some background to the research and outline the purpose. Then
aims, objectives, and hypotheses should be set out, along with an indica-
tion of the scope of the project and the main gaps in knowledge that will
be addressed.
Literature review
This should cover background theory/knowledge and also key con-

cepts and definitions, and it will show how the research fits in with these.
However, it should not be an account of everything that you have read
which vaguely relates to the research. You have to be selective here.
Methods
Here you show how the methods were used to address each of the objec-
tives. Therefore, it should include a justification of the overall research
design and methods – for example, a case study or survey. Also, address
which type of instruments were used to gather the data – questionnaire,
interview, etc. In addition, list what type(s) of data were gathered – quan-
titative, qualitative, or both? If it is a survey, you should cover things like
the population surveyed and the sample size. If it is related to product
development, justify your selection of materials or processes and how
you plan to apply them. If appropriate, you should give an account of the
research at each stage and mention any problems that may have affected
the results. Finally, you should say how the data were analysed – be it sta-
tistically or otherwise. Also acknowledge the limitations of the research in
relation to such things as time constraints and accuracy.
Results
Here you should set out the results in an organised way – for example, in
relation to a particular theme or issue. The more academic the report, the
more specific.
Analysis and discussion
This should interpret the results and highlight the most significant ones
and perhaps deduce things from them. Here you discuss the findings in
relation to the back ground theories and knowledge and the original aims
of the project. Some researchers prefer to have the results, analysis, and
discussion as one section because they think that it gives a more rounded
summary of the research. This is a matter of taste and convention.
Conclusions and recommendations
Here the researcher needs to assess the extent to which the original goals
of the research have been met. It will also reflect on the methods used. It
might recommend action or show how it has increased our understand-
ing. Consider the questions remaining or generated by the research and
recommend further research. It is important, at these stages, to draw
together the threads of the research in order to arrive at some general
conclusion and, perhaps, to suggest some way forward. Attempt to make
them positive and constructive (O’Leary, 2014; Denscombe, 2017).
The end matter
Regardless of whether you make use of all the above guidelines for the
structure of the report, it will remain important to have the proper refer-
ences of other literature sources, project prototypes or data sets as well
as overviews of the design conditions and test results in appendices. This
allows the readers to be able to validate and critically analyse the research
you have done. It provides the necessary transparency at the end of the
report.
TYPICAL END MATTER CONTENTS IN A

RESEARCH REPORT
Appendices
Here you should include anything that might interrupt the flow
of the arguments in the report. Material included here is gener-
ally too detailed for inclusion in the main report but should be
available for examination by readers to show them the material
or instruments you have used – e.g. questionnaires and inter-
view schedules.
References
This should be an alphabetical list of all of the authors cited or
referred to in the text. It should not be confused with a bibli-
ography, which is a list of everything that you have read dur-
ing the research. The Harvard System is the most widely used.
Within this system the ideas of the author are referred to in sum-
mary or by direct quotation. Then, in the back of the report, the
authors or organisation are listed in alphabetical order. The next
section deals with this in more detail.
Fallacies (mistakes) to avoid when writing
Fallacies are argumentative mistakes you can make while you are writing
your research down. These are very common to a lot of research work and
take place across the spectrum of publication modes, whether academic
articles or (social) media posts. Below are some examples of commonly
encountered fallacies, showing the scope and breadth of material cur-
rently in existence.
MISTAKES TO AVOID WHEN WRITING
Begging the question: When someone restates a claim via a dif-

ferent phrase, that is called circular.
Scare tactics: When there is the aim to frighten people into
agreeing with the arguer by threatening them or predicting
unrealistically dire consequences.
Correlation/causation fallacy: Claiming two events that occur

together have an automatic cause-and-effect relationship.
(Correlation is equal to the cause.)
Cherry-picking: Using evidence that supports your idea while
ignoring contradicting evidence.
Hasty generalisation: Drawing a general conclusion from a
tiny sample.
Category mistake: Things of one kind are presented as if they
belonged to another.
Appeal to anonymous authority: Using evidence from an
anonymous ‘expert’, ‘study’ or generalised group (like ‘scien-
tists’) to claim something is true.
Appeal to common practice: Claiming something is true
because it’s commonly practiced – everybody does it.
Relativist fallacy: Rejecting a claim because of a belief that
truth is relative to a person or group. Using subjectivity as an
argument to reject research instead of counter-research.
(McCandless, 2022; Krobová and Zàpotocký, 2022)
A good exercise is to look at other publications and see whether

you are able to identify which rhetorical fallacies are made. Gaining more
experience in recognising them not only helps your own writing process,
but it also helps in better evaluating the validity and argumentation of
what is published elsewhere.
Thinking about your audience when writing
The target audience for a research project will differ according to the topic.
There are also no specific rules or guidelines that are applicable to all sec-
tors or situations when it comes to writing up your research (Denscombe,
2017). This means that whatever you write or produce, you need to adapt
it to the appropriate circumstances and needs for the end-user/reader.
Think about who or what the research is for and what you are trying to
achieve by reporting it.
Also, think about what is already familiar and what they need to know.
As a writer you must find out what types of readers will be receiving your
output and what they will be using it for (Bryman, 2016). For example,
you might need to consider whether they are an academic, civil servant,
charity or CEO.
It is important to put yourself in the position of your audience. This can
give you additional insights towards what style is preferred and whether
the audience is likely to understand and read everything (Robson, 2017).
Try to identify whether your audience is relevant when it comes to adding
many quotations or whether they are only reading the main conclusions
(Dawson, 2019). You might have to produce more than one report in
order to cater for different groups. For example, one for the client and one
for the more general reader. For some types of readers, you might have
to use plain and clear language whilst for others you will have to convince
them of your knowledge on the subject. In the case of the latter, also make
sure you understand all the specialised terminology.
You will also need to consider how your written output will be used,
for instance, as a reference to make recommendations, to provide an
overview of a subject or issue, to provide data for further use, to describe
or to be critical or to demonstrate the development and delivery of a
new product or service. The type of project and the target audience will
determine the format and content of the report. For example, within
industry, workplace reports may be short and less detailed, whereas
academic reports are often complex and lengthy.
Presenting your work to others
The best way to improve and develop your writing is to be willing to accept
criticism, either formally or informally. For obvious reasons people feel
uneasy with this but the best thing to do is to see it as a positive opportu-
nity to learn. Particularly for a large-scale project, it is important to sched-
ule for feedback in your workplan at key stages, say after each chapter or
each milestone of product development. Without the discipline from this
activity, the writing can drift on for longer than necessary.
In an academic or industrial context you would arrange to meet
with your supervisor or manager. You could present a working paper
at a seminar, conference, workshop, or even a focus group. This can
provide additional moments for feedback and lead to new insights and
implementations that will improve your research (Patton, 2017).
If the work is commissioned by another organisation, it can vary as

to whether they want you to give feedback on the progress of the work
at intervals, say via an interim report or upon completion of the project.
This can often be the case during multi-annual studies or projects that
require multiple rounds of investment for materials. If the latter is the case,
it would be advisable for you to arrange to meet with the client when you
have some form of draft so that you can be sure that their requirements
are being met. This could save time at the end and avoid the problem of
the report being thrown back at the end for major changes. Whatever the
research context, make sure that you meet with your supervisor, manager,
or client before the final draft stage to ensure that you have fulfilled the
requirements and addressed any problem areas.
Once you have received feedback, you must consider whether your
report needs to be adjusted at all. Also, it is worth evaluating the criticisms
and ensure that they were made for all the right reasons. Because there
is a tendency to become immersed in your writing it is important to take
a break from your writing for a day or two in order to be able to edit and
evaluate your work effectively. Working through the revision checklist can
be helpful if you are experiencing problems finishing off. Remember that
it is normal to have multiple drafts as you go through the writing process
and that a good tip is to make a separate folder to keep the previous
drafts in for later reflection as they can still be very useful (Bell and Waters,
2018). One common reason for delaying this is that you don’t think that
your work is good enough. Once you are satisfied that all of these points
have been met, then proof-read the final draft. It is useful to do this by
reading out loud. Finally, work through a revision/editing checklist, such
as the one below, it will help to reveal any outstanding editorial or content
issues in your reporting.
REVISION/EDITING CHECKLIST
● Check for accuracy in spelling, referencing, quotations,

grammar, and punctuation.
● Check that your arguments are clear with logic and flow and
that any headings and sub-headings are used appropriately.
● Test for readability – this will be affected by the sentence and
paragraph length and links between sections and chapters.
● Make sure that the layout, presentation, and referencing

style meets with the appropriate conventions.
● In the literature review assess whether an adequate num-
ber and type of sources have been included – for example,
between academic and practitioner. Also ensure there is a
balance in articles from books, journals and other sources.
● Have the methods and analysis techniques been adequately
justified?
● Also, are the data reliable and appropriately sourced?
● Ensure that the findings are clearly presented, and that
the discussion is analytical and critical and not just a mere
description.
● Also ask yourself: Have the original objectives been achieved?
If applicable, have hypotheses been proved or not?
● Make sure that your conclusions are clearly based on evi-
dence from your findings.
● Ensure the layout and style are consistent throughout your
report.
(Jagaiah, Howard and Olinghouse, 2019;
Bell and Waters, 2018)
A note on ethics when writing up
Throughout your research ethics will always play an important part; you
therefore have to be aware of the ethical standards in your field. As you
have gathered data throughout your research, making sure it is valid is one
aspect, making sure that it is aggregated and non-traceable is another.
Having taken the right steps to ensure data remains anonymous and con-
fidential when writing up your research is essential. This can be easier for
large data sets, but when it comes to small-scale research, it can be more
difficult (Rice and Atkin, 2013).
You can provide a detailed discussion on how you implemented
ethics within your research, topics you can address might include:
ethical board approvals, informed consent (explaining benefits and
risks), the voluntary nature of participation, confidentiality, the right for
participants to ask questions, relational ethics, and the dissemination
of the results. Finally, admit your limitations, address potential bias, and
avoid exploitation (Leavy, 2017).
Transparency through democratising the knowledge-building process
allows your participants or audience to understand and to critically analyse
its implications and format. One way of achieving this is, for instance, by
sharing the findings and making them as understandable as possible.
Using different formats and modes for your research can help establish
this (Leavy, 2017). Think about how you might have used participants to
test a new product you are developing, or to explain the clinical trials on
which your results are based.
Submitting your research report to others
Before you submit your work, you need to check that you have met the
appropriate presentation requirements, such as margin sizes, line spac-
ing, paper size, number of copies, and whether or not it needs to be
bound.
In the academic setting it is likely that you will be assessed internally
by the relevant tutors or committee. In industry or the public sector, senior
management or the board who requested the work may assess you. Within
society, as a charity, your stakeholders and end-users will be relevant
for the assessment. Regardless of the sector, you may be requested to
do a presentation, product demonstration, public engagement, or oral
examination.
There is no such thing as a standard demonstration or presentation.
For either it is important to prepare and ‘perhaps the best mental
preparation of all is for the researcher to be in a position to exploit the
strengths of their writing and to pre-empt criticism of its weaknesses’
(Sharp, Peters and Howard, 2002, p. 223).
You need to demonstrate a clear grasp of the research context, what
your research has contributed to the problem, and any limitations.
Styling your report
Style relates to the way you write in connection to factors such as detail,
complexity, language, terminology, and references, and is a key ingredient
to ensuring the quality of a report. Whatever the written output required,
you should aim for clarity in order to avoid confusion and ambiguity for
the reader. Therefore, you should pay particular attention to the length of
sentences and paragraphs and vocabulary. In addition, use language that
makes the report interesting to read.
Try to mix and match the length of sentences because this makes for
a more interesting read. Be careful not to put in sentences that are too long
because they may be less easy to understand and could make it hard work
for the reader. Break up lengthy pages of text with headings and bullet
points; however, be aware that certain conventions might not accept this.
Short and simple words are better unless the conventions or the
field you are working in particularly require these. Consider the tone of
your writing, depending on your audience; you need to take care not to
be patronising. At the same time, you have to be cautious in assuming
certain things are self-evident. This is particularly important in the use of
terminology or jargon. Take extra notice of your punctuation and do not
use more than necessary in order to make a point. When developing
an argument that is complex, break it up into separate parts and create
linkages to make it easier for the reader to follow.
Another important factor to consider is whether to write using a
passive or active voice. A passive voice could be used to de-personalise
the research – which would be useful if confidential data were consulted.
An example of a passive voice would be ‘The conclusion that some
managers receive more than others was indicated by information relating
to salary levels’. In contrast to the passive voice, the active voice provides
more information and can aid clarity. Whatever style you use the important
thing is to be consistent. An example of an active voice would be ‘Salary
information indicates that some managers receive more than others’.
Finally, it is generally accepted that research reports should be written
in a non-biased way – that is, in such a way that does not discriminate or
exclude particular groups of people on the basis of what may be fairly
arbitrary characteristics such as sex, race, religion, physical and mental
abilities, or sexual orientation.
Social media and publication
Using (social) media as a mode for publication or drawing attention to

your research is an important tool that can be utilised very effectively. It can
allow for open access to publications, fundraising opportunities, end-user
education, and product promotion. It can even lead to an increase in

academic productivity (Bean, 2016). This does not mean that there is a
causality, but it indicates the importance and trends that demonstrate the
power of (social) media (Bouvier, 2022).
The reason behind using this online presence as an organisation
is usually to attract public attention and this works across the different
sectors as it can be either altruistic, as a public service, to build a reputation,
for education or more commercial in nature in order to promote new
innovative products and influence the market. Despite the limitations in
terms of words, you can use (social) media as a channel to draw attention
to the wider research project. You can therefore view (social) media
more as a part of a broader strategy related to your publication and
dissemination than as a solely purposed one. It may be that this forms a
part of the overall plan related to your research, rather than the complete
plan you wish to use to generate impact or create awareness (Rice and
Atkin, 2013). The next chapter will continue on how you can use social
media for knowledge dissemination.
Storytelling
Another way of publishing work is though storytelling (as discussed in rela-

tion to narrative analysis in Chapter 4). It can be seen as an effective way of
exchanging information and knowledge. It is used as a technique to present
relationships in a dynamic manner through interaction (Tong et al., 2018).
When explaining ideas, storytelling can be very useful as it creates very
little distance between the intended meaning and the perceived meaning.
You will have to be precise and make sure that these ideas are supported
by the proper argumentation following your research. The idea is to take
your audience on a journey where you want to relate your own experience
to them and to create an emotional connection (Lambert, 2018). Bear in
mind, however, that despite the assumption that the meaning you are try-
ing to get across is evident, this can still lead to misinterpretation.
Visualising your data
How you then visualise some results also heavily influences how your
audience is going to interpret your report. When it comes to visual
representations of data, there is a difference between being able to read

complex graphs and tables vs. heatmaps and word clouds (Schwabish,
2021).
Technological developments have allowed us to gather more data,
and have then created the need to make this data explainable. It is
important to not try and collect large data sets just with the intention to
find evidence; it should be viewed as a supportive tool rather than an
answer in itself (Bell and Waters, 2018). Visualisation of this data then
allows us to turn something that can be quite complex into something that
can be used for evidence-based decision-making and data-driven policy.
It is a skill that is becoming more important and an effective visualisation
can mean the difference between a success and a failure when it comes
to communicating the results of your research, whether this is for an
academic study, raising money for your charity, presenting to your board,
or engaging with society (Knaflic, 2015).
Research can be made more understandable through the use of
new visualisation tools and narrative agents such as artificial intelligence.
It will allow you to demonstrate simulations and digital twins that
would have otherwise been impossible to explain (Cohen, Manion, and
Morrison, 2017). Simulations ensure a high reliability with the added
benefit that they avoid failures or system breakdown in a societal
system. These new methods allow for a new narrative and can help put
actions into context where you can experiment with intense scenarios
(Spierling, 2002).
There are many tools available that can help with the visualisation
process, and these can be used by novices as much as by more advanced
researchers. The important aspect is to not let your tools be a limiting
factor in what you can do within your research, but to focus on picking
a tool that will help you to communicate effectively with data you have
collected. Do not be discouraged when it takes multiple attempts to create
the visualisation, but continue playing with the tools and searching online
for solutions (Knaflic, 2015).
Tone and voice
You should know how to pitch the tone of what you are writing. For exam-
ple, a news article for society will be lighter in tone than a purely academic
one. Additionally, do not use more words than necessary in order to prove
a point. Instead, make the article interesting by using lively vocabulary. Be

innovative with your title and make it eye-catching.
A lot of people only read the introduction and conclusion, so make
sure that these are well written and give a good overview, especially if
you are severely limited in terms of wordcount or time. Finally, don’t be
intimidated or put off by the prospect of publishing. As long as you remain
transparent and admit your limitations you are able to demonstrate results
in an as open format as possible.
Remember, writing down your research takes different forms and
depends on what the purpose of your research was and which sector
you might represent. It is important to start writing down as soon as you
can. This will make the process more flowing and shows the role tone and
voice will play.
Summary
In this chapter we have demonstrated that you need to allocate plenty

of time in your workplan for writing and that you should start as soon
as possible. You need to consider how your written output will be used
because the type of project and the target audience will determine the for-
mat and content of the publication. The best way to improve and develop
your writing is to be willing to accept criticism, either formally or informally.
Once you have received feedback, consider whether your report needs to
be adjusted. Working through the revision checklist can be helpful if you
are experiencing problems.
You should be aware of the ethical standards in your field and make
sure the data you have gathered is valid and anonymised. You need to
demonstrate a clear grasp of the research context, what your research
has contributed to, as well as the problem and any limitations. Whatever
the written output required, you should aim for clarity in order to avoid
confusion and ambiguity on the part of the reader.
Using (social) media as a mode for publication or drawing attention
to your research is an important tool that can be utilised very effectively.
Despite the limitation of words, view (social) media as a part of a broader

strategy related to your publication and dissemination. Both storytelling
and the visualisation of data allow us to turn something that can be quite
complex into something understandable. These new methods allow for a
new narrative and can help put actions into context.
Finally, know how to pitch the tone of what you are writing. Make
the content interesting by using lively vocabulary, remain transparent, and
admit your limitations.
References
Bean, J. (2016) ‘Academic output and social media: A marriage of oppo-
sites’, World Neurosurgery, 90, pp. 651–653.
Bell, J. and Waters, S. (2018) Doing your research project: A guide for first-
time researchers. 7th edn. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Blaxter, L., Hughes, C. and Tight, M. (2010) How to research. 4th edn.
Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill/Open University Press.
Bouvier, G. (2022) Qualitative research using social media/Gwen Bouvier
and Joel Rasmussen. 1st edn. London: Routledge.
Bryman, A. (2016) Social research methods. 5th edn. Oxford, New York:
Oxford University Press.
cation. 8th edn. London, England : Routledge.
Dawson, C. (2019) Introduction to research methods: A practical guide for
anyone undertaking a research project. 5th edn. London: Robinson.
University Press.
Jagaiah, T., Howard, D. and Olinghouse, N. (2019) ‘Writer’s checklist: A
procedural support for struggling writers’, The Reading Teacher, 73(1),
pp. 103–110.
Knaflic, C. N. (2015) Storytelling with data: The effective visual communi-
cation of information. 1st edn. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Krobová, T. and Zàpotocký, J. (2022) ‘“I Am Not Racist, But …”: Rhetorical
Fallacies in arguments about the Refugee crisis on Czech Facebook’,
Journal of Intercultural Communication, 21(2), pp. 58–69.
Lambert, J. (2018) Digital storytelling: Capturing lives, creating commu-
nity/Joe Lambert, Brooke Hessler. 2nd edn. London: Routledge.
Leavy, P. (2017) Research design: Quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods,

arts-based, and community-based participatory research approaches.
New York: The Guilford Press.
McCandless, D. (2022) Rhetological Fallacies. Available at: https://
www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/rhetological-fallacies/
O’Leary, Z. (2014) The essential guide to doing your research project. 2nd
edn. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
Orna, E. and Stevens, G. (2009) Managing information for research:
Practical help in researching, writing and designing dissertations. 2nd
edn. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Patton, M. Q. (2017) Facilitating evaluation: Principles in practice. 1st edn.
Rice, R. E. and Atkin, C. K. (2013) Public communication campaigns. 4th
edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Robson, C. (2017) Small-scale evaluation: Principles and practice/Colin
Robson. 2nd edn. London: SAGE.
Schwabish, J. A. (2021) Better data visualizations: A guide for scholars,
researchers, and wonks. New York: Columbia University Press.
Sharp, J. A., Peters, J. and Howard, K. (2002) The management of a stu-
dent research project. 3rd edn. Aldershot, Hants, England; Burlington,
VT: Gower.
Spierling, U. (2002) ‘Digital storytelling’, Computers and Graphics
(Pergamon), 26(1), pp. 1–2.
Tong, C., Roberts, R., Borgo, R., Walton, S., Laramee, R. S., Wegba, K., Lu,
A., Wang, Y., Qu, H., Luo, Q. and Ma, X. (2018) ‘Storytelling and visuali-
zation: An extended survey’, Information (Switzerland), 9(3), pp. 1–42.
RESEARCH IMPACT
Dennis Dokter 6

● What is impact?
● Examples of impact.
● Different interpretations of impact.
● Co-production as impact.
● Assessing impact.
● Limitations of assessing impact.
● Dissemination.
● Contextualising research impact (by using Merton’s norms).
Research impact has multiple ways of manifesting itself depending on the

desired outcome. In this chapter we will focus on the different forms of
research impact and how these can be measured. It will look at how this
relates to the dissemination of research. Furthermore, it will explain how
you can evaluate and reflect on your own research as well as how you can
use Merton’s norms in order to critically challenge research in general.
Academia
It will teach you how impact can help to expand the state-of-the-
art knowledge within your academic field, help you develop new
teaching material, and publish new insights.
DOI: 10.4324/9781003180159-6
140 Research impact
Industry
It demonstrates how impact generates new ways of engaging
with your product users, developing and creating new innovative
products and achieving a better understanding of the market.
Public sector
Impact can help this sector create new policy for their govern-
mental organisation, generate new solutions for societal chal-
lenges and become more data-driven in their decision-making
processes.
Society
Impact teaches us to recognise how knowledge, services, policy,
and products affect us personally. It allows us to think more crit-
ically about parliamentary decisions, publications, news articles,
and products.
What is impact?
When looking at impact, it is important to realise that this is very much

related to how different knowledge is valued, incentivised, and rewarded
(Williams, 2020). Individuals, research organisations, governmental organ-
isations, and companies each have their own idea on what impact might
mean in relation to their specific context. This makes it even more impor-
tant to look at how research impact is measured and how this relates to
different stakeholders and end-users.
IMPACT DEFINED
An effect on, change or benefit to the economy, society, culture,

public policy or services, health, the environment or quality of
life, beyond academia.
(Alla et al., 2017)
Research impact 141
The wider impact of research is becoming increasingly relevant as

universities have to make it more of a key component to their societal
and economic role (beyond academia). This is partially related to their
own realisation of how their role within society is developing as well as
to the need for funded research, which has been paid for by taxpayers,
to be accountable for its spending. This has led to a wider view of impact
as well as a different funding process. When you are doing research, it
is important to consider your relationship towards the other sectors, not
only when designing your research framework but also when looking at
the impact you are aiming to create.
It is becoming increasingly important to demonstrate the impact your
research will have as it is closely related to the amount of public funding
and support you can receive (Bornmann, 2012).
The development of impact
Historically, scientific impact from an academic’s point of view would be

derived via bibliometric methods (i.e., the number of publications and
citations generated from those publications produces an ‘impact factor’).
These types of metrics focus on how you generate new knowledge within
the academic field and how you therefore influence that sector (Williams,
2020). Other quantitative metrics supporting this would then be, for
instance, research income and the amount of research projects executed
and published within each year. Although bibliometrics are not the ideal
way of measuring the complete breadth of what impact would mean, they
do play a substantive role as a metric within academia and are influential
within science (Petersohn and Heinze, 2017).
Examples of impact
When you are thinking of what impact your research will generate, think
about which sector you work in and which sectors your research is rel-
evant to (either academic, industry, public sector, or society). Very often
the generation of new academic knowledge falls under academic impact,
but you should also consider the other forms of impact and effect your
research work might have.
142 Research impact
As mentioned, the conception of impact has changed: following

the introduction of the Research Excellence Framework (REF), societal/
industrial and governmental impact have been added as additional
relevant factors. An analysis of the 2014 impact case studies produced
by one of the UK’s leading universities further amplifies how the other
sectors are represented within research impact: the top three categories
were; Commercialisation (industry), Parliamentary Scrutiny (Society), and
Influencing Government Policy (Public Sector) (Hinrichs-Krapels, Grant
and Gill, 2015).
Academia
From an academic point of view, impact can demonstrate new knowledge

gaps and teaching methods that can be explored. It can provide you with
new insights in how to teach your own classes as well as educate you with
new knowledge within your field by reading papers and publications. As
an academic, when you are designing a research proposal, it can be to
fill those established knowledge gaps that have been identified by other
research projects. Or it can be that a company comes to you with a prob-
lem for the development of new innovative solutions for their product
development and that you are able to bring in your expertise.
Industry
When examining the industrial sector, impact can have an effect when you
want to know about the cutting-edge developments within your sector.
By comparing the market and looking at publications and new products,
this can give ideas for your own organisation. New market research can
also provide you with the tools for engaging with your own market audi-
ence, allowing you to adapt your strategy in order to remain competitive.
Similarly, as a company, you might wish to create a new innovative
product in order to disrupt the current market and generate new income.
In this instance you would design a research product to identify what
steps you need to take in order to generate that impact. This might mean
engaging with other sectors in order to get more insights on the available
skills, current legislation, and current societal needs. An internal research
Research impact 143
project might be to analyse the current organisational structure and

exploring how this might be improved.
Public sector
As a public sector organisation, impact of research can demonstrate

effects of policy interventions or demonstrate new toolkits in order to
improve your services and increase efficiency. It can also demonstrate the
need to change legislation and provide new transparency on the current
state of your sector and expose certain societal challenges.
The purpose of conducting research within a public sector organisation
can be related to a desire to innovate within your organisation, as well as to
commit to policy goals. You might want to visualise the status of sustainability
within your local council, for example, or see how you might improve
healthcare outcomes. You might also wish to develop tenders and funding
grants. Knowing what impact might be generated gives you tools in order
to develop these opportunities in such a way that they do meet your needs.
Society
We are all influenced by the impact of research both directly as well as

indirectly. Directly, it can be because of research impact caused by new
products that you are using, or the effects a new policy implementation
might have on your way of living. Indirectly, you can be influenced by
news articles, social media posts, and other sources that are based on
the research impact from the other sectors. Knowing the context on how
policy, products, or media articles are designed will give you the tools to
critically evaluate and compare them for yourself.
Generating impact from a societal point of view can be very individual,
for instance, when you are researching which, new product might be the
best for your household as well as when you want to buy someone a
gift or apply for a permit. You will want to review which products are the
best or what documents are necessary in order to generate the desired
impact. Similarly, when you are critical of certain articles, you might
want to research where these insights came from. However, on a larger
scale, certain foundations, charities, or representational organisations
144 Research impact
might want to commission research themselves or via bids. This can be

to improve living situations, to represent patients, or to help your sports
or other pastime club get the necessary funding or meet the obligated
criteria for a new location or equipment.
Figure 6.1 shows some examples of how you might establish impact
within the four sectors of academia, industry, public sector, and society.
They are useful starting points to help you to think about how you might
wish to create an impact before you start your research or project. Similarly,
working in one of the other sectors, these examples can demonstrate
how you can create an impact within your own sector and how you might
engage with a university, company, public sector organisation, or society
in order to amplify the desired effects.
Sector Impact Examples

Academia - New ways of Teaching and new content.
- Bibliographic metrics.
- Knowledge creation and contextualisation.
Industry - Market adoption.
- New products/services developed.
- Improved business model.
Public Sector - Adopted policy implementations.
- Integrated toolkits.
- Evidence Based decision making/increased transparency.
Society - Different user behaviour (for instance; more use of public
transport, improved health outcomes).
- Monitoring different behaviour of social media and
review/comment platforms.
- Media exposure.
Figure 6.1 Exploring impact and examples
Sharing impact (and research) findings with others
Heidi Fisher, a social entrepreneur and expert in examining effect and

impact, has identified a number of ways to share impact findings with oth-
ers. These are valuable considerations for anyone assessing the impact of
research-driven work:
● Be really clear who you are sharing your impact findings with – and
what they will be interested in knowing.
● Decide what format is best for the audience you are targeting (report,
audio, video, interactive graphics, infographics etc.).
Research impact 145
● Be honest and transparent – share details of how you have measured

your impact, areas where you have not measured anything, and how
confident you are that the impact that has been achieved results from
your activities.
● Do not be afraid to share your negative or unintended outcomes.
Include what you are going to do to minimise these going forward.
(Fisher, 2021, p. 161)
Different interpretations of impact
There are different interpretations on impact (e.g. commercial applica-

tions, policy interventions, and cultural engagement). All of these vary and
relate to different disciplines, institutions, sectors, or markets. The broader
you design your research scope, the wider (potentially) will be your range
and variety of impacts (Terama et al., 2016).
Funded research implies a connection towards impact. This means
that researchers will have to contribute, in one way or another, to one of
the four sectors we have identified (academic, industrial, public sector, or
society). It has changed the way research has been done in the past by
broadening the field and increasing the influence of other sectors on its
actual effects (Papatsiba and Cohen, 2020).
An effective way of making sure you are addressing the impact across
the different sectors of academia, industry, public sector, and society is
via co-production. This means that you collaborate between academic
and non-academic partners to, on the one hand, fill the knowledge gap or
generate new knowledge as well as generate impact in the other sectors,
depending on your partners and user involvement. And, as mentioned
earlier, this does not deteriorate the quality of your research, but helps fill
and address the wider demands of impact (Durose).
Co-production as impact
Via co-production, you can, for instance, also affect what is taught. It
shows that engaging with external actors and collaborating with them to
identify knowledge gaps allows academics to generate new knowledge,
146 Research impact
papers, and teaching materials while simultaneously also helping an

industrial partner develop a necessary innovation to solve their needs.
CO-PRODUCTION IN RESEARCH
Research benefits of including people from outside the research

community in a process of shared learning. This may be described
in a variety of ways: co-production, collaboration, or participant
and public involvement. It includes working with a range of peo-
ple involved in project or research work, such as: participants
in a project, patients, carers, and service users, as well as peo-
ple from the wider society, like public policy-makers, community
groups, third sector organisations, and businesses. The involve-
ment of individuals with a stake in the project who are not
researchers can enhance the quality and help it to bring about
positive change for society and the economy. Co-production can
take place throughout the project. It may encompass identify-
ing research questions, design and priority setting, governance,
the co-delivery of research activities, the communication of key
findings and involvement in knowledge exchange.
(UKRI, 2022)
Collaboration across the different sectors promotes value-based

rationality and practices (Darby, 2017). It takes the conversation and
research in a direction that is not only academically achievable but also
relevant and desirable across the other sectors. Creating impact statements
prior to the beginning of your research will help shape what you do,
providing a more relevant mapping of how it will impact beyond the
academic environment. One way of contributing towards the direction that
your impact might generate is by leaving space for reflection within your
publications, presentations, and other research projects. It also allows for
the other sectors to critically reflect on research and support them in how
it might be relevant for them towards their own research and innovation
agenda. It is therefore important to remain transparent and develop new
approaches within your work that leave opportunities for new approaches
for co-produced impact (Wynne-Jones, North, and Routledge, 2015).
Research impact 147
Example of co-production across the sectors
Each of our four sectors, academia, industry, the public sector and soci-
ety, may view a research issue or topic from a particular viewpoint. As a
researcher, you might notice that there is a knowledge gap when it comes
to the different effects on patients who are required to wait for emergency
care at the hospital versus waiting at home. From a public sector point of
view, you might wish to create a new policy and implement new solutions
in order to improve waiting times at hospitals, thereby improving patient
care and experience while reducing costs. A commercial organisation
might be working on developing a new application for the healthcare sec-
tor where they might want to focus on benefit of digital triaging and plan-
ning as a way of selling their product, while improving existing services
and reducing other costs. From a societal perspective, you might notice
an increase in frustration when it comes to waiting times or by having to
physically wait within the hospital building.
Academia Industry
Researcher observes gap in waiting Digital patient appointment system
times for healthcare appointments. offers business opportunity.
Public sector Society

Development of new policy in terms if Service users become frustrated by
patient care may reduce waiting times. extended waiting times.
Figure 6.2 A co-produced view of a research topic in health
Examining the scenario above, you can observe an overlap between

all the different sectors, by identifying the communalities and then using
co-production as a collaborative approach to finding a solution. The
important part is that there exists an awareness of how necessary it is for
the sectors to work together, and to create and broker these opportunities.
For instance, the public sector can create an opportunity by writing
out a national funding bid with the purpose of solving waiting times
and experiences within hospitals, together with organising sessions
where interested parties can meet and discuss a potential proposal. The
academic realises that this matches their desire to fix the knowledge gap
and starts writing a high-level overview of what the bid might look like
from an academic point of view (including potential papers they might
148 Research impact
be able to publish); they will also start looking for partners at the session.
Similarly, the company sees this bid as an opportunity to further develop
and implement their new product and will also join this session. When
the two organisations meet, they might decide to collaborate, but they
may also realise that in order for their ideas to actually have an impact
and be successful, they will need to engage with end-users and patient
representatives (society), hospitals, and legislation surrounding the
implementation of new technology (public sector) in order to create the
desired impact.
This is just a brief example of one possibility that can foster
co-production for the purposes of impact. The important takeaway would
be to realise that engagement and collaboration with other sectors can
amplify and speed up your own interests as much as it does those of
the collective. Finding these partners might not always be as simple, but
realising that these are valuable already makes you take the first step in
terms of engagement.
Assessing impact
As identified earlier, scientific research is essential in generating knowl-

edge to better help us understand and contextualise contemporary social,
economic, and political issues. Being able to measure and assess impact
is an important step into providing insights to how research and innova-
tion has led to desired, or even unintended, impact.
Research impact has traditionally been assessed by using metrics,
such as human, physical, and financial capital (Williams, 2020). Cross-
sector impact has been assessed by using a range of techniques and
methods that look at the creation of intellectual property, statistical
differences, commercial income, case studies, and economic measures
(Penfield et al., 2013). However, as we have seen with the REF, there
have been growing policy imperatives that have caused a shift. Australia
started this trend in 2005 the Australian Research Quality Framework
(which used predominantly case studies as an impact demonstrator),
the Netherlands introduced the wider interpretation of impact within
its standard evaluation protocol in 2003 and in the UK, it was the 2005
Memorandum from Research Councils, which led to the REF (which also
uses case studies). Each assessment panels within the REF has different
Research impact 149
definitions within their guidelines depending on the impacts that are

being assessed (society, culture economic, policy, production etc.). The
impacts presented in the REF should still be seen as a proxy of looking at
impact and that there are multiple approaches. Again, the measurement
of impact can be different for each actor in the different sectors.
There are three substantive approaches to assessing impact that
have been developed for academia, but have purpose and utility for other
sectors:
1. Forward tracking: start looking at the research and trace it forward

to policy and practice settings (new products, behavioural change,
legislation)
2. Backward tracking: in contrast to forward tracking, you look at pol-
icy implementations, knowledge exchange activities, or new services
and products and try to retrace this back to research
3. Evaluation of mechanisms to increase research use: these focus
purely on the knowledge exchange activities themselves and there-
fore demonstrate immediate uptake; however, it causes challenges
for a longer period of time.
(Morton, 2015)
When using any of the above examples to assess research or academic

impact, it is important that you take into account the societal, industrial, and
public sector effects and impacts. This helps to create a more fully-rounded
and inclusive view of impact. Widening your approach also provides bet-
ter qualitative and quantitative data that potential funding agencies use
to make decisions, or that actors within the other sectors will use to find
engagement with and allows them to innovate themselves. Measuring the
effect or impact of research is complex, non-linear and unpredictable.
This causes us to more quickly count what can be more easily measured
and not what counts in terms of significance (Milat, Bauman and Redman,
2015). Keep that in mind when evaluating impact assessment.
Limitations of assessing impact
Generating impact and assessing how this can be achieved is very

important in understanding how research places a role within academia,
industry, public sector, and society. However, it is important to realise
150 Research impact
that there are, of course, problems and limitations to predicting accu-

rately whether the impacts you expect are actually achieved. These can
be summarised as:
Causality: it is very difficult to make clear which impacts relates to which

causes.
Attribution: as impact is very complex, it can be hard to identify what other
inputs might have attributed to the impact besides your work.
Internationality: research and innovation has an international nature, this
means that multiple effects take place globally simultaneously, influenc-
ing and diluting your work as well.
Timescale: the initial measurement of impact happens on its short-term
effects, it is difficult to assess its more longer-term implications.
(Martin, 2007)
Do not be discouraged by these problems; rather, you should view them

as guidelines and limitations that should be addressed within your work.
These acknowledgements can then help provide transparency to your
research whilst allowing for new opportunities to arise, additional knowl-
edge gaps to be identified and other products to be developed, by either
yourself or others, in a follow-up project.
Dissemination
To understand how knowledge can be spread in order to both monitor

as well as assess impact, we have to understand knowledge dissemi-
nation. For a long time, researchers have been aware of how important
knowledge dissemination is. Whilst most communication of research
effect or impact has been through publications and academic articles,
we are now seeing other communication tools and technologies being
used to disseminate research work. This offers a greater opportunity to
share the outputs of research work with much wider audiences. Newer
approaches to dissemination, such as those offered by socially driven
media, allow sectors that are not academic (industry, public policy, soci-
ety) to share knowledge and consume knowledge produced by others
(Schnitzler et al., 2016).
Research impact 151
KNOWLEDGE DISSEMINATION
Knowledge dissemination involves distributing knowledge to

those who may need it.
(Kingston, 2012)
Typically, when sectors outside of academia wish to share knowledge

on new policies, products, or services, they cannot always enter the world
of academic publications. This forms part of an issue known as information
asymmetry, where information is distributed unequally amongst your
targeted audience, meaning that not everyone would be aware of the
possible implications. However, open, transparent, and public disclosure
of information leads to a reduction in asymmetry (Blankespoor, Miller and
White, 2013).
A wide variety of knowledge dissemination tools and techniques are
available for researchers. Knowing who your target audience is will make it
easier to look at what approach of dissemination will be most effective for
that sector, both internally and externally (Kingston, 2012).
DISSEMINATION TOOLS AND DEVICES
In addition to traditional reporting, there are a number of output

options for your research work. These include:
● Videos.
● Podcasts.
● Case studies.
● Infographics.
● Interactive images and virtual tours.
● Podcasts.
● Photo gallery/wall or graffiti wall.
● Stakeholder events.
(Fisher, 2021, p. 164)
152 Research impact
A dissemination identifier
In order to communicate research work, we can utilise a four-way clas-

sification of systems that can support in identifying and disseminating
the exchange of knowledge. Within this identifier, there are two dimen-
sions; the first dimension makes a distinction between ‘collect’ and ‘con-
nect’. ‘Collect’ is knowledge that is recorded or written in a repository
and ‘Connect’ is where knowledge is communicated directly between
individuals. The second dimension makes a distinction between ‘formal’
and ‘informal’. ‘Formal’ indicates that there is a defined framework or set
of rules that you are operating in (structured), whereas ‘Informal’ is more
unmanaged and ‘bottom-up’ (conversational) (Milton, 2010). Based on
these, Figure 6.3 gives examples of dissemination you might be able to
use as a way of knowledge distribution for your own research work.
Connect
- Social networking. - Virtual Teams.
- Community engagement. - Conference presentations.
- Patient participation. - Formal networking events.
- Drop-in sessions. - Teaching.
Informal Formal
- Wikis. - News articles.
- Blogs. - Academic publications.
- Online reviews. - Online presentations.
- Social media posts. - Case studies.
- Opinion pieces. - White papers.
Collect
Figure 6.3 Dissemination identifier. Adapted from (Milton, 2010)
Limitations to dissemination
When it comes to the dissemination via online sources, there are some
specific limitations and risks that must be considered when using (social)
Research impact 153
media. This includes biased perspectives, knowledge within echo cham-

bers and algorithm-driven filter bubbles that selectively display informa-
tion based on user preferences (Chan et al., 2020; Pariser, 2011). This
is often compounded when there is not sufficient source content to
allow others to see a difference between true and untrue information
(Johannsson and Selak, 2020). Given all of this, the following provides a
useful review mechanism for evaluating the use of (social) media to dis-
seminate research content.
TIPS FOR THE RESPONSIBLE USE OF SOCIAL

MEDIA WHEN DISSEMINATING RESEARCH
1. Preferential use of established professional forums, or com-

munication groups, to deliver information.
2. Clear identification of the information source – allows user
to judge the likely veracity and quality of information.
3. Declaration of conflicts of interest, when appropriate.
4. Identify methods to verify the source when appropriate or
necessary – website address if source not readily accessible
by simple search strategies, or institutional email address of
originator.
5. Transparent methods for peer review and feedback, and the
provision of author/institutional contact details so that crit-
icisms can be directed directly to originators.
6. Transparently acknowledge and document collaborations
with identified professional experts, and, when necessary,
adjust information to meet contextual needs.
(Adapted from: Chan et al., 2020)
Contextualising research impact

(by using Merton’s norms)
In the first chapter of this textbook, we introduced Merton’s norms. These

norms are seen as a way of how science should be performed within
the scientific community. However, as Mitroff has shown through his
study of the Apollo moon scientists, there are also counter-norms. These
154 Research impact
counter-norms should be interpreted as the norms that actually influ-

ence the field (Mitroff, 1974). The fact that they contradict the Mertonian
norms makes the counter-norms relevant when valuing how research
takes place; it puts the research in its context and helps us to assess its
impact.
Assessing how the norms or counter-norms are present in research
has a relationship to what is happening within the practical world and
places it in its societal, cultural, and historical context. By using these norms
and counter-norms, you are able to ask more critical questions when
assessing the validity of research but you are also able to describe the
situation in which the research was performed and are able to challenge
this in relation to its context. The following example can give an indication
of how the contextualisation of these norms and counter-norms are
present within research performed within a university setting. However,
the same sort of analysis can be applied to any sector that performs,
designs, or funds research – whether that be industrial research, public
policy research, or societal research.
COMMUNALITY (COMMON OWNERSHIP) VS

INDIVIDUALISM (RESTRICTIVE AND CLOSED)
Imagine a university research lab where they are trying to

develop a new method in order to find a more effective method
to treat a disease. In a university setting it then becomes clear
that sharing information about this research is important. One
of the examples is how videos on YouTube can serve as a way to
inform the general public on what they are researching and how
they were able to get certain results. The use of open-source
sharing and certain collaborations is to share published results
and to promote the advancement within their field. Conferences
are also visited in order to discuss and present unpublished
research. There is a high level of trust between the scientists
that discussed information at conferences is not ‘stolen’ for
one’s own research.
Sharing information with the public has commercialisation
implications, for when the public is interested certain research
Research impact 155
sponsors are more inclined to supply funding for their work.

The protection of the work researchers perform is also neces-
sary to make sure that they are the first to publish their results.
Commercial contracts allow more funding and access to tech-
nology, equipment, and information which otherwise would be
unavailable because of intellectual property laws.
As you can see, there can be a clear struggle between being

transparent as an organisation versus trying to protect your work or even
your researchers. This norm focusses on how, despite the best intentions,
it can be sometimes necessary to not share all information. However, it
will always remain important to have the opportunity to scrutinise, even if
that has to happen within a more formal setting.
UNIVERSALISM (EVERYONE CAN DO THIS) VS

PARTICULARISM (RESTRICTIVE – ONLY A FEW
CAN DO THIS)
A diverse and multicultural environment provides different view-

points on ideas which helps in constructing rich, new knowledge
from a research project. However, from the perspective of par-
ticularism, you need to be a member of an exclusive ‘club’. For
instance, when applying for a postdoc you must have a number
of first author publications, if you do not have these publications
the chances of getting hired are much lower. The attractiveness
of a country or organisation also plays a role for research appli-
cations. How many grants you received and publications you
have produced contribute to your chances of getting funding
for your new research. It is important to “sell” yourself as a
researcher. Focusing on who you know, what you’ve done, and
where you came from are decisive factors. The distribution of
funds within the university itself are related to this. Who is on
what awarding panel helps to improve funding, making it rele-
vant to how researchers develop themselves through the hier-
archy of a university.
156 Research impact
It becomes clearer that a diverse workspace is more effective than

a homogenous one. However, we need to keep in mind that a lot of
bias influences our decision-making processes for who we hire and
why. Being able to have a transparent and honest overview will help
provide insights towards the conditions that people are working in an
organisation.
DISINTERESTEDNESS (BEING OBJECTIVE AND

CONSIDERED) VS SELF-INTERESTEDNESS
(BEING SUBJECTIVE AND SELFISH)
As a researcher you have to ‘generate’ knowledge. When there

are more positions within a research department, for example,
they are able to apply for more funding and therefore generat-
ing more money. These positions are not created for the mere
interest in certain research but also for the intention of funding
the institution. When you find something which is not necessar-
ily in your field of research, it becomes difficult to continue this
research. A way of being able to continue would then be to inform
the relevant field which is connected to that research and hope
that they are willing to cooperate and clear funds. Being resource-
ful with how you use your funding helps create reserves that sup-
port scientific creativity, and this is also promoted by principal
investigators. The pressure to publish enough papers and to get a
positive outcome in order to get enough funding of your research
also influences the path your research has to follow.
The above illustrates the constant trade-off between purpose and

profit. Within each sector, the main goal is, of course, to do what your
institution was set up to do. The point of the matter remains though, that
in order to keep your organisation running, you do need to make sure you
retain or generate enough funds, be it by grant funding, sponsoring, or by
selling your products/services. On the other hand, it also provides that
drive to keep continuing to innovate.
Research impact 157
ORGANISED SCEPTICISM (CONSTANTLY CRITICAL

AND EVALUATIVE) VS ORGANISED DOGMATISM
(CLOSED THINKING AND UNCRITICAL)
Because of the lack of funds in the scientific world, it becomes

nearly impossible to replicate or reproduce certain experiments
and results. There is no commercial interest for the reproduc-
tion of results, so no one is willing to fund them through grants.
This causes researchers to take certain results for granted and
to use them in their research without replicating them. With
scientific research, something must be delivered. As shown
before, more playing room for different side-tracks of research
becomes possible because of certain grants and the way they
are spent. It allows radiotherapy to replicate certain results. It
is seen as important to be aware of this fact and to try rep-
licate and reproduce their own results as much as possible.
Competition restricts certain research to be done; everyone
wants to do research in basically the same direction. Your
research has to be economically feasible, which causes a lack
of freedom within your research to replicate and question other
results.
The last example shows the fragility between trying to be as safe and
valid as possible versus timeliness and lack of funds. Deadlines will always
play a part in making sure research and innovation is delivered efficiently,
making sure it is safe and true are then very important factors. By making
your processes as transparent as possible and referring to the limitations
and demarcations of the research yourself, you are able to demonstrate
due diligence and set an example.
Remember, when using these norms and counter-norms in order
to contextualise the quality of someone’s research, product, or policy,
do not use it as a ‘be all and end all’ of scientific validity, but use it as an
acknowledgement that research is indeed messy and non-linear and
therefore needs to be viewed from multiple perspectives.
158 Research impact
Summary
This chapter has identified that impact has an effect on academia, soci-
ety, public sectors, and industry and that the wider impact of research
is becoming increasingly relevant. Keep in mind of what impact your
research might generate in which sectors. The broader you design your
research scope, the wider the impact. By using co-production, you show
that by collaborating benefits for the sectors you are working with as well
as your own are created. Do keep in mind the limitations of attributing
impact. Being able to measure and assess impact is therefore an impor-
tant step into providing insights into how research and innovation led
to impact. Again, impact can be different for each actor in the different
sectors as research impact is complex, non-linear and unpredictable. The
distribution of knowledge and knowing who your target audience is will
make it easier to look at what approach of dissemination will be most
effective; however, there are some specific limitations and risks that must
be considered Think of the norms and counter-norms for putting research
and impact into context. By making your processes as transparent as pos-
sible and referring to the limitations and demarcations of the research
yourself, you are able to demonstrate due diligence and set an example.
Remember, research is messy but necessary.
References
Alla, K., Hall, W. D., Whiteford, H. A., Head, B. W. and Meurk, C. S. (2017)
‘How do we define the policy impact of public health research? A sys-
tematic review’, Health Research Policy and Systems, 15(1), pp. 84.
Blankespoor, E., Miller, G. S. and White, H. D. (2013) The Role of
Dissemination in Market Liquidity: Evidence from Firms’ Use of Twitter:
Stanford University, Graduate School of Business. Available at: https://
EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ecl:stabus:2106r.
Bornmann, L. (2012) ‘Measuring the societal impact of research: Research
is less and less assessed on scientific impact alone–we should aim to
quantify the increasingly important contributions of science to society’,
EMBO Reports, 13(8), pp. 673–676.
Research impact 159
Chan, A. K. M., Nickson, C. P., Rudolph, J. W., Lee, A. and Joynt, G. M. (2020)
‘Social media for rapid knowledge dissemination: Early experience
from the COVID-19 pandemic’, Anaesthesia, 75(12), pp. 1579–1582.
Darby, S. (2017) ‘Making space for co-produced research ‘impact’:
Learning from a participatory action research case study’, Area, 49(2),
pp. 230–237.
Fisher, H. L. (2021) Impact first: The social entrepreneurs guide to measur-
ing, managing and growing your impact. London: Nielsen.
Hinrichs-Krapels, S., Grant, J. and Gill, A. (2015) The nature, scale and ben-
eficiaries of research impact. London: Kings College.
Johannsson, H. and Selak, T. (2020) ‘Dissemination of medical publica-
tions on social media - is it the new standard?’, Anaesthesia, 75(2), pp.
155–157.
Kingston, J. (2012) ‘Choosing a knowledge dissemination approach’,
Knowledge and Process Management, 19(3), pp. 160–170.
Martin, B. (2007) ‘Assessing the impact of basic research on society and
the economy’, Paper presented at the Science Impact: Rethinking
the impact of basic research on society and the economy (FWF-ESF
International Conference, 11 May 2007), Vienna, Austria.
Milat, A. J., Bauman, A. and Redman, S. (2015) ‘Narrative review of mod-
els and success factors for scaling up public health interventions’,
Implementation Science, 10(1), pp. 113.
Milton, N. (2010) The lessons learned handbook: Practical approaches to
learning from experience. Oxford: Chandos.
Mitroff, I. I. (1974) ‘Norms and counter-norms in a select group of the
Apollo Moon Scientists: A case study of the Ambivalence of Scientists’,
American Sociological Review, 39(4), pp. 579–595.
Morton, S. (2015) ‘Progressing research impact assessment: A ‘contribu-
tions’ approach’, Research Evaluation, 24(4), pp. 405–419.
Papatsiba, V. and Cohen, E. (2020) ‘Institutional hierarchies and research
impact: New academic currencies, capital and position-taking in UK
higher education’, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 41(2), pp.
178–196.
Pariser, E. (2011) The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you.
London: Viking.
Penfield, T., Baker, M. J., Scoble, R. and Wykes, M. C. (2013) ‘Assessment,
evaluations, and definitions of research impact: A review’, Research
Evaluation, 23(1), pp. 21–32.
160 Research impact
Petersohn, S. and Heinze, T. (2017) ‘Professionalization of bibliometric

research assessment. Insights from the history of the Leiden Centre
for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS)’, Science and Public Policy,
45, pp. 565–578.
Schnitzler, K., Davies, N., Ross, F. and Harris, R. (2016) ‘Using Twitter™
to drive research impact: A discussion of strategies, opportunities and
challenges’, International Journal of Nursing Studies, 59, pp. 15–26.
Terama, E., Smallman, M., Lock, S. J., Johnson, C. and Austwick, M. Z.
(2016) ‘Beyond academia - interrogating research impact in the
research excellence framework’, PLoS One, 11(12), p. e0168533.
UKRI (2022) Co-production in Research: UKRI. Available at: https://www.
ukri.org/about-us/policies-standards-and-data/good-research-
resource-hub/research-co-production/ (Accessed: 24 August 2022).
Williams, K. (2020) ‘Playing the fields: Theorizing research impact and its
assessment’, Research Evaluation, 29(2), pp. 191–202.
Wynne-Jones, S., North, P. and Routledge, P. (2015) ‘Practising partic-
ipatory geographies: Potentials, problems and politics’, Area, 47, pp.
218–221.
INDEX
Pages in italics refer figures.
abstract 35, 53–54, 123 see investigation of admissions

academia: analysing data 94; into hospital; role of data
collecting data 58; planning 26; visualisation 110–111
purpose of research 2; research Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA)
impact 139–142, 144, 144–145, 109
147, 149, 151, 158; writing up Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) 109
117 anonymity 17–18, 28, 73
acknowledgements 124, 150, 157 appendices 110, 126–127
action research 13–14 assessing impact: crosss sector
active voice 133 impact 148; limitations 149–
analysing data: coding and 150; metrics 148; REF 148–149;
classifying data 83; content see substantive approaches to 149
content analysis; descriptive attribution 150
analysis see descriptive analysis audience 32, 53, 68, 95, 111,
of data; digital narrative–digital 117–118, 123, 128–129,
storytelling 88–89; discourse 132–134, 144, 150
see discourse analysis; audio-recording 68–70, 73
inferential analysis see inferential Australian Research Quality
analysis of data; interpreting Framework 2005 148
and 82–83; narrative analysis
87–88, 112; presenting data bias: academics 58; industry
109–110; qualitative data 59; information 58; and
83–84; quantitative data predispositions 57; public
83, 92–95; quantitative data sector 59; society 59
analysis software 93–94; bibliometrics 141
relating to hospital admissions Blanche, R. 5
162 Index
causality 150 co-production as impact 145;

charts/figures 109–110 across the sectors 147–148;
coding frame 85, 85–86 collaboration 146; in research
coding guides 86 146; research topic in health 147
Cohen, L. 28 correlation research 103; formula
collaboration 146, 148, 153–154 for 106, 105–107
collecting data 31, 33, 38; counter-norms 16
experiment-based research Covid-, 19; pandemic 78; vaccines 2
and RCTs 60–62; observation critical discourse analysis 90
as data collection tool see
observation; quantitative and Dallimer, M. 5
qualitative 59; social media as data analysis add-ins 93
tool see social media; through databases and online reference
literature review see literature resources: EBSCO 51; Google
review; tools/instruments 60 Scholar 51; JSTOR 51;
commercial organisation 147 ResearchGate 51; ScienceDirect
communality vs. individualism 51; Web of Science 52;
154–155 Wikipedia 52
communication 25, 69, 77, 78, data visualisation 110–111
118, 146, 150, 153 dependent variable 104
conclusions 126, 133, 136 descriptive analysis of data 92;
confidentiality 28, 29, 73 associating data 103–105;
confirmatory bias 57 formula of correlation research
constructivism 8–9, 10 106, 105–107; the mean
constructivist research traditions 9 99–101, 100–101; the median
content analysis: coding guides 98–99; the mode 98–99;
86; concept-driven and data- relationships between variables
driven coding 86; develop 103–105, 104–105; standard
a coding frame 85, 85–86; deviation 101–103
NVivo, software program digital ethnography 74
87; qualitative data analysis discourse analysis 89; advantages
software 86–87; sample of 90–91; critical 90;
categories 84, 84 framework for 90; grounded
contents list 119, 124 theory 91–92
contextualised/applied research DiscoverText 78
4, 4 disinterestedness vs. self-
contextual questions 69 interestednes 156
Index 163
dissemination: identifier 152, 152; General Data Protection

knowledge 150–151; limitations Regulation (GDPR) 65–66
152–153; social media 153; Google Scholar 51
tools and devices 151 government policy (public sector)
Dokter, Dennis 116–137, 139–158 142
graphical representations 110
EBSCO 51 grounded theory 91–92, 112
end matter 126; appendices 127;
references 127 The Harvard System 127
ethics of research 14–17; accurate Holden, J. 5
reporting 18; anonymity 17–18; hypothesis 34; non-directional
confidentiality 18; consenting 108; two-tailed tests 108
to participate 17; potential
for harm 18; questionable independent variable 104
practices in social research 19; industry: analysing data 94;
voluntary participation 17 collecting data 59; planning
ethnographic research 74 26; purpose of research 2–3;
European Union 65, 89 research impact 140–145, 144,
experiment-based research data 147, 149–150; writing up 117,
60–62 129, 132
inferential analysis of data 92–93;
Facebook 77, 77 hypothesis 108–109; population
fallacies (mistakes) 127–128 107; sample 107; statistical
feedback 29, 129–130, 136 significance 108–109; testing for
Ferré, M. 5 significance 109
figures and tables 124 informed consent 41–42, 42
Fisher, H. L. 144 Instagram 77, 77
focus group interviews: internationality 150
advantages of using 71–72; interview: benefits of 70;
checklist 72–73; defining 71; conducting 68–70; in face-to-
face-to- face setting 70–71; vs. face setting 68; focus group see
one-to-one interviews 72; as focus group interviews; guide/
online activity 70 schedule–career in medicine
funded research 141, 145 70; before interview 67–68;
member checking interview
GANTT chart 36–37, 37 data 68
Gatekeepers 29–30 introduction 125, 136
164 Index
investigation of admissions into the median 98–99

hospital: age of admissions Memorandum from Research
(female) 96–97, 97; Barnswell Councils 2005 148
Hospital 96; grouping of ages– Merton, R. K. 15
female admissions 98; Paperfield Merton’s norms 139, 153–154;
Hospital 95, 95–96; tally chart of communalism/communism
female admissions 97, 97–98 15; communality vs.
individualism 154–155;
JSTOR 51 disinterestedness 16;
disinterestedness vs. self-
knowledge dissemination interestednes 156; organised
150–151 scepticism 16; organised
knowledge gaps 142, 145, 147 scepticism vs. organised
dogmatism 157; universalism
Lambert, J. 88 15–16; universalism vs.
Lawford-Rolfe, R. 5 particularism 155
literature: aggregating material Mitroff, I. I. 16, 153
55–56; critically analysing the mode 98–99
56–57; Endnote 53–54; moderator/facilitator 71–72
selecting and maintaining moral compass 15
notes 53–55 Morrison, K. 28
literature review 46, 125; multiple-choice questions 62, 64,
developing strategy 50, 52–53; 64
as knowledge enhancer 48; as
list 48; locating 49; as report National Institute for Health
49; as search 48; as steering Research (NIHR) 7
instrument 49; as survey/scan negotiated access approach 30
48; types of 47–48 Netnography 78
new knowledge 141–142, 145,
main text: analysis and 155
discussion 126; conclusions new products 142–143, 144,
and recommendations 126; 148–149
introduction 125; literature NIHR see National Institute for
review 125; methods 125; Health Research
results 126 non-directional hypothesis 108
Manion, L. 28 non-participant observation 73
Martin-Ortega, J. 5 non-verbal behaviour 70
the mean 99–101, 100–101 NVivo, software program 28, 87
Index 165
observation 79; advantages acknowledgements 124; list of

of using 76; ethnographic contents 124; lists of figures
research 74; framework from and tables 124; preface 124;
organisational study 75–76; title 123
participant and non-participant presentation 131, 146; conference
73; passive and contextualised 152; of data 109–110; online
74–75 152; requirements 132; of story
online survey 64–66 88
open-ended questions 62, 63 publication 4, 42, 51, 118,
organised scepticism vs. organised 127–128, 133–134, 136–137,
dogmatism 157 141–142, 155
public sector: analysing data 94;
parliamentary scrutiny (society) collecting data 59; planning 26;
142 research for 3, 15, 17; research
participants 16–19, 26–31, 40–42, impact 140–143, 144, 144–145,
60–61, 71–75, 88–89, 131–132, 147, 147, 148–149; writing up
146 117, 121, 132
passive voice 133 punctuation 130, 133
Pearson Product Moment pure research 4, 4
Correlation Coefficient 103;
approach (R) 106, 106 qualitative data 12–13, 40, 59,
planning 24; academic 26; 83–84, 88–89, 91, 111–112;
accessibility of research sample analysis software 86–87
29–30; ethical framework qualitative methods 12–13, 27
41–42; industry 26; informed quantitative data 8, 11, 83,
consent protocol 41–42, 92; analysis tools 112; and
42; methodology 39–40; qualitative data 40, 59
negotiating access 28, 30; quantitative data analysis software:
public sector 26; report writing academic 94; industry 94;
29; resources 27–28; society public sector 94; society 95;
27; timeframe 29; and timing SPSS 93–94
see timing and planning quantitative methods 11, 13
policy research 3, 154 quantitative metrics 141
positivism 8–9
pragmatism 9–10 randomised control trials (RCTs)
preface 124 60
preliminary part of RCTs see randomised control trials
write-up: abstract 123; real-world setting 25–26
166 Index
recommendations 47, 126, 129 impact findings with others

Reed, M. S. 5 144–145; society 140, 143–144
REF see Research Excellence research plan: visual plan – GANTT
Framework chart 36–37, 37; Week 1 to 2
references 53–56, 58, 85, 127, 35; Week 3 to 10 36; Week 10
129, 132 to 13 36; Week 14 36
report writing 29, 54, 119 research project: collecting data
research: academic researchers 1; 31; data analysis 31; developing
data see analysing data; ethical a strategy 31, 35–36; exploring
considerations in see ethics of literature 31, 34–35; framing
research; experimental data your questions 30–32;
collection design 61–62; focus negotiating access 30; planning
of 3; Gatekeepers 29–30; stage see planning; stages in
hypothesis 34; importance of process 24–26, 25; writing up
data 45–46; interviews see results 32
interview; market researchers research questions 34; defining
1; organisations 2, 84, 140; 33; framing your questions
plan and structure 25; pollsters 32–33; purpose of 33
1; pure and applied 4, 4; research work 2, 3, 141, 146;
purpose of 1–3; and setting 32; advantages of using survey 67;
in social sciences 24; strategy dissemination 150–152; effect/
see research plan; survey 65; impact of 4–7; planning stage
tradition/paradigm 8, 10 see planning; true/valid 7
research-based disciplines 3–4 resources 27–28; useful databases
Research Excellence Framework and online reference 51–52
(REF) 142, 148–149 revision/editing checklist 130–131
ResearchGate 51
research impact: academia 139, ScienceDirect 51
142; assessing see assessing sectors 141–151, 158
impact; contextualising, using skip logic/branching 66
Merton’s norms see Merton’s small and medium-sized
norms; co-production enterprises (SMEs) 2, 26
see co-production as social media 152–153;
impact; definition 140–141; DiscoverText 78; Netnography
development 141; examples 78; platforms 76–77, 77; and
of 141–144, 144; industry 140, publication 133–134; rapid
142–143; interpretations 145; access to 77
public sector 140, 143; sharing social research 19–20, 26
Index 167
society: analysing data 90, 95; title 65, 109, 123, 136
collecting data 59; planning traditions and methods 7; action
research 27, 41; purpose of research 14; constructivism
research 2, 7, 15–16; research 9; mixing quantitative and
impact 140–147, 144, 147; qualitative methods 13;
writing up 117 positivism 8–9; pragmatism
software packages 28, 94, 100–101 9–10; qualitative methods 12–13;
Spearman’s Rank Order quantitative and qualitative
Correlation Coefficient 103 research 10, 13; quantitative
SPSS see Statistical Package for methods 11
the Social Sciences t-test 109
standard deviation: distribution of Twitter 77, 77
exam results 102, 103; for exam
scores 101, 102 UK Research and Innovation (UKRI)
Statistical Package for the Social 6
Sciences (SPSS) 93–94, 100 UK Research and Investment
statistical significance 108–109 (UKRI) 41
storytelling 88–89, 111, 118, 134, universalism vs. particularism 155
137
styling report 132–133 variables: negative relationship
survey-based research 79; GDPR (correlation) 105; no
legislation 65–66; multiple- relationship relationship
choice and scale questions 62, (correlation) 105; positive
64, 64; online survey 64–65; relationship (correlation)
open-ended and closed-ended 104; relationships between
questions 62, 63; potential 103–104
respondents identifying 66–67; visualisation of data 134–135
routing and piping 66
survey response rate 38 web-based collaborative text
analytics system 78
target audience 128–129, 136, Web of Science 52
151, 158 wikipedia 52
timeframe 29, 34 Wilkinson, David 1–20, 23–43,
timescale 150 45–79, 82–112
timing and planning: analysing data write-up: end matter 126–127;
38–39; collecting data 37–38; ethics 131–132; getting started/
drawing conclusions 39; writing start early 116–119; main body
and submitting report 39 of research report see main text;
168 Index
notes when writing see editing checklist 130–131; social

writing; organising information media and publication 133–134;
119–121; preliminary part of see storytelling 134; styling report
preliminary part of write-up; 132–133; submitting research
results 32; time management report to others 132; thinking
121–123 about audience 128–129; tone
writing: fallacies (mistakes) to and voice 135–136; visualising
avoid 127–128; presenting work data 134–135
to others 129–130; revision/ written output 117, 129, 132, 136

David Wilkinson, Dennis Dokter - The Researcher's Toolkit. The Complete Guide To Practitioner Research-Routledge. Taylor & Francis Group (2023)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

David Wilkinson, Dennis Dokter - The Researcher's Toolkit. The Complete Guide To Practitioner Research-Routledge. Taylor & Francis Group (2023)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE RESEARCHER’S

● The importance of research and framing your research question and

The Researcher’s Toolkit is a must-read guide for students and budding

David Wilkinson and Dennis Dokter

Second edition published 2023

© 2023 David Wilkinson and Dennis Dokter

Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered

First edition published by Routledge 2000

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

ISBN: 978-1-032-01809-6 (hbk)

3 Collecting your data: literature and other forms of data 45

4 Analysing your data 82

Figure 1.1 Pure and applied research comparison 4

Figure 4.12 Positive relationship (correlation) between two

collection devices). Dealing with the data you collect (Chapter 4) is an

IN THIS CHAPTER WE EXPLORE:

The purpose of research

commissioned. Each year government departments employ universities

THE PURPOSE OF RESEARCH

The focus of research

Broadly speaking, research can be categorised as expanding knowledge in

To expand knowledge in a discipline or area

Research can be seen as enquiry designed to contribute to disci-

Academic ‘pure’ research Contextualised ‘applied’ research

Figure 1.1 Pure and applied research comparison

The measurable effect or impact of research work is central in commer-

consumer groups of remote working and the likelihood of purchasing

• Understanding and awareness – meaning your research helped peo-

• Policy – your research contributed to new or amended guidelines or

UK RESEARCH AND INNOVATION (UKRI)

Launched in April 2018, UKRI is a non-departmental public body

The UKRI provide two substantive strands which should be used to

contribution that excellent social and economic research has on society

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH RESEARCH (NIHR)

The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) has a mission

The NIHR provide a short summary of their focused interest in

Traditions and methods

Research work relies on an agreed understanding of how we come to

Underlying elements: Ontology, epistemology,

A research tradition or paradigm is a philosophical framework

There are numerous traditions or paradigms through which to frame

Some examples of traditions: positivism,

Positivist research is often linked to scientific research and is reliant on

positivism typically uses quantitative research methods or approaches to

Constructivist research traditions are fundamentally based on the belief

The pragmatist paradigm is underpinned by its acceptance of a

conducting research work. A pragmatic approach to research work is

Approaches to collecting data – methods and tools

Methods and tools commonly used within particular paradigms or tra-

Figure 1.2 Traditions in research

Surveys, tests, structured interviews, laboratory experiments, and

Quantitative data are those types of data that can usually be

The results of quantitative research are presented in the form of

Participant observation, focus groups, unstructured interviews, or life his-

Qualitative data include observations, interviews, and life his-

This approach to research began to be challenged during the 1960s

claim to represent. Quantitative research just seemed to lack imagination

Quantitative research Qualitative research

Figure 1.3 Quantitative and qualitative research compared

Mixing quantitative and qualitative methods

There are numerous examples of how quantitative and qualitative methods

Action research is about diagnosing a specific problem (e.g., pupil absence)