essay about research method

What is Research Methodology? Definition, Types, and Examples

Research methodology 1,2 is a structured and scientific approach used to collect, analyze, and interpret quantitative or qualitative data to answer research questions or test hypotheses. A research methodology is like a plan for carrying out research and helps keep researchers on track by limiting the scope of the research. Several aspects must be considered before selecting an appropriate research methodology, such as research limitations and ethical concerns that may affect your research.

The research methodology section in a scientific paper describes the different methodological choices made, such as the data collection and analysis methods, and why these choices were selected. The reasons should explain why the methods chosen are the most appropriate to answer the research question. A good research methodology also helps ensure the reliability and validity of the research findings. There are three types of research methodology—quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method, which can be chosen based on the research objectives.

What is research methodology ?

A research methodology describes the techniques and procedures used to identify and analyze information regarding a specific research topic. It is a process by which researchers design their study so that they can achieve their objectives using the selected research instruments. It includes all the important aspects of research, including research design, data collection methods, data analysis methods, and the overall framework within which the research is conducted. While these points can help you understand what is research methodology, you also need to know why it is important to pick the right methodology.

Paperpal your AI academic writing assistant

Having a good research methodology in place has the following advantages: 3

Helps other researchers who may want to replicate your research; the explanations will be of benefit to them.
You can easily answer any questions about your research if they arise at a later stage.
A research methodology provides a framework and guidelines for researchers to clearly define research questions, hypotheses, and objectives.
It helps researchers identify the most appropriate research design, sampling technique, and data collection and analysis methods.
A sound research methodology helps researchers ensure that their findings are valid and reliable and free from biases and errors.
It also helps ensure that ethical guidelines are followed while conducting research.
A good research methodology helps researchers in planning their research efficiently, by ensuring optimum usage of their time and resources.

Writing the methods section of a research paper? Let Paperpal help you achieve perfection

Types of research methodology.

There are three types of research methodology based on the type of research and the data required. 1

Quantitative research methodology focuses on measuring and testing numerical data. This approach is good for reaching a large number of people in a short amount of time. This type of research helps in testing the causal relationships between variables, making predictions, and generalizing results to wider populations.
Qualitative research methodology examines the opinions, behaviors, and experiences of people. It collects and analyzes words and textual data. This research methodology requires fewer participants but is still more time consuming because the time spent per participant is quite large. This method is used in exploratory research where the research problem being investigated is not clearly defined.
Mixed-method research methodology uses the characteristics of both quantitative and qualitative research methodologies in the same study. This method allows researchers to validate their findings, verify if the results observed using both methods are complementary, and explain any unexpected results obtained from one method by using the other method.

What are the types of sampling designs in research methodology?

Sampling 4 is an important part of a research methodology and involves selecting a representative sample of the population to conduct the study, making statistical inferences about them, and estimating the characteristics of the whole population based on these inferences. There are two types of sampling designs in research methodology—probability and nonprobability.

Probability sampling

In this type of sampling design, a sample is chosen from a larger population using some form of random selection, that is, every member of the population has an equal chance of being selected. The different types of probability sampling are:

Systematic —sample members are chosen at regular intervals. It requires selecting a starting point for the sample and sample size determination that can be repeated at regular intervals. This type of sampling method has a predefined range; hence, it is the least time consuming.
Stratified —researchers divide the population into smaller groups that don’t overlap but represent the entire population. While sampling, these groups can be organized, and then a sample can be drawn from each group separately.
Cluster —the population is divided into clusters based on demographic parameters like age, sex, location, etc.
Convenience —selects participants who are most easily accessible to researchers due to geographical proximity, availability at a particular time, etc.
Purposive —participants are selected at the researcher’s discretion. Researchers consider the purpose of the study and the understanding of the target audience.
Snowball —already selected participants use their social networks to refer the researcher to other potential participants.
Quota —while designing the study, the researchers decide how many people with which characteristics to include as participants. The characteristics help in choosing people most likely to provide insights into the subject.

What are data collection methods?

During research, data are collected using various methods depending on the research methodology being followed and the research methods being undertaken. Both qualitative and quantitative research have different data collection methods, as listed below.

Qualitative research 5

One-on-one interviews: Helps the interviewers understand a respondent’s subjective opinion and experience pertaining to a specific topic or event
Document study/literature review/record keeping: Researchers’ review of already existing written materials such as archives, annual reports, research articles, guidelines, policy documents, etc.
Focus groups: Constructive discussions that usually include a small sample of about 6-10 people and a moderator, to understand the participants’ opinion on a given topic.
Qualitative observation : Researchers collect data using their five senses (sight, smell, touch, taste, and hearing).

Quantitative research 6

Sampling: The most common type is probability sampling.
Interviews: Commonly telephonic or done in-person.
Observations: Structured observations are most commonly used in quantitative research. In this method, researchers make observations about specific behaviors of individuals in a structured setting.
Document review: Reviewing existing research or documents to collect evidence for supporting the research.
Surveys and questionnaires. Surveys can be administered both online and offline depending on the requirement and sample size.

Let Paperpal help you write the perfect research methods section. Start now!

What are data analysis methods.

The data collected using the various methods for qualitative and quantitative research need to be analyzed to generate meaningful conclusions. These data analysis methods 7 also differ between quantitative and qualitative research.

Quantitative research involves a deductive method for data analysis where hypotheses are developed at the beginning of the research and precise measurement is required. The methods include statistical analysis applications to analyze numerical data and are grouped into two categories—descriptive and inferential.

Descriptive analysis is used to describe the basic features of different types of data to present it in a way that ensures the patterns become meaningful. The different types of descriptive analysis methods are:

Measures of frequency (count, percent, frequency)
Measures of central tendency (mean, median, mode)
Measures of dispersion or variation (range, variance, standard deviation)
Measure of position (percentile ranks, quartile ranks)

Inferential analysis is used to make predictions about a larger population based on the analysis of the data collected from a smaller population. This analysis is used to study the relationships between different variables. Some commonly used inferential data analysis methods are:

Correlation: To understand the relationship between two or more variables.
Cross-tabulation: Analyze the relationship between multiple variables.
Regression analysis: Study the impact of independent variables on the dependent variable.
Frequency tables: To understand the frequency of data.
Analysis of variance: To test the degree to which two or more variables differ in an experiment.

Qualitative research involves an inductive method for data analysis where hypotheses are developed after data collection. The methods include:

Content analysis: For analyzing documented information from text and images by determining the presence of certain words or concepts in texts.
Narrative analysis: For analyzing content obtained from sources such as interviews, field observations, and surveys. The stories and opinions shared by people are used to answer research questions.
Discourse analysis: For analyzing interactions with people considering the social context, that is, the lifestyle and environment, under which the interaction occurs.
Grounded theory: Involves hypothesis creation by data collection and analysis to explain why a phenomenon occurred.
Thematic analysis: To identify important themes or patterns in data and use these to address an issue.

How to choose a research methodology?

Here are some important factors to consider when choosing a research methodology: 8

Research objectives, aims, and questions —these would help structure the research design.
Review existing literature to identify any gaps in knowledge.
Check the statistical requirements —if data-driven or statistical results are needed then quantitative research is the best. If the research questions can be answered based on people’s opinions and perceptions, then qualitative research is most suitable.
Sample size —sample size can often determine the feasibility of a research methodology. For a large sample, less effort- and time-intensive methods are appropriate.
Constraints —constraints of time, geography, and resources can help define the appropriate methodology.

Got writer’s block? Kickstart your research paper writing with Paperpal now!

How to write a research methodology .

A research methodology should include the following components: 3,9

Research design —should be selected based on the research question and the data required. Common research designs include experimental, quasi-experimental, correlational, descriptive, and exploratory.
Research method —this can be quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method.
Reason for selecting a specific methodology —explain why this methodology is the most suitable to answer your research problem.
Research instruments —explain the research instruments you plan to use, mainly referring to the data collection methods such as interviews, surveys, etc. Here as well, a reason should be mentioned for selecting the particular instrument.
Sampling —this involves selecting a representative subset of the population being studied.
Data collection —involves gathering data using several data collection methods, such as surveys, interviews, etc.
Data analysis —describe the data analysis methods you will use once you’ve collected the data.
Research limitations —mention any limitations you foresee while conducting your research.
Validity and reliability —validity helps identify the accuracy and truthfulness of the findings; reliability refers to the consistency and stability of the results over time and across different conditions.
Ethical considerations —research should be conducted ethically. The considerations include obtaining consent from participants, maintaining confidentiality, and addressing conflicts of interest.

Streamline Your Research Paper Writing Process with Paperpal

The methods section is a critical part of the research papers, allowing researchers to use this to understand your findings and replicate your work when pursuing their own research. However, it is usually also the most difficult section to write. This is where Paperpal can help you overcome the writer’s block and create the first draft in minutes with Paperpal Copilot, its secure generative AI feature suite.

With Paperpal you can get research advice, write and refine your work, rephrase and verify the writing, and ensure submission readiness, all in one place. Here’s how you can use Paperpal to develop the first draft of your methods section.

Generate an outline: Input some details about your research to instantly generate an outline for your methods section
Develop the section: Use the outline and suggested sentence templates to expand your ideas and develop the first draft.
P araph ras e and trim : Get clear, concise academic text with paraphrasing that conveys your work effectively and word reduction to fix redundancies.
Choose the right words: Enhance text by choosing contextual synonyms based on how the words have been used in previously published work.
Check and verify text : Make sure the generated text showcases your methods correctly, has all the right citations, and is original and authentic. .

You can repeat this process to develop each section of your research manuscript, including the title, abstract and keywords. Ready to write your research papers faster, better, and without the stress? Sign up for Paperpal and start writing today!

Frequently Asked Questions

Q1. What are the key components of research methodology?

A1. A good research methodology has the following key components:

Research design
Data collection procedures
Data analysis methods
Ethical considerations

Q2. Why is ethical consideration important in research methodology?

A2. Ethical consideration is important in research methodology to ensure the readers of the reliability and validity of the study. Researchers must clearly mention the ethical norms and standards followed during the conduct of the research and also mention if the research has been cleared by any institutional board. The following 10 points are the important principles related to ethical considerations: 10

Participants should not be subjected to harm.
Respect for the dignity of participants should be prioritized.
Full consent should be obtained from participants before the study.
Participants’ privacy should be ensured.
Confidentiality of the research data should be ensured.
Anonymity of individuals and organizations participating in the research should be maintained.
The aims and objectives of the research should not be exaggerated.
Affiliations, sources of funding, and any possible conflicts of interest should be declared.
Communication in relation to the research should be honest and transparent.
Misleading information and biased representation of primary data findings should be avoided.

Q3. What is the difference between methodology and method?

A3. Research methodology is different from a research method, although both terms are often confused. Research methods are the tools used to gather data, while the research methodology provides a framework for how research is planned, conducted, and analyzed. The latter guides researchers in making decisions about the most appropriate methods for their research. Research methods refer to the specific techniques, procedures, and tools used by researchers to collect, analyze, and interpret data, for instance surveys, questionnaires, interviews, etc.

Research methodology is, thus, an integral part of a research study. It helps ensure that you stay on track to meet your research objectives and answer your research questions using the most appropriate data collection and analysis tools based on your research design.

Accelerate your research paper writing with Paperpal. Try for free now!

Research methodologies. Pfeiffer Library website. Accessed August 15, 2023. https://library.tiffin.edu/researchmethodologies/whatareresearchmethodologies
Types of research methodology. Eduvoice website. Accessed August 16, 2023. https://eduvoice.in/types-research-methodology/
The basics of research methodology: A key to quality research. Voxco. Accessed August 16, 2023. https://www.voxco.com/blog/what-is-research-methodology/
Sampling methods: Types with examples. QuestionPro website. Accessed August 16, 2023. https://www.questionpro.com/blog/types-of-sampling-for-social-research/
What is qualitative research? Methods, types, approaches, examples. Researcher.Life blog. Accessed August 15, 2023. https://researcher.life/blog/article/what-is-qualitative-research-methods-types-examples/
What is quantitative research? Definition, methods, types, and examples. Researcher.Life blog. Accessed August 15, 2023. https://researcher.life/blog/article/what-is-quantitative-research-types-and-examples/
Data analysis in research: Types & methods. QuestionPro website. Accessed August 16, 2023. https://www.questionpro.com/blog/data-analysis-in-research/#Data_analysis_in_qualitative_research
Factors to consider while choosing the right research methodology. PhD Monster website. Accessed August 17, 2023. https://www.phdmonster.com/factors-to-consider-while-choosing-the-right-research-methodology/
What is research methodology? Research and writing guides. Accessed August 14, 2023. https://paperpile.com/g/what-is-research-methodology/
Ethical considerations. Business research methodology website. Accessed August 17, 2023. https://research-methodology.net/research-methodology/ethical-considerations/

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!

Language and Grammar Rules for Academic Writing

Climatic vs. climactic: difference and examples, you may also like, dissertation printing and binding | types & comparison , what is a dissertation preface definition and examples , how to write a research proposal: (with examples..., how to write your research paper in apa..., how to choose a dissertation topic, how to write a phd research proposal, how to write an academic paragraph (step-by-step guide), maintaining academic integrity with paperpal’s generative ai writing..., research funding basics: what should a grant proposal..., how to write an abstract in research papers....

Reference management. Clean and simple.

What is research methodology?

The basics of research methodology

Why do you need a research methodology, what needs to be included, why do you need to document your research method, what are the different types of research instruments, qualitative / quantitative / mixed research methodologies, how do you choose the best research methodology for you, frequently asked questions about research methodology, related articles.

When you’re working on your first piece of academic research, there are many different things to focus on, and it can be overwhelming to stay on top of everything. This is especially true of budding or inexperienced researchers.

If you’ve never put together a research proposal before or find yourself in a position where you need to explain your research methodology decisions, there are a few things you need to be aware of.

Once you understand the ins and outs, handling academic research in the future will be less intimidating. We break down the basics below:

A research methodology encompasses the way in which you intend to carry out your research. This includes how you plan to tackle things like collection methods, statistical analysis, participant observations, and more.

You can think of your research methodology as being a formula. One part will be how you plan on putting your research into practice, and another will be why you feel this is the best way to approach it. Your research methodology is ultimately a methodological and systematic plan to resolve your research problem.

In short, you are explaining how you will take your idea and turn it into a study, which in turn will produce valid and reliable results that are in accordance with the aims and objectives of your research. This is true whether your paper plans to make use of qualitative methods or quantitative methods.

The purpose of a research methodology is to explain the reasoning behind your approach to your research - you'll need to support your collection methods, methods of analysis, and other key points of your work.

Think of it like writing a plan or an outline for you what you intend to do.

When carrying out research, it can be easy to go off-track or depart from your standard methodology.

Tip: Having a methodology keeps you accountable and on track with your original aims and objectives, and gives you a suitable and sound plan to keep your project manageable, smooth, and effective.

With all that said, how do you write out your standard approach to a research methodology?

As a general plan, your methodology should include the following information:

Your research method. You need to state whether you plan to use quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis, or mixed-method research methods. This will often be determined by what you hope to achieve with your research.
Explain your reasoning. Why are you taking this methodological approach? Why is this particular methodology the best way to answer your research problem and achieve your objectives?
Explain your instruments. This will mainly be about your collection methods. There are varying instruments to use such as interviews, physical surveys, questionnaires, for example. Your methodology will need to detail your reasoning in choosing a particular instrument for your research.
What will you do with your results? How are you going to analyze the data once you have gathered it?
Advise your reader. If there is anything in your research methodology that your reader might be unfamiliar with, you should explain it in more detail. For example, you should give any background information to your methods that might be relevant or provide your reasoning if you are conducting your research in a non-standard way.
How will your sampling process go? What will your sampling procedure be and why? For example, if you will collect data by carrying out semi-structured or unstructured interviews, how will you choose your interviewees and how will you conduct the interviews themselves?
Any practical limitations? You should discuss any limitations you foresee being an issue when you’re carrying out your research.

In any dissertation, thesis, or academic journal, you will always find a chapter dedicated to explaining the research methodology of the person who carried out the study, also referred to as the methodology section of the work.

A good research methodology will explain what you are going to do and why, while a poor methodology will lead to a messy or disorganized approach.

You should also be able to justify in this section your reasoning for why you intend to carry out your research in a particular way, especially if it might be a particularly unique method.

Having a sound methodology in place can also help you with the following:

When another researcher at a later date wishes to try and replicate your research, they will need your explanations and guidelines.
In the event that you receive any criticism or questioning on the research you carried out at a later point, you will be able to refer back to it and succinctly explain the how and why of your approach.
It provides you with a plan to follow throughout your research. When you are drafting your methodology approach, you need to be sure that the method you are using is the right one for your goal. This will help you with both explaining and understanding your method.
It affords you the opportunity to document from the outset what you intend to achieve with your research, from start to finish.

A research instrument is a tool you will use to help you collect, measure and analyze the data you use as part of your research.

The choice of research instrument will usually be yours to make as the researcher and will be whichever best suits your methodology.

There are many different research instruments you can use in collecting data for your research.

Generally, they can be grouped as follows:

Interviews (either as a group or one-on-one). You can carry out interviews in many different ways. For example, your interview can be structured, semi-structured, or unstructured. The difference between them is how formal the set of questions is that is asked of the interviewee. In a group interview, you may choose to ask the interviewees to give you their opinions or perceptions on certain topics.
Surveys (online or in-person). In survey research, you are posing questions in which you ask for a response from the person taking the survey. You may wish to have either free-answer questions such as essay-style questions, or you may wish to use closed questions such as multiple choice. You may even wish to make the survey a mixture of both.
Focus Groups. Similar to the group interview above, you may wish to ask a focus group to discuss a particular topic or opinion while you make a note of the answers given.
Observations. This is a good research instrument to use if you are looking into human behaviors. Different ways of researching this include studying the spontaneous behavior of participants in their everyday life, or something more structured. A structured observation is research conducted at a set time and place where researchers observe behavior as planned and agreed upon with participants.

These are the most common ways of carrying out research, but it is really dependent on your needs as a researcher and what approach you think is best to take.

It is also possible to combine a number of research instruments if this is necessary and appropriate in answering your research problem.

There are three different types of methodologies, and they are distinguished by whether they focus on words, numbers, or both.

Data type	What is it?	Methodology
Quantitative	This methodology focuses more on measuring and testing numerical data. What is the aim of quantitative research? When using this form of research, your objective will usually be to confirm something.	Surveys, tests, existing databases. For example, you may use this type of methodology if you are looking to test a set of hypotheses.
Qualitative	Qualitative research is a process of collecting and analyzing both words and textual data. This form of research methodology is sometimes used where the aim and objective of the research are exploratory.	Observations, interviews, focus groups. Exploratory research might be used where you are trying to understand human actions i.e. for a study in the sociology or psychology field.
Mixed-method	A mixed-method approach combines both of the above approaches. The quantitative approach will provide you with some definitive facts and figures, whereas the qualitative methodology will provide your research with an interesting human aspect.	Where you can use a mixed method of research, this can produce some incredibly interesting results. This is due to testing in a way that provides data that is both proven to be exact while also being exploratory at the same time.

➡️ Want to learn more about the differences between qualitative and quantitative research, and how to use both methods? Check out our guide for that!

If you've done your due diligence, you'll have an idea of which methodology approach is best suited to your research.

It’s likely that you will have carried out considerable reading and homework before you reach this point and you may have taken inspiration from other similar studies that have yielded good results.

Still, it is important to consider different options before setting your research in stone. Exploring different options available will help you to explain why the choice you ultimately make is preferable to other methods.

If proving your research problem requires you to gather large volumes of numerical data to test hypotheses, a quantitative research method is likely to provide you with the most usable results.

If instead you’re looking to try and learn more about people, and their perception of events, your methodology is more exploratory in nature and would therefore probably be better served using a qualitative research methodology.

It helps to always bring things back to the question: what do I want to achieve with my research?

Once you have conducted your research, you need to analyze it. Here are some helpful guides for qualitative data analysis:

➡️ How to do a content analysis

➡️ How to do a thematic analysis

➡️ How to do a rhetorical analysis

Research methodology refers to the techniques used to find and analyze information for a study, ensuring that the results are valid, reliable and that they address the research objective.

Data can typically be organized into four different categories or methods: observational, experimental, simulation, and derived.

Writing a methodology section is a process of introducing your methods and instruments, discussing your analysis, providing more background information, addressing your research limitations, and more.

Your research methodology section will need a clear research question and proposed research approach. You'll need to add a background, introduce your research question, write your methodology and add the works you cited during your data collecting phase.

The research methodology section of your study will indicate how valid your findings are and how well-informed your paper is. It also assists future researchers planning to use the same methodology, who want to cite your study or replicate it.

Resources Home 🏠
Try SciSpace Copilot
Search research papers
Add Copilot Extension
Try AI Detector
Try Paraphraser
Try Citation Generator
April Papers
June Papers
July Papers

Here's What You Need to Understand About Research Methodology

Research methodology involves a systematic and well-structured approach to conducting scholarly or scientific inquiries. Knowing the significance of research methodology and its different components is crucial as it serves as the basis for any study.

Typically, your research topic will start as a broad idea you want to investigate more thoroughly. Once you’ve identified a research problem and created research questions , you must choose the appropriate methodology and frameworks to address those questions effectively.

What is the definition of a research methodology?

Research methodology is the process or the way you intend to execute your study. The methodology section of a research paper outlines how you plan to conduct your study. It covers various steps such as collecting data, statistical analysis, observing participants, and other procedures involved in the research process

The methods section should give a description of the process that will convert your idea into a study. Additionally, the outcomes of your process must provide valid and reliable results resonant with the aims and objectives of your research. This thumb rule holds complete validity, no matter whether your paper has inclinations for qualitative or quantitative usage.

Studying research methods used in related studies can provide helpful insights and direction for your own research. Now easily discover papers related to your topic on SciSpace and utilize our AI research assistant, Copilot , to quickly review the methodologies applied in different papers.

Analyze and understand research methodologies faster with SciSpace Copilot

The need for a good research methodology

While deciding on your approach towards your research, the reason or factors you weighed in choosing a particular problem and formulating a research topic need to be validated and explained. A research methodology helps you do exactly that. Moreover, a good research methodology lets you build your argument to validate your research work performed through various data collection methods, analytical methods, and other essential points.

Just imagine it as a strategy documented to provide an overview of what you intend to do.

While undertaking any research writing or performing the research itself, you may get drifted in not something of much importance. In such a case, a research methodology helps you to get back to your outlined work methodology.

A research methodology helps in keeping you accountable for your work. Additionally, it can help you evaluate whether your work is in sync with your original aims and objectives or not. Besides, a good research methodology enables you to navigate your research process smoothly and swiftly while providing effective planning to achieve your desired results.

What is the basic structure of a research methodology?

Usually, you must ensure to include the following stated aspects while deciding over the basic structure of your research methodology:

1. Your research procedure

Explain what research methods you’re going to use. Whether you intend to proceed with quantitative or qualitative, or a composite of both approaches, you need to state that explicitly. The option among the three depends on your research’s aim, objectives, and scope.

2. Provide the rationality behind your chosen approach

Based on logic and reason, let your readers know why you have chosen said research methodologies. Additionally, you have to build strong arguments supporting why your chosen research method is the best way to achieve the desired outcome.

3. Explain your mechanism

The mechanism encompasses the research methods or instruments you will use to develop your research methodology. It usually refers to your data collection methods. You can use interviews, surveys, physical questionnaires, etc., of the many available mechanisms as research methodology instruments. The data collection method is determined by the type of research and whether the data is quantitative data(includes numerical data) or qualitative data (perception, morale, etc.) Moreover, you need to put logical reasoning behind choosing a particular instrument.

4. Significance of outcomes

The results will be available once you have finished experimenting. However, you should also explain how you plan to use the data to interpret the findings. This section also aids in understanding the problem from within, breaking it down into pieces, and viewing the research problem from various perspectives.

5. Reader’s advice

Anything that you feel must be explained to spread more awareness among readers and focus groups must be included and described in detail. You should not just specify your research methodology on the assumption that a reader is aware of the topic.

All the relevant information that explains and simplifies your research paper must be included in the methodology section. If you are conducting your research in a non-traditional manner, give a logical justification and list its benefits.

6. Explain your sample space

Include information about the sample and sample space in the methodology section. The term "sample" refers to a smaller set of data that a researcher selects or chooses from a larger group of people or focus groups using a predetermined selection method. Let your readers know how you are going to distinguish between relevant and non-relevant samples. How you figured out those exact numbers to back your research methodology, i.e. the sample spacing of instruments, must be discussed thoroughly.

For example, if you are going to conduct a survey or interview, then by what procedure will you select the interviewees (or sample size in case of surveys), and how exactly will the interview or survey be conducted.

7. Challenges and limitations

This part, which is frequently assumed to be unnecessary, is actually very important. The challenges and limitations that your chosen strategy inherently possesses must be specified while you are conducting different types of research.

The importance of a good research methodology

You must have observed that all research papers, dissertations, or theses carry a chapter entirely dedicated to research methodology. This section helps maintain your credibility as a better interpreter of results rather than a manipulator.

A good research methodology always explains the procedure, data collection methods and techniques, aim, and scope of the research. In a research study, it leads to a well-organized, rationality-based approach, while the paper lacking it is often observed as messy or disorganized.

You should pay special attention to validating your chosen way towards the research methodology. This becomes extremely important in case you select an unconventional or a distinct method of execution.

Curating and developing a strong, effective research methodology can assist you in addressing a variety of situations, such as:

When someone tries to duplicate or expand upon your research after few years.
If a contradiction or conflict of facts occurs at a later time. This gives you the security you need to deal with these contradictions while still being able to defend your approach.
Gaining a tactical approach in getting your research completed in time. Just ensure you are using the right approach while drafting your research methodology, and it can help you achieve your desired outcomes. Additionally, it provides a better explanation and understanding of the research question itself.
Documenting the results so that the final outcome of the research stays as you intended it to be while starting.

Instruments you could use while writing a good research methodology

As a researcher, you must choose which tools or data collection methods that fit best in terms of the relevance of your research. This decision has to be wise.

There exists many research equipments or tools that you can use to carry out your research process. These are classified as:

a. Interviews (One-on-One or a Group)

An interview aimed to get your desired research outcomes can be undertaken in many different ways. For example, you can design your interview as structured, semi-structured, or unstructured. What sets them apart is the degree of formality in the questions. On the other hand, in a group interview, your aim should be to collect more opinions and group perceptions from the focus groups on a certain topic rather than looking out for some formal answers.

In surveys, you are in better control if you specifically draft the questions you seek the response for. For example, you may choose to include free-style questions that can be answered descriptively, or you may provide a multiple-choice type response for questions. Besides, you can also opt to choose both ways, deciding what suits your research process and purpose better.

c. Sample Groups

Similar to the group interviews, here, you can select a group of individuals and assign them a topic to discuss or freely express their opinions over that. You can simultaneously note down the answers and later draft them appropriately, deciding on the relevance of every response.

d. Observations

If your research domain is humanities or sociology, observations are the best-proven method to draw your research methodology. Of course, you can always include studying the spontaneous response of the participants towards a situation or conducting the same but in a more structured manner. A structured observation means putting the participants in a situation at a previously decided time and then studying their responses.

Of all the tools described above, it is you who should wisely choose the instruments and decide what’s the best fit for your research. You must not restrict yourself from multiple methods or a combination of a few instruments if appropriate in drafting a good research methodology.

Types of research methodology

A research methodology exists in various forms. Depending upon their approach, whether centered around words, numbers, or both, methodologies are distinguished as qualitative, quantitative, or an amalgamation of both.

1. Qualitative research methodology

When a research methodology primarily focuses on words and textual data, then it is generally referred to as qualitative research methodology. This type is usually preferred among researchers when the aim and scope of the research are mainly theoretical and explanatory.

The instruments used are observations, interviews, and sample groups. You can use this methodology if you are trying to study human behavior or response in some situations. Generally, qualitative research methodology is widely used in sociology, psychology, and other related domains.

2. Quantitative research methodology

If your research is majorly centered on data, figures, and stats, then analyzing these numerical data is often referred to as quantitative research methodology. You can use quantitative research methodology if your research requires you to validate or justify the obtained results.

In quantitative methods, surveys, tests, experiments, and evaluations of current databases can be advantageously used as instruments If your research involves testing some hypothesis, then use this methodology.

3. Amalgam methodology

As the name suggests, the amalgam methodology uses both quantitative and qualitative approaches. This methodology is used when a part of the research requires you to verify the facts and figures, whereas the other part demands you to discover the theoretical and explanatory nature of the research question.

The instruments for the amalgam methodology require you to conduct interviews and surveys, including tests and experiments. The outcome of this methodology can be insightful and valuable as it provides precise test results in line with theoretical explanations and reasoning.

The amalgam method, makes your work both factual and rational at the same time.

Final words: How to decide which is the best research methodology?

If you have kept your sincerity and awareness intact with the aims and scope of research well enough, you must have got an idea of which research methodology suits your work best.

Before deciding which research methodology answers your research question, you must invest significant time in reading and doing your homework for that. Taking references that yield relevant results should be your first approach to establishing a research methodology.

Moreover, you should never refrain from exploring other options. Before setting your work in stone, you must try all the available options as it explains why the choice of research methodology that you finally make is more appropriate than the other available options.

You should always go for a quantitative research methodology if your research requires gathering large amounts of data, figures, and statistics. This research methodology will provide you with results if your research paper involves the validation of some hypothesis.

Whereas, if you are looking for more explanations, reasons, opinions, and public perceptions around a theory, you must use qualitative research methodology.The choice of an appropriate research methodology ultimately depends on what you want to achieve through your research.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Research Methodology

1. how to write a research methodology.

You can always provide a separate section for research methodology where you should specify details about the methods and instruments used during the research, discussions on result analysis, including insights into the background information, and conveying the research limitations.

2. What are the types of research methodology?

There generally exists four types of research methodology i.e.

Observation
Experimental
Derivational

3. What is the true meaning of research methodology?

The set of techniques or procedures followed to discover and analyze the information gathered to validate or justify a research outcome is generally called Research Methodology.

4. Where lies the importance of research methodology?

Your research methodology directly reflects the validity of your research outcomes and how well-informed your research work is. Moreover, it can help future researchers cite or refer to your research if they plan to use a similar research methodology.

Consensus GPT vs. SciSpace GPT: Choose the Best GPT for Research

Literature Review and Theoretical Framework: Understanding the Differences

Using AI for research: A beginner’s guide

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

Knowledge Base
Methodology

Research Methods | Definition, Types, Examples

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

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

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

Second, decide how you will analyse the data .

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

Methods for collecting data, examples of data collection methods, methods for analysing data, examples of data analysis methods, frequently asked questions about methodology.

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

Qualitative vs quantitative data

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

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

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


Qualitative
Quantitative		.

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

Primary vs secondary data

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

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


Primary
Secondary

Descriptive vs experimental data

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

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

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


Descriptive
Experimental

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Research methods for collecting data
Research method	Primary or secondary?	Qualitative or quantitative?	When to use
	Primary	Quantitative	To test cause-and-effect relationships.
	Primary	Quantitative	To understand general characteristics of a population.
Interview/focus group	Primary	Qualitative	To gain more in-depth understanding of a topic.
Observation	Primary	Either	To understand how something occurs in its natural setting.
	Secondary	Either	To situate your research in an existing body of work, or to evaluate trends within a research topic.
	Either	Either	To gain an in-depth understanding of a specific group or context, or when you don’t have the resources for a large study.

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

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

Qualitative analysis methods

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

From open-ended survey and interview questions, literature reviews, case studies, and other sources that use text rather than numbers.
Using non-probability sampling methods .

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

Quantitative analysis methods

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

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

During an experiment.
Using probability sampling methods .

Because the data are collected and analysed in a statistically valid way, the results of quantitative analysis can be easily standardised and shared among researchers.

Research methods for analysing data
Research method	Qualitative or quantitative?	When to use
	Quantitative	To analyse data collected in a statistically valid manner (e.g. from experiments, surveys, and observations).
Meta-analysis	Quantitative	To statistically analyse the results of a large collection of studies. Can only be applied to studies that collected data in a statistically valid manner.
	Qualitative	To analyse data collected from interviews, focus groups or textual sources. To understand general themes in the data and how they are communicated.
	Either	To analyse large volumes of textual or visual data collected from surveys, literature reviews, or other sources. Can be quantitative (i.e. frequencies of words) or qualitative (i.e. meanings of words).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Is this article helpful?

How To Choose Your Research Methodology

Qualitative vs quantitative vs mixed methods.

By: Derek Jansen (MBA). Expert Reviewed By: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | June 2021

Without a doubt, one of the most common questions we receive at Grad Coach is “ How do I choose the right methodology for my research? ”. It’s easy to see why – with so many options on the research design table, it’s easy to get intimidated, especially with all the complex lingo!

In this post, we’ll explain the three overarching types of research – qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods – and how you can go about choosing the best methodological approach for your research.

Overview: Choosing Your Methodology

Understanding the options – Qualitative research – Quantitative research – Mixed methods-based research

Choosing a research methodology – Nature of the research – Research area norms – Practicalities

1. Understanding the options

Before we jump into the question of how to choose a research methodology, it’s useful to take a step back to understand the three overarching types of research – qualitative , quantitative and mixed methods -based research. Each of these options takes a different methodological approach.

Qualitative research utilises data that is not numbers-based. In other words, qualitative research focuses on words , descriptions , concepts or ideas – while quantitative research makes use of numbers and statistics. Qualitative research investigates the “softer side” of things to explore and describe, while quantitative research focuses on the “hard numbers”, to measure differences between variables and the relationships between them.

Importantly, qualitative research methods are typically used to explore and gain a deeper understanding of the complexity of a situation – to draw a rich picture . In contrast to this, quantitative methods are usually used to confirm or test hypotheses . In other words, they have distinctly different purposes. The table below highlights a few of the key differences between qualitative and quantitative research – you can learn more about the differences here.

Uses an inductive approach
Is used to build theories
Takes a subjective approach
Adopts an open and flexible approach
The researcher is close to the respondents
Interviews and focus groups are oftentimes used to collect word-based data.
Generally, draws on small sample sizes
Uses qualitative data analysis techniques (e.g. content analysis , thematic analysis , etc)
Uses a deductive approach
Is used to test theories
Takes an objective approach
Adopts a closed, highly planned approach
The research is disconnected from respondents
Surveys or laboratory equipment are often used to collect number-based data.
Generally, requires large sample sizes
Uses statistical analysis techniques to make sense of the data

Mixed methods -based research, as you’d expect, attempts to bring these two types of research together, drawing on both qualitative and quantitative data. Quite often, mixed methods-based studies will use qualitative research to explore a situation and develop a potential model of understanding (this is called a conceptual framework), and then go on to use quantitative methods to test that model empirically.

In other words, while qualitative and quantitative methods (and the philosophies that underpin them) are completely different, they are not at odds with each other. It’s not a competition of qualitative vs quantitative. On the contrary, they can be used together to develop a high-quality piece of research. Of course, this is easier said than done, so we usually recommend that first-time researchers stick to a single approach , unless the nature of their study truly warrants a mixed-methods approach.

The key takeaway here, and the reason we started by looking at the three options, is that it’s important to understand that each methodological approach has a different purpose – for example, to explore and understand situations (qualitative), to test and measure (quantitative) or to do both. They’re not simply alternative tools for the same job.

Right – now that we’ve got that out of the way, let’s look at how you can go about choosing the right methodology for your research.

2. How to choose a research methodology

To choose the right research methodology for your dissertation or thesis, you need to consider three important factors . Based on these three factors, you can decide on your overarching approach – qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods. Once you’ve made that decision, you can flesh out the finer details of your methodology, such as the sampling , data collection methods and analysis techniques (we discuss these separately in other posts ).

The three factors you need to consider are:

The nature of your research aims, objectives and research questions
The methodological approaches taken in the existing literature
Practicalities and constraints

Let’s take a look at each of these.

Factor #1: The nature of your research

As I mentioned earlier, each type of research (and therefore, research methodology), whether qualitative, quantitative or mixed, has a different purpose and helps solve a different type of question. So, it’s logical that the key deciding factor in terms of which research methodology you adopt is the nature of your research aims, objectives and research questions .

But, what types of research exist?

Broadly speaking, research can fall into one of three categories:

Exploratory – getting a better understanding of an issue and potentially developing a theory regarding it
Confirmatory – confirming a potential theory or hypothesis by testing it empirically
A mix of both – building a potential theory or hypothesis and then testing it

As a rule of thumb, exploratory research tends to adopt a qualitative approach , whereas confirmatory research tends to use quantitative methods . This isn’t set in stone, but it’s a very useful heuristic. Naturally then, research that combines a mix of both, or is seeking to develop a theory from the ground up and then test that theory, would utilize a mixed-methods approach.

Let’s look at an example in action.

If your research aims were to understand the perspectives of war veterans regarding certain political matters, you’d likely adopt a qualitative methodology, making use of interviews to collect data and one or more qualitative data analysis methods to make sense of the data.

If, on the other hand, your research aims involved testing a set of hypotheses regarding the link between political leaning and income levels, you’d likely adopt a quantitative methodology, using numbers-based data from a survey to measure the links between variables and/or constructs .

So, the first (and most important thing) thing you need to consider when deciding which methodological approach to use for your research project is the nature of your research aims , objectives and research questions. Specifically, you need to assess whether your research leans in an exploratory or confirmatory direction or involves a mix of both.

The importance of achieving solid alignment between these three factors and your methodology can’t be overstated. If they’re misaligned, you’re going to be forcing a square peg into a round hole. In other words, you’ll be using the wrong tool for the job, and your research will become a disjointed mess.

If your research is a mix of both exploratory and confirmatory, but you have a tight word count limit, you may need to consider trimming down the scope a little and focusing on one or the other. One methodology executed well has a far better chance of earning marks than a poorly executed mixed methods approach. So, don’t try to be a hero, unless there is a very strong underpinning logic.

Need a helping hand?

Factor #2: The disciplinary norms

Choosing the right methodology for your research also involves looking at the approaches used by other researchers in the field, and studies with similar research aims and objectives to yours. Oftentimes, within a discipline, there is a common methodological approach (or set of approaches) used in studies. While this doesn’t mean you should follow the herd “just because”, you should at least consider these approaches and evaluate their merit within your context.

A major benefit of reviewing the research methodologies used by similar studies in your field is that you can often piggyback on the data collection techniques that other (more experienced) researchers have developed. For example, if you’re undertaking a quantitative study, you can often find tried and tested survey scales with high Cronbach’s alphas. These are usually included in the appendices of journal articles, so you don’t even have to contact the original authors. By using these, you’ll save a lot of time and ensure that your study stands on the proverbial “shoulders of giants” by using high-quality measurement instruments .

Of course, when reviewing existing literature, keep point #1 front of mind. In other words, your methodology needs to align with your research aims, objectives and questions. Don’t fall into the trap of adopting the methodological “norm” of other studies just because it’s popular. Only adopt that which is relevant to your research.

Factor #3: Practicalities

When choosing a research methodology, there will always be a tension between doing what’s theoretically best (i.e., the most scientifically rigorous research design ) and doing what’s practical , given your constraints . This is the nature of doing research and there are always trade-offs, as with anything else.

But what constraints, you ask?

When you’re evaluating your methodological options, you need to consider the following constraints:

Data access
Equipment and software
Your knowledge and skills

Let’s look at each of these.

Constraint #1: Data access

The first practical constraint you need to consider is your access to data . If you’re going to be undertaking primary research , you need to think critically about the sample of respondents you realistically have access to. For example, if you plan to use in-person interviews , you need to ask yourself how many people you’ll need to interview, whether they’ll be agreeable to being interviewed, where they’re located, and so on.

If you’re wanting to undertake a quantitative approach using surveys to collect data, you’ll need to consider how many responses you’ll require to achieve statistically significant results. For many statistical tests, a sample of a few hundred respondents is typically needed to develop convincing conclusions.

So, think carefully about what data you’ll need access to, how much data you’ll need and how you’ll collect it. The last thing you want is to spend a huge amount of time on your research only to find that you can’t get access to the required data.

Constraint #2: Time

The next constraint is time. If you’re undertaking research as part of a PhD, you may have a fairly open-ended time limit, but this is unlikely to be the case for undergrad and Masters-level projects. So, pay attention to your timeline, as the data collection and analysis components of different methodologies have a major impact on time requirements . Also, keep in mind that these stages of the research often take a lot longer than originally anticipated.

Another practical implication of time limits is that it will directly impact which time horizon you can use – i.e. longitudinal vs cross-sectional . For example, if you’ve got a 6-month limit for your entire research project, it’s quite unlikely that you’ll be able to adopt a longitudinal time horizon.

Constraint #3: Money

As with so many things, money is another important constraint you’ll need to consider when deciding on your research methodology. While some research designs will cost near zero to execute, others may require a substantial budget .

Some of the costs that may arise include:

Software costs – e.g. survey hosting services, analysis software, etc.
Promotion costs – e.g. advertising a survey to attract respondents
Incentive costs – e.g. providing a prize or cash payment incentive to attract respondents
Equipment rental costs – e.g. recording equipment, lab equipment, etc.
Travel costs
Food & beverages

These are just a handful of costs that can creep into your research budget. Like most projects, the actual costs tend to be higher than the estimates, so be sure to err on the conservative side and expect the unexpected. It’s critically important that you’re honest with yourself about these costs, or you could end up getting stuck midway through your project because you’ve run out of money.

Constraint #4: Equipment & software

Another practical consideration is the hardware and/or software you’ll need in order to undertake your research. Of course, this variable will depend on the type of data you’re collecting and analysing. For example, you may need lab equipment to analyse substances, or you may need specific analysis software to analyse statistical data. So, be sure to think about what hardware and/or software you’ll need for each potential methodological approach, and whether you have access to these.

Constraint #5: Your knowledge and skillset

The final practical constraint is a big one. Naturally, the research process involves a lot of learning and development along the way, so you will accrue knowledge and skills as you progress. However, when considering your methodological options, you should still consider your current position on the ladder.

Some of the questions you should ask yourself are:

Am I more of a “numbers person” or a “words person”?
How much do I know about the analysis methods I’ll potentially use (e.g. statistical analysis)?
How much do I know about the software and/or hardware that I’ll potentially use?
How excited am I to learn new research skills and gain new knowledge?
How much time do I have to learn the things I need to learn?

Answering these questions honestly will provide you with another set of criteria against which you can evaluate the research methodology options you’ve shortlisted.

So, as you can see, there is a wide range of practicalities and constraints that you need to take into account when you’re deciding on a research methodology. These practicalities create a tension between the “ideal” methodology and the methodology that you can realistically pull off. This is perfectly normal, and it’s your job to find the option that presents the best set of trade-offs.

Recap: Choosing a methodology

In this post, we’ve discussed how to go about choosing a research methodology. The three major deciding factors we looked at were:

Exploratory
Confirmatory
Combination
Research area norms
Hardware and software
Your knowledge and skillset

If you have any questions, feel free to leave a comment below. If you’d like a helping hand with your research methodology, check out our 1-on-1 research coaching service , or book a free consultation with a friendly Grad Coach.

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

Very useful and informative especially for beginners

Nice article! I’m a beginner in the field of cybersecurity research. I am a Telecom and Network Engineer and Also aiming for PhD scholarship.

I find the article very informative especially for my decitation it has been helpful and an eye opener.

Hi I am Anna ,

I am a PHD candidate in the area of cyber security, maybe we can link up

The Examples shows by you, for sure they are really direct me and others to knows and practices the Research Design and prepration.

I found the post very informative and practical.

I struggle so much with designs of the research for sure!

I’m the process of constructing my research design and I want to know if the data analysis I plan to present in my thesis defense proposal possibly change especially after I gathered the data already.

Thank you so much this site is such a life saver. How I wish 1-1 coaching is available in our country but sadly it’s not.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

Print Friendly

Home » Research Methods – Types, Examples and Guide

Research Methods – Types, Examples and Guide

Table of Contents

Research Methods

Definition:

Research Methods refer to the techniques, procedures, and processes used by researchers to collect , analyze, and interpret data in order to answer research questions or test hypotheses. The methods used in research can vary depending on the research questions, the type of data that is being collected, and the research design.

Types of Research Methods

Types of Research Methods are as follows:

Qualitative research Method

Qualitative research methods are used to collect and analyze non-numerical data. This type of research is useful when the objective is to explore the meaning of phenomena, understand the experiences of individuals, or gain insights into complex social processes. Qualitative research methods include interviews, focus groups, ethnography, and content analysis.

Quantitative Research Method

Quantitative research methods are used to collect and analyze numerical data. This type of research is useful when the objective is to test a hypothesis, determine cause-and-effect relationships, and measure the prevalence of certain phenomena. Quantitative research methods include surveys, experiments, and secondary data analysis.

Mixed Method Research

Mixed Method Research refers to the combination of both qualitative and quantitative research methods in a single study. This approach aims to overcome the limitations of each individual method and to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the research topic. This approach allows researchers to gather both quantitative data, which is often used to test hypotheses and make generalizations about a population, and qualitative data, which provides a more in-depth understanding of the experiences and perspectives of individuals.

Key Differences Between Research Methods

The following Table shows the key differences between Quantitative, Qualitative and Mixed Research Methods

Research Method	Quantitative	Qualitative	Mixed Methods
	To measure and quantify variables	To understand the meaning and complexity of phenomena	To integrate both quantitative and qualitative approaches
	Typically focused on testing hypotheses and determining cause and effect relationships	Typically exploratory and focused on understanding the subjective experiences and perspectives of participants	Can be either, depending on the research design
	Usually involves standardized measures or surveys administered to large samples	Often involves in-depth interviews, observations, or analysis of texts or other forms of data	Usually involves a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods
	Typically involves statistical analysis to identify patterns and relationships in the data	Typically involves thematic analysis or other qualitative methods to identify themes and patterns in the data	Usually involves both quantitative and qualitative analysis
	Can provide precise, objective data that can be generalized to a larger population	Can provide rich, detailed data that can help understand complex phenomena in depth	Can combine the strengths of both quantitative and qualitative approaches
	May not capture the full complexity of phenomena, and may be limited by the quality of the measures used	May be subjective and may not be generalizable to larger populations	Can be time-consuming and resource-intensive, and may require specialized skills
Typically focused on testing hypotheses and determining cause-and-effect relationships	Surveys, experiments, correlational studies	Interviews, focus groups, ethnography	Sequential explanatory design, convergent parallel design, explanatory sequential design

Examples of Research Methods

Examples of Research Methods are as follows:

Qualitative Research Example:

A researcher wants to study the experience of cancer patients during their treatment. They conduct in-depth interviews with patients to gather data on their emotional state, coping mechanisms, and support systems.

Quantitative Research Example:

A company wants to determine the effectiveness of a new advertisement campaign. They survey a large group of people, asking them to rate their awareness of the product and their likelihood of purchasing it.

Mixed Research Example:

A university wants to evaluate the effectiveness of a new teaching method in improving student performance. They collect both quantitative data (such as test scores) and qualitative data (such as feedback from students and teachers) to get a complete picture of the impact of the new method.

Applications of Research Methods

Research methods are used in various fields to investigate, analyze, and answer research questions. Here are some examples of how research methods are applied in different fields:

Psychology : Research methods are widely used in psychology to study human behavior, emotions, and mental processes. For example, researchers may use experiments, surveys, and observational studies to understand how people behave in different situations, how they respond to different stimuli, and how their brains process information.
Sociology : Sociologists use research methods to study social phenomena, such as social inequality, social change, and social relationships. Researchers may use surveys, interviews, and observational studies to collect data on social attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors.
Medicine : Research methods are essential in medical research to study diseases, test new treatments, and evaluate their effectiveness. Researchers may use clinical trials, case studies, and laboratory experiments to collect data on the efficacy and safety of different medical treatments.
Education : Research methods are used in education to understand how students learn, how teachers teach, and how educational policies affect student outcomes. Researchers may use surveys, experiments, and observational studies to collect data on student performance, teacher effectiveness, and educational programs.
Business : Research methods are used in business to understand consumer behavior, market trends, and business strategies. Researchers may use surveys, focus groups, and observational studies to collect data on consumer preferences, market trends, and industry competition.
Environmental science : Research methods are used in environmental science to study the natural world and its ecosystems. Researchers may use field studies, laboratory experiments, and observational studies to collect data on environmental factors, such as air and water quality, and the impact of human activities on the environment.
Political science : Research methods are used in political science to study political systems, institutions, and behavior. Researchers may use surveys, experiments, and observational studies to collect data on political attitudes, voting behavior, and the impact of policies on society.

Purpose of Research Methods

Research methods serve several purposes, including:

Identify research problems: Research methods are used to identify research problems or questions that need to be addressed through empirical investigation.
Develop hypotheses: Research methods help researchers develop hypotheses, which are tentative explanations for the observed phenomenon or relationship.
Collect data: Research methods enable researchers to collect data in a systematic and objective way, which is necessary to test hypotheses and draw meaningful conclusions.
Analyze data: Research methods provide tools and techniques for analyzing data, such as statistical analysis, content analysis, and discourse analysis.
Test hypotheses: Research methods allow researchers to test hypotheses by examining the relationships between variables in a systematic and controlled manner.
Draw conclusions : Research methods facilitate the drawing of conclusions based on empirical evidence and help researchers make generalizations about a population based on their sample data.
Enhance understanding: Research methods contribute to the development of knowledge and enhance our understanding of various phenomena and relationships, which can inform policy, practice, and theory.

When to Use Research Methods

Research methods are used when you need to gather information or data to answer a question or to gain insights into a particular phenomenon.

Here are some situations when research methods may be appropriate:

To investigate a problem : Research methods can be used to investigate a problem or a research question in a particular field. This can help in identifying the root cause of the problem and developing solutions.
To gather data: Research methods can be used to collect data on a particular subject. This can be done through surveys, interviews, observations, experiments, and more.
To evaluate programs : Research methods can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of a program, intervention, or policy. This can help in determining whether the program is meeting its goals and objectives.
To explore new areas : Research methods can be used to explore new areas of inquiry or to test new hypotheses. This can help in advancing knowledge in a particular field.
To make informed decisions : Research methods can be used to gather information and data to support informed decision-making. This can be useful in various fields such as healthcare, business, and education.

Advantages of Research Methods

Research methods provide several advantages, including:

Objectivity : Research methods enable researchers to gather data in a systematic and objective manner, minimizing personal biases and subjectivity. This leads to more reliable and valid results.
Replicability : A key advantage of research methods is that they allow for replication of studies by other researchers. This helps to confirm the validity of the findings and ensures that the results are not specific to the particular research team.
Generalizability : Research methods enable researchers to gather data from a representative sample of the population, allowing for generalizability of the findings to a larger population. This increases the external validity of the research.
Precision : Research methods enable researchers to gather data using standardized procedures, ensuring that the data is accurate and precise. This allows researchers to make accurate predictions and draw meaningful conclusions.
Efficiency : Research methods enable researchers to gather data efficiently, saving time and resources. This is especially important when studying large populations or complex phenomena.
Innovation : Research methods enable researchers to develop new techniques and tools for data collection and analysis, leading to innovation and advancement in the field.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

Experimental Design – Types, Methods, Guide

Observational Research – Methods and Guide

Research Topics – Ideas and Examples

Research Paper – Structure, Examples and Writing...

Ethical Considerations – Types, Examples and...

Exploratory Research – Types, Methods and...

USC Libraries
Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

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

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

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

Importance of a Good Methodology Section

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

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

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

Structure and Writing Style

I. Groups of Research Methods

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

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

II. Content

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

The remainder of your methodology section should describe the following:

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

In addition, an effectively written methodology section should:

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

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

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

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

III. Problems to Avoid

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

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

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

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

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

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

Writing Tip

Statistical Designs and Tests? Do Not Fear Them!

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

To locate data and statistics, GO HERE .

Another Writing Tip

Knowing the Relationship Between Theories and Methods

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

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

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

Yet Another Writing Tip

Methods and the Methodology

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

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

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

<< Previous: Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
Next: Qualitative Methods >>
Last Updated: Sep 4, 2024 9:40 AM
URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

Knowledge Base

Methodology

What Is Qualitative Research? | Methods & Examples

What Is Qualitative Research? | Methods & Examples

Published on June 19, 2020 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on June 22, 2023.

Qualitative research involves collecting and analyzing non-numerical data (e.g., text, video, or audio) to understand concepts, opinions, or experiences. It can be used to gather in-depth insights into a problem or generate new ideas for research.

Qualitative research is the opposite of quantitative research , which involves collecting and analyzing numerical data for statistical analysis.

Qualitative research is commonly used in the humanities and social sciences, in subjects such as anthropology, sociology, education, health sciences, history, etc.

How does social media shape body image in teenagers?
How do children and adults interpret healthy eating in the UK?
What factors influence employee retention in a large organization?
How is anxiety experienced around the world?
How can teachers integrate social issues into science curriculums?

Approaches to qualitative research, qualitative research methods, qualitative data analysis, advantages of qualitative research, disadvantages of qualitative research, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about qualitative research.

Qualitative research is used to understand how people experience the world. While there are many approaches to qualitative research, they tend to be flexible and focus on retaining rich meaning when interpreting data.

Common approaches include grounded theory, ethnography , action research , phenomenological research, and narrative research. They share some similarities, but emphasize different aims and perspectives.

Qualitative research approaches
Approach	What does it involve?
Grounded theory	Researchers collect rich data on a topic of interest and develop theories .
	Researchers immerse themselves in groups or organizations to understand their cultures.
Action research	Researchers and participants collaboratively link theory to practice to drive social change.
Phenomenological research	Researchers investigate a phenomenon or event by describing and interpreting participants’ lived experiences.
Narrative research	Researchers examine how stories are told to understand how participants perceive and make sense of their experiences.

Note that qualitative research is at risk for certain research biases including the Hawthorne effect , observer bias , recall bias , and social desirability bias . While not always totally avoidable, awareness of potential biases as you collect and analyze your data can prevent them from impacting your work too much.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Each of the research approaches involve using one or more data collection methods . These are some of the most common qualitative methods:

Observations: recording what you have seen, heard, or encountered in detailed field notes.
Interviews: personally asking people questions in one-on-one conversations.
Focus groups: asking questions and generating discussion among a group of people.
Surveys : distributing questionnaires with open-ended questions.
Secondary research: collecting existing data in the form of texts, images, audio or video recordings, etc.
You take field notes with observations and reflect on your own experiences of the company culture.
You distribute open-ended surveys to employees across all the company’s offices by email to find out if the culture varies across locations.
You conduct in-depth interviews with employees in your office to learn about their experiences and perspectives in greater detail.

Qualitative researchers often consider themselves “instruments” in research because all observations, interpretations and analyses are filtered through their own personal lens.

For this reason, when writing up your methodology for qualitative research, it’s important to reflect on your approach and to thoroughly explain the choices you made in collecting and analyzing the data.

Qualitative data can take the form of texts, photos, videos and audio. For example, you might be working with interview transcripts, survey responses, fieldnotes, or recordings from natural settings.

Most types of qualitative data analysis share the same five steps:

Prepare and organize your data. This may mean transcribing interviews or typing up fieldnotes.
Review and explore your data. Examine the data for patterns or repeated ideas that emerge.
Develop a data coding system. Based on your initial ideas, establish a set of codes that you can apply to categorize your data.
Assign codes to the data. For example, in qualitative survey analysis, this may mean going through each participant’s responses and tagging them with codes in a spreadsheet. As you go through your data, you can create new codes to add to your system if necessary.
Identify recurring themes. Link codes together into cohesive, overarching themes.

There are several specific approaches to analyzing qualitative data. Although these methods share similar processes, they emphasize different concepts.

Qualitative data analysis
Approach	When to use	Example
	To describe and categorize common words, phrases, and ideas in qualitative data.	A market researcher could perform content analysis to find out what kind of language is used in descriptions of therapeutic apps.
	To identify and interpret patterns and themes in qualitative data.	A psychologist could apply thematic analysis to travel blogs to explore how tourism shapes self-identity.
	To examine the content, structure, and design of texts.	A media researcher could use textual analysis to understand how news coverage of celebrities has changed in the past decade.
	To study communication and how language is used to achieve effects in specific contexts.	A political scientist could use discourse analysis to study how politicians generate trust in election campaigns.

Qualitative research often tries to preserve the voice and perspective of participants and can be adjusted as new research questions arise. Qualitative research is good for:

Flexibility

The data collection and analysis process can be adapted as new ideas or patterns emerge. They are not rigidly decided beforehand.

Natural settings

Data collection occurs in real-world contexts or in naturalistic ways.

Meaningful insights

Detailed descriptions of people’s experiences, feelings and perceptions can be used in designing, testing or improving systems or products.

Generation of new ideas

Open-ended responses mean that researchers can uncover novel problems or opportunities that they wouldn’t have thought of otherwise.

Researchers must consider practical and theoretical limitations in analyzing and interpreting their data. Qualitative research suffers from:

Unreliability

The real-world setting often makes qualitative research unreliable because of uncontrolled factors that affect the data.

Subjectivity

Due to the researcher’s primary role in analyzing and interpreting data, qualitative research cannot be replicated . The researcher decides what is important and what is irrelevant in data analysis, so interpretations of the same data can vary greatly.

Limited generalizability

Small samples are often used to gather detailed data about specific contexts. Despite rigorous analysis procedures, it is difficult to draw generalizable conclusions because the data may be biased and unrepresentative of the wider population .

Labor-intensive

Although software can be used to manage and record large amounts of text, data analysis often has to be checked or performed manually.

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

Chi square goodness of fit test
Degrees of freedom
Null hypothesis
Discourse analysis
Control groups
Mixed methods research
Non-probability sampling
Quantitative research
Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Research bias

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

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

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

There are five common approaches to qualitative research :

Grounded theory involves collecting data in order to develop new theories.
Ethnography involves immersing yourself in a group or organization to understand its culture.
Narrative research involves interpreting stories to understand how people make sense of their experiences and perceptions.
Phenomenological research involves investigating phenomena through people’s lived experiences.
Action research links theory and practice in several cycles to drive innovative changes.

Data collection is the systematic process by which observations or measurements are gathered in research. It is used in many different contexts by academics, governments, businesses, and other organizations.

There are various approaches to qualitative data analysis , but they all share five steps in common:

Prepare and organize your data.
Review and explore your data.
Develop a data coding system.
Assign codes to the data.
Identify recurring themes.

The specifics of each step depend on the focus of the analysis. Some common approaches include textual analysis , thematic analysis , and discourse analysis .

Cite this Scribbr article

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

Bhandari, P. (2023, June 22). What Is Qualitative Research? | Methods & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved September 6, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/qualitative-research/

Is this article helpful?

Pritha Bhandari

Other students also liked, qualitative vs. quantitative research | differences, examples & methods, how to do thematic analysis | step-by-step guide & examples, what is your plagiarism score.

15 Types of Research Methods

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

Learn about our Editorial Process

types of research methods, explained below

Research methods refer to the strategies, tools, and techniques used to gather and analyze data in a structured way in order to answer a research question or investigate a hypothesis (Hammond & Wellington, 2020).

Generally, we place research methods into two categories: quantitative and qualitative. Each has its own strengths and weaknesses, which we can summarize as:

Quantitative research can achieve generalizability through scrupulous statistical analysis applied to large sample sizes.
Qualitative research achieves deep, detailed, and nuance accounts of specific case studies, which are not generalizable.

Some researchers, with the aim of making the most of both quantitative and qualitative research, employ mixed methods, whereby they will apply both types of research methods in the one study, such as by conducting a statistical survey alongside in-depth interviews to add context to the quantitative findings.

Below, I’ll outline 15 common research methods, and include pros, cons, and examples of each .

Types of Research Methods

Research methods can be broadly categorized into two types: quantitative and qualitative.

Quantitative methods involve systematic empirical investigation of observable phenomena via statistical, mathematical, or computational techniques, providing an in-depth understanding of a specific concept or phenomenon (Schweigert, 2021). The strengths of this approach include its ability to produce reliable results that can be generalized to a larger population, although it can lack depth and detail.
Qualitative methods encompass techniques that are designed to provide a deep understanding of a complex issue, often in a specific context, through collection of non-numerical data (Tracy, 2019). This approach often provides rich, detailed insights but can be time-consuming and its findings may not be generalizable.

These can be further broken down into a range of specific research methods and designs:

Primarily Quantitative Methods	Primarily Qualitative methods
Experimental Research	Case Study
Surveys and Questionnaires	Ethnography
Longitudinal Studies	Phenomenology
Cross-Sectional Studies	Historical research
Correlational Research	Content analysis
Causal-Comparative Research	Grounded theory
Meta-Analysis	Action research
Quasi-Experimental Design	Observational research

Combining the two methods above, mixed methods research mixes elements of both qualitative and quantitative research methods, providing a comprehensive understanding of the research problem . We can further break these down into:

Sequential Explanatory Design (QUAN→QUAL): This methodology involves conducting quantitative analysis first, then supplementing it with a qualitative study.
Sequential Exploratory Design (QUAL→QUAN): This methodology goes in the other direction, starting with qualitative analysis and ending with quantitative analysis.

Let’s explore some methods and designs from both quantitative and qualitative traditions, starting with qualitative research methods.

Qualitative Research Methods

Qualitative research methods allow for the exploration of phenomena in their natural settings, providing detailed, descriptive responses and insights into individuals’ experiences and perceptions (Howitt, 2019).

These methods are useful when a detailed understanding of a phenomenon is sought.

1. Ethnographic Research

Ethnographic research emerged out of anthropological research, where anthropologists would enter into a setting for a sustained period of time, getting to know a cultural group and taking detailed observations.

Ethnographers would sometimes even act as participants in the group or culture, which many scholars argue is a weakness because it is a step away from achieving objectivity (Stokes & Wall, 2017).

In fact, at its most extreme version, ethnographers even conduct research on themselves, in a fascinating methodology call autoethnography .

The purpose is to understand the culture, social structure, and the behaviors of the group under study. It is often useful when researchers seek to understand shared cultural meanings and practices in their natural settings.

However, it can be time-consuming and may reflect researcher biases due to the immersion approach.

Pros of Ethnographic Research	Cons of Ethnographic Research
1. Provides deep cultural insights	1. Time-consuming
2. Contextually relevant findings	2. Potential researcher bias
3. Explores dynamic social processes	3. May

Example of Ethnography

Liquidated: An Ethnography of Wall Street by Karen Ho involves an anthropologist who embeds herself with Wall Street firms to study the culture of Wall Street bankers and how this culture affects the broader economy and world.

2. Phenomenological Research

Phenomenological research is a qualitative method focused on the study of individual experiences from the participant’s perspective (Tracy, 2019).

It focuses specifically on people’s experiences in relation to a specific social phenomenon ( see here for examples of social phenomena ).

This method is valuable when the goal is to understand how individuals perceive, experience, and make meaning of particular phenomena. However, because it is subjective and dependent on participants’ self-reports, findings may not be generalizable, and are highly reliant on self-reported ‘thoughts and feelings’.

Pros of Phenomenological Research	Cons of Phenomenological Research
1. Provides rich, detailed data	1. Limited generalizability
2. Highlights personal experience and perceptions	2. Data collection can be time-consuming
3. Allows exploration of complex phenomena	3. Requires highly skilled researchers

Example of Phenomenological Research

A phenomenological approach to experiences with technology by Sebnem Cilesiz represents a good starting-point for formulating a phenomenological study. With its focus on the ‘essence of experience’, this piece presents methodological, reliability, validity, and data analysis techniques that phenomenologists use to explain how people experience technology in their everyday lives.

3. Historical Research

Historical research is a qualitative method involving the examination of past events to draw conclusions about the present or make predictions about the future (Stokes & Wall, 2017).

As you might expect, it’s common in the research branches of history departments in universities.

This approach is useful in studies that seek to understand the past to interpret present events or trends. However, it relies heavily on the availability and reliability of source materials, which may be limited.

Common data sources include cultural artifacts from both material and non-material culture , which are then examined, compared, contrasted, and contextualized to test hypotheses and generate theories.

Pros of Historical Research	Cons of Historical Research
1.	1. Dependent on available sources
2. Can help understand current events or trends	2. Potential bias in source materials
3. Allows the study of change over time	3. Difficult to replicate

Example of Historical Research

A historical research example might be a study examining the evolution of gender roles over the last century. This research might involve the analysis of historical newspapers, advertisements, letters, and company documents, as well as sociocultural contexts.

4. Content Analysis

Content analysis is a research method that involves systematic and objective coding and interpreting of text or media to identify patterns, themes, ideologies, or biases (Schweigert, 2021).

A content analysis is useful in analyzing communication patterns, helping to reveal how texts such as newspapers, movies, films, political speeches, and other types of ‘content’ contain narratives and biases.

However, interpretations can be very subjective, which often requires scholars to engage in practices such as cross-comparing their coding with peers or external researchers.

Content analysis can be further broken down in to other specific methodologies such as semiotic analysis, multimodal analysis , and discourse analysis .

Pros of Content Analysis	Cons of Content Analysis
1. Unobtrusive data collection	1. Lacks contextual information
2. Allows for large sample analysis	2. Potential coder bias
3. Replicable and reliable if done properly	3. May overlook nuances

Example of Content Analysis

How is Islam Portrayed in Western Media? by Poorebrahim and Zarei (2013) employs a type of content analysis called critical discourse analysis (common in poststructuralist and critical theory research ). This study by Poorebrahum and Zarei combs through a corpus of western media texts to explore the language forms that are used in relation to Islam and Muslims, finding that they are overly stereotyped, which may represent anti-Islam bias or failure to understand the Islamic world.

5. Grounded Theory Research

Grounded theory involves developing a theory during and after data collection rather than beforehand.

This is in contrast to most academic research studies, which start with a hypothesis or theory and then testing of it through a study, where we might have a null hypothesis (disproving the theory) and an alternative hypothesis (supporting the theory).

Grounded Theory is useful because it keeps an open mind to what the data might reveal out of the research. It can be time-consuming and requires rigorous data analysis (Tracy, 2019).

Pros of Grounded Theory Research	Cons of Grounded Theory Research
1. Helps with theory development	1. Time-consuming
2. Rigorous data analysis	2. Requires iterative data collection and analysis
3. Can fill gaps in existing theories	3. Requires skilled researchers

Grounded Theory Example

Developing a Leadership Identity by Komives et al (2005) employs a grounded theory approach to develop a thesis based on the data rather than testing a hypothesis. The researchers studied the leadership identity of 13 college students taking on leadership roles. Based on their interviews, the researchers theorized that the students’ leadership identities shifted from a hierarchical view of leadership to one that embraced leadership as a collaborative concept.

6. Action Research

Action research is an approach which aims to solve real-world problems and bring about change within a setting. The study is designed to solve a specific problem – or in other words, to take action (Patten, 2017).

This approach can involve mixed methods, but is generally qualitative because it usually involves the study of a specific case study wherein the researcher works, e.g. a teacher studying their own classroom practice to seek ways they can improve.

Action research is very common in fields like education and nursing where practitioners identify areas for improvement then implement a study in order to find paths forward.

Pros of Action Research	Cons of Action Research
1. Addresses real-world problems and seeks to find solutions.	1. It is time-consuming and often hard to implement into a practitioner’s already busy schedule
2. Integrates research and action in an action-research cycle.	2. Requires collaboration between researcher, practitioner, and research participants.
3. Can bring about positive change in isolated instances, such as in a school or nursery setting.	3. Complexity of managing dual roles (where the researcher is also often the practitioner)

Action Research Example

Using Digital Sandbox Gaming to Improve Creativity Within Boys’ Writing by Ellison and Drew was a research study one of my research students completed in his own classroom under my supervision. He implemented a digital game-based approach to literacy teaching with boys and interviewed his students to see if the use of games as stimuli for storytelling helped draw them into the learning experience.

7. Natural Observational Research

Observational research can also be quantitative (see: experimental research), but in naturalistic settings for the social sciences, researchers tend to employ qualitative data collection methods like interviews and field notes to observe people in their day-to-day environments.

This approach involves the observation and detailed recording of behaviors in their natural settings (Howitt, 2019). It can provide rich, in-depth information, but the researcher’s presence might influence behavior.

While observational research has some overlaps with ethnography (especially in regard to data collection techniques), it tends not to be as sustained as ethnography, e.g. a researcher might do 5 observations, every second Monday, as opposed to being embedded in an environment.

Pros of Qualitative Observational Research	Cons of Qualitative Observational Research
1. Captures behavior in natural settings, allowing for interesting insights into authentic behaviors.	1. Researcher’s presence may influence behavior
2. Can provide rich, detailed data through the researcher’s vignettes.	2. Can be time-consuming
3. Non-invasive because researchers want to observe natural activities rather than interfering with research participants.	3. Requires skilled and trained observers

Observational Research Example

A researcher might use qualitative observational research to study the behaviors and interactions of children at a playground. The researcher would document the behaviors observed, such as the types of games played, levels of cooperation , and instances of conflict.

8. Case Study Research

Case study research is a qualitative method that involves a deep and thorough investigation of a single individual, group, or event in order to explore facets of that phenomenon that cannot be captured using other methods (Stokes & Wall, 2017).

Case study research is especially valuable in providing contextualized insights into specific issues, facilitating the application of abstract theories to real-world situations (Patten, 2017).

However, findings from a case study may not be generalizable due to the specific context and the limited number of cases studied (Walliman, 2021).

Pros of Case Study Research	Cons of Case Study Research
1. Provides detailed insights	1. Limited generalizability
2. Facilitates the study of complex phenomena	2. Can be time-consuming
3. Can test or generate theories	3. Subject to observer bias

See More: Case Study Advantages and Disadvantages

Example of a Case Study

Scholars conduct a detailed exploration of the implementation of a new teaching method within a classroom setting. The study focuses on how the teacher and students adapt to the new method, the challenges encountered, and the outcomes on student performance and engagement. While the study provides specific and detailed insights of the teaching method in that classroom, it cannot be generalized to other classrooms, as statistical significance has not been established through this qualitative approach.

Quantitative Research Methods

Quantitative research methods involve the systematic empirical investigation of observable phenomena via statistical, mathematical, or computational techniques (Pajo, 2022). The focus is on gathering numerical data and generalizing it across groups of people or to explain a particular phenomenon.

9. Experimental Research

Experimental research is a quantitative method where researchers manipulate one variable to determine its effect on another (Walliman, 2021).

This is common, for example, in high-school science labs, where students are asked to introduce a variable into a setting in order to examine its effect.

This type of research is useful in situations where researchers want to determine causal relationships between variables. However, experimental conditions may not reflect real-world conditions.

Pros of Experimental Research	Cons of Experimental Research
1. Allows for determination of causality	1. Might not reflect real-world conditions
2. Allows for the study of phenomena in highly controlled environments to minimize research contamination.	2. Can be costly and time-consuming to create a controlled environment.
3. Can be replicated so other researchers can test and verify the results.	3. Ethical concerns need to be addressed as the research is directly manipulating variables.

Example of Experimental Research

A researcher may conduct an experiment to determine the effects of a new educational approach on student learning outcomes. Students would be randomly assigned to either the control group (traditional teaching method) or the experimental group (new educational approach).

10. Surveys and Questionnaires

Surveys and questionnaires are quantitative methods that involve asking research participants structured and predefined questions to collect data about their attitudes, beliefs, behaviors, or characteristics (Patten, 2017).

Surveys are beneficial for collecting data from large samples, but they depend heavily on the honesty and accuracy of respondents.

They tend to be seen as more authoritative than their qualitative counterparts, semi-structured interviews, because the data is quantifiable (e.g. a questionnaire where information is presented on a scale from 1 to 10 can allow researchers to determine and compare statistical means, averages, and variations across sub-populations in the study).

Pros of Surveys and Questionnaires	Cons of Surveys and Questionnaires
1. Data can be gathered from larger samples than is possible in qualitative research.	1. There is heavy dependence on respondent honesty
2. The data is quantifiable, allowing for comparison across subpopulations	2. There is limited depth of response as opposed to qualitative approaches.
3. Can be cost-effective and time-efficient	3. Static with no flexibility to explore responses (unlike semi- or unstrcutured interviewing)

Example of a Survey Study

A company might use a survey to gather data about employee job satisfaction across its offices worldwide. Employees would be asked to rate various aspects of their job satisfaction on a Likert scale. While this method provides a broad overview, it may lack the depth of understanding possible with other methods (Stokes & Wall, 2017).

11. Longitudinal Studies

Longitudinal studies involve repeated observations of the same variables over extended periods (Howitt, 2019). These studies are valuable for tracking development and change but can be costly and time-consuming.

With multiple data points collected over extended periods, it’s possible to examine continuous changes within things like population dynamics or consumer behavior. This makes a detailed analysis of change possible.

a visual representation of a longitudinal study demonstrating that data is collected over time on one sample so researchers can examine how variables change over time

Perhaps the most relatable example of a longitudinal study is a national census, which is taken on the same day every few years, to gather comparative demographic data that can show how a nation is changing over time.

While longitudinal studies are commonly quantitative, there are also instances of qualitative ones as well, such as the famous 7 Up study from the UK, which studies 14 individuals every 7 years to explore their development over their lives.

Pros of Longitudinal Studies	Cons of Longitudinal Studies
1. Tracks changes over time allowing for comparison of past to present events.	1. Is almost by definition time-consuming because time needs to pass between each data collection session.
2. Can identify sequences of events, but causality is often harder to determine.	2. There is high risk of participant dropout over time as participants move on with their lives.

Example of a Longitudinal Study

A national census, taken every few years, uses surveys to develop longitudinal data, which is then compared and analyzed to present accurate trends over time. Trends a census can reveal include changes in religiosity, values and attitudes on social issues, and much more.

12. Cross-Sectional Studies

Cross-sectional studies are a quantitative research method that involves analyzing data from a population at a specific point in time (Patten, 2017). They provide a snapshot of a situation but cannot determine causality.

This design is used to measure and compare the prevalence of certain characteristics or outcomes in different groups within the sampled population.

A visual representation of a cross-sectional group of people, demonstrating that the data is collected at a single point in time and you can compare groups within the sample

The major advantage of cross-sectional design is its ability to measure a wide range of variables simultaneously without needing to follow up with participants over time.

However, cross-sectional studies do have limitations . This design can only show if there are associations or correlations between different variables, but cannot prove cause and effect relationships, temporal sequence, changes, and trends over time.

Pros of Cross-Sectional Studies	Cons of Cross-Sectional Studies
1. Quick and inexpensive, with no long-term commitment required.	1. Cannot determine causality because it is a simple snapshot, with no time delay between data collection points.
2. Good for descriptive analyses.	2. Does not allow researchers to follow up with research participants.

Example of a Cross-Sectional Study

Our longitudinal study example of a national census also happens to contain cross-sectional design. One census is cross-sectional, displaying only data from one point in time. But when a census is taken once every few years, it becomes longitudinal, and so long as the data collection technique remains unchanged, identification of changes will be achievable, adding another time dimension on top of a basic cross-sectional study.

13. Correlational Research

Correlational research is a quantitative method that seeks to determine if and to what degree a relationship exists between two or more quantifiable variables (Schweigert, 2021).

This approach provides a fast and easy way to make initial hypotheses based on either positive or negative correlation trends that can be observed within dataset.

While correlational research can reveal relationships between variables, it cannot establish causality.

Methods used for data analysis may include statistical correlations such as Pearson’s or Spearman’s.

Pros of Correlational Research	Cons of Correlational Research
1. Reveals relationships between variables	1. Cannot determine causality
2. Can use existing data	2. May be
3. Can guide further experimental research	3. Correlation may be coincidental

Example of Correlational Research

A team of researchers is interested in studying the relationship between the amount of time students spend studying and their academic performance. They gather data from a high school, measuring the number of hours each student studies per week and their grade point averages (GPAs) at the end of the semester. Upon analyzing the data, they find a positive correlation, suggesting that students who spend more time studying tend to have higher GPAs.

14. Quasi-Experimental Design Research

Quasi-experimental design research is a quantitative research method that is similar to experimental design but lacks the element of random assignment to treatment or control.

Instead, quasi-experimental designs typically rely on certain other methods to control for extraneous variables.

The term ‘quasi-experimental’ implies that the experiment resembles a true experiment, but it is not exactly the same because it doesn’t meet all the criteria for a ‘true’ experiment, specifically in terms of control and random assignment.

Quasi-experimental design is useful when researchers want to study a causal hypothesis or relationship, but practical or ethical considerations prevent them from manipulating variables and randomly assigning participants to conditions.

Pros	Cons
1. It’s more feasible to implement than true experiments.	1. Without random assignment, it’s harder to rule out confounding variables.
2. It can be conducted in real-world settings, making the findings more applicable to the real world.	2. The lack of random assignment may of the study.
3. Useful when it’s unethical or impossible to manipulate the independent variable or randomly assign participants.	3. It’s more difficult to establish a cause-effect relationship due to the potential for confounding variables.

Example of Quasi-Experimental Design

A researcher wants to study the impact of a new math tutoring program on student performance. However, ethical and practical constraints prevent random assignment to the “tutoring” and “no tutoring” groups. Instead, the researcher compares students who chose to receive tutoring (experimental group) to similar students who did not choose to receive tutoring (control group), controlling for other variables like grade level and previous math performance.

Related: Examples and Types of Random Assignment in Research

15. Meta-Analysis Research

Meta-analysis statistically combines the results of multiple studies on a specific topic to yield a more precise estimate of the effect size. It’s the gold standard of secondary research .

Meta-analysis is particularly useful when there are numerous studies on a topic, and there is a need to integrate the findings to draw more reliable conclusions.

Some meta-analyses can identify flaws or gaps in a corpus of research, when can be highly influential in academic research, despite lack of primary data collection.

However, they tend only to be feasible when there is a sizable corpus of high-quality and reliable studies into a phenomenon.

Pros	Cons
Increased Statistical Power: By combining data from multiple studies, meta-analysis increases the statistical power to detect effects.	Publication Bias: Studies with null or negative findings are less likely to be published, leading to an overestimation of effect sizes.
Greater Precision: It provides more precise estimates of effect sizes by reducing the influence of random error.	Quality of Studies: of a meta-analysis depends on the quality of the studies included.
Resolving Discrepancies: Meta-analysis can help resolve disagreements between different studies on a topic.	Heterogeneity: Differences in study design, sample, or procedures can introduce heterogeneity, complicating interpretation of results.

Example of a Meta-Analysis

The power of feedback revisited (Wisniewski, Zierer & Hattie, 2020) is a meta-analysis that examines 435 empirical studies research on the effects of feedback on student learning. They use a random-effects model to ascertain whether there is a clear effect size across the literature. The authors find that feedback tends to impact cognitive and motor skill outcomes but has less of an effect on motivational and behavioral outcomes.

Choosing a research method requires a lot of consideration regarding what you want to achieve, your research paradigm, and the methodology that is most valuable for what you are studying. There are multiple types of research methods, many of which I haven’t been able to present here. Generally, it’s recommended that you work with an experienced researcher or research supervisor to identify a suitable research method for your study at hand.

Hammond, M., & Wellington, J. (2020). Research methods: The key concepts . New York: Routledge.

Howitt, D. (2019). Introduction to qualitative research methods in psychology . London: Pearson UK.

Pajo, B. (2022). Introduction to research methods: A hands-on approach . New York: Sage Publications.

Patten, M. L. (2017). Understanding research methods: An overview of the essentials . New York: Sage

Schweigert, W. A. (2021). Research methods in psychology: A handbook . Los Angeles: Waveland Press.

Stokes, P., & Wall, T. (2017). Research methods . New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.

Tracy, S. J. (2019). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact . London: John Wiley & Sons.

Walliman, N. (2021). Research methods: The basics. London: Routledge.

Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 10 Reasons you’re Perpetually Single
Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 20 Montessori Toddler Bedrooms (Design Inspiration)
Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 21 Montessori Homeschool Setups
Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 101 Hidden Talents Examples

Exam Tips: How to write a research methods essay

Travis Dixon March 17, 2019 Research Methodology , Revision and Exam Preparation

Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)

Updated Feb 2021

One of the most difficult of the five types of exam questions to write about in IB Psychology is research methods. Like most other essay questions, students tend to focus on studies and miss other important aspects of the essay. In this post, I offer my best tips for how to write an excellent essay on research methods.

What-How-Why

IB Psychology - Teacher Support Pack - Chapter 6: Quantitative Methods

Our unit on Quantitative Methods is designed to help students answer these challenging questions.

These three simple questions are an excellent guideline for most of the IB Psych’ course. Research methods essays are no different. You want to show you:

Know what the research methods are
Understand how and why they’re used

The following helps you figure out how to address these key questions. However, the structure and content of your answer will depend on the specific question you’re answering and the materials you’ve used in your course.

Exam tips for writing about research methods and ethics
Biological Research Methods Example Essay (ERQ)
How to explain the use of a research method

Step 1: What?

The first thing to get right is the definition . It’s really important to have a clear, precise and accurate definition of the research method/s you’re writing about. This could be either in the introduction or in the first body paragraph of the essay (i.e. the central argument). After defining the method, the explanation of how and why should begin.

Step 2: How?

Every essay answer should have a central argument that shows knowledge and understanding of the topic in the question (watch this video for more essay advice). In the case of research methods questions, the central argument should be an explanation of how and why the particular method is used in that particular topic . This is a key part of the answer that many students miss.

For example, if you’re explaining the use of a true experiment the “how” would include the nature of the independent variables and perhaps common ways the dependent variable is measured. For instance, in true experiments on the brain the IV is commonly a factor hypothesized to affect brain activity like chemical messengers such as serotonin and the effects of the manipulation of this IV on the brain is measured using fMRI.

Tip: A detailed central argument explaining how and why the method is used is the key to scoring top marks in the “knowledge and understanding” section of the essay rubric. Your explanation of the method would be identical in an SAQ and an essay.

Step 3: Why?

This is straightforward – give reasons why this method is useful. Weak answers will be generic, such as “true experiments are helpful because they can establish causal relationships.” Stronger answers will focus on specific details of the field of psychology in question. For instance, an essay on true experiments might focus on animal experimentation and the benefits of manipulating brain activity in rodents and animals in ways that couldn’t be done in humans but provide valuable additional information alongside human quasi experiments and correlational studies.

Scroll on for more exam tips.

DOWNLOAD Example Research Methods Essay

Common Error: What is a “method”?

One of the biggest mistakes a student can make in a research method essay is writing about a method that actually isn’t a “ research method .” For example, if a student wrote about animal studies, twin studies, or brain imaging technology as a research method they would score very low marks because these are not research methods (according to the IB).

To quote the official IB FAQs document, “…the different research methods for the study of psychology at this level: case studies, naturalistic observations, interviews, experiments, field experiments, quasi-experiments, natural experiments, correlations studies.” Therefore, make sure the method/s you are writing about is from this list.

Tip: Prepare to write about true experiments and/or correlational studies for Paper 1 and 2. These are used in every topic and it simplifies the preparation for this tricky question. Our IB Psychology Revision Textbook follows this approach.

Research Methods from the IB Guide

This screen shot of the online IB Psychology guide shows the list of “research methods” that you have to choose from.

Link to the topic!

A common weakness in research methods essays is they do not fully address the question by explaining the use of the method in relation to the approach or the topic in the question. A good way to check if the answer has applied the explanation to the topic is to read the explanation and see if it could also be true of any topic in IB Psychology. If it’s generic enough so it could be used across multiple topics, then the application needs to be clearer. Another even easier way to check is to see if the topic or approach is even mentioned at all in the explanation!

Explain studies, don’t just describe them!

Examiner’s reports always complain that “there’s too much description in essays”. This is actually the wrong complaint. A lot of description is great, but it needs to be matched with explanation . So the real critique should be “there’s not enough explanation in essays.”

So how do you go beyond describing so you’re explaining a study? The key is in the final 1-3 sentences after the results when you make it clear what the results show about the question, i.e. what conclusions are we drawing from those results?

In research methods essays, however, it’s a little different. Many students make the mistake of explaining what the results show about behaviour , whereas in research methods essays you need to explain how the study shows the use of the method . For example, if using a study that’s a true experiment you explain how the manipulation of the IV in a controlled environment enabled causal conclusions to be drawn, or why it was useful in a correlational study to show the strength of a relationship between the two variables in the study, etc.

Remember : In ThemEd’s three levels of learning, describing means to summarize individual things and explaining means to show how they’re related. In this type of essay, this means explaining how the procedures of a research method are applied in a particular topic (see the example essay for a demonstration of this being done).

Evaluate the method, not the studies

To show critical thinking in a research methods essay, it’s important you can explain strengths and limitations of the research method you are writing about. So when you’re evaluating the studies, it’s not a good idea to explain the limitations of the study (e.g. lacking generalizability) without focusing on how the methods are limited in some way.

For example, if I was writing about Loftus and Palmer’s car crash study to show the use of a true experiment to study cognitive processes, it would not be that relevant to the question to explain a limitation of the study based on the characteristics of the participants (e.g. they had limited driving experience) because this isn’t really linked to the true experimental method. A far better evaluative point to make is to explain that maybe these results in a controlled environment might not be reflective of what happens in real life, possibly due to the fact that in this scenario there were no consequences for a wrong answer and the level of emotion is much lower than when witnessing real crimes. These are better points to make because they are focused on a key aspect of the true experiment – the controlled environment.

When explaining limitations of correlational studies, don’t just say “correlational doesn’t mean causation” but actually provide examples. For example, how could the relationship work in both directions, or what are some other factors that might explain the relationship? For example, if I was critiquing the use of correlational studies to study personal relationships, I might say that correlational studies (e.g. Gottman and Levenson) that show a correlational between marital satisfaction and communication could be explained in either direction (what we call bidirectional ambiguity): it could be that poor communication is leading to decreased marital satisfaction (being unhappy in a marriage), or that being unhappy in the marriage is causing more poor communication.

Tip: Go beyond one sentence explanations of limitations like “ecological validity.” This post explains exactly how to explain limitations of ecological in detail.

Often a third variable can explain the connection between two variables in a correlational study, like in this example of crime and ice-cream. Explaining possible links like this is an excellent way of highlighting the limitations in correlational studies.

Study one method in depth

My advice to students is to prep true experiments and correlational studies, but for every topic they should choose one of these to prep in depth. This is because there is a good chance you might be asked to write an essay about just one method. For example, if the question was “Evaluate the use of one method to study emotion and cognition.” If you revised two or more methods for this topic, then that would have been a wasted effort. By preparing to write about one in-depth (and perhaps having a second with just one study as an example), you are best-prepared to write an excellent essay.

This post about why depth is better than breadth in IB Psychology might help clarify this point.

Tip: Use one method to critique the other. This is another reason why I like true experiments and correlational studies – their strengths and limitations can be used to evaluate one-anothers.

Discuss vs evaluate – what’s the difference?

There is none. While some teachers will argue that these command terms require different content, I argue (and can demonstrate) that this is simply not the case, especially when it comes to research methods. You can read more about this on this blog post.

One method or two?

A common question is “do quasi and true experiments count as one method or two?” The truth is no-one yet knows how the IB is going to mark this in the exams. It appears from the IB materials that they are considered two (see quote and image above). However, this is another reason why prepping correlational studies and true experiments is a good idea because they are clearly two separate methods.

Example Essay

You can read an example essay that (I hope) follows the advice given in this blog pots. This essay has been taken from the resources in the Quantitative Methods Teacher Support Pack. Even if you’re not teaching using our textbooks, this TSP would still be useful.

Note to students: This has been submitted to turnitin and will be known by your teachers, so it would be very unwise to try to submit this as your own work.

Example Questions

You might be asked about research methods in relation to any of the topics in the IB Psychology curriculum. For example, you might be asked to evaluate the use of one research method used in the study of the brain and behaviour. However, you would not be asked to discuss the method used to study neuroplasticity, since this is a sub-content point related to the broader topic. It’s possible that the question might be linked to the approach as well.

Remember that essay questions will be either discuss, evaluate, to what extent or contrast. It is unlikely that the “to what extent” command term will be used for a research methods essay (but not impossible) and it’s also unlikely that “contrast” will be used as well because it is more likely you’ll be asked to write about “one or more” methods. So here are some example essay questions:

Evaluate the use of one research method used to study cognitive processes.
Discuss how and why one research method is used to study cultural origins of behaviour.
Discuss the use of one or more research methods used to study genes and behaviour.
Evaluate the use of one or more research methods used in the biological approach to understanding human behaviour.
Evaluate the use of one or more research methods used to study etiologies of psychological disorders.
Discuss the use of one research method used to study personal relationships.

Check the IB Guide or your textbooks for a list of the topics in the course.

Good luck and I hope this post was helpful. Remember to check out our store to find the latest revision materials and resources.

Was this helpful? Feel free to leave questions and comments.

Travis Dixon is an IB Psychology teacher, author, workshop leader, examiner and IA moderator.

Research Methods Essays – How to Write Them

Last Updated on April 17, 2017 by

Essay planning and writing for the AS and A Level sociology exams – hints and tips

The research methods section of the AS sociology 7191 (2) exam (research methods and topics in sociology) consists of one short answer question (out of 4 marks) and one essay question (out of 16 marks).

You should aim to spend approximately 20-25 minutes answering this essay question

This longer methods question will nearly always ask you to evaluate either the strengths or limitations of a particular method, for example ‘Evaluate the strengths of using social surveys in Social Research’.

This means that you will need to evaluate either the strengths or the limitations of the particular method as directed in the question.

Explain why Interpretivists like or dislike the method

Representativeness – explain how easy it is to get a large, representative sample

Say what kind of topics this method is useful for researching and why

It is good practice to use examples of actual examples of research studies that have used the method under examination, preferably woven into the body of the essay.

If you like this sort of thing, then you might like to purchase more of the same…

Methods in Context Essay Template

Discover more from ReviseSociology

Organizing Academic Research Papers: 6. The Methodology

Purpose of Guide
Design Flaws to Avoid
Glossary of Research Terms
Narrowing a Topic Idea
Broadening a Topic Idea
Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
Academic Writing Style
Choosing a Title
Making an Outline
Paragraph Development
Executive Summary
Background Information
The Research Problem/Question
Theoretical Framework
Citation Tracking
Content Alert Services
Evaluating Sources
Primary Sources
Secondary Sources
Tertiary Sources
What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
Qualitative Methods
Quantitative Methods
Using Non-Textual Elements
Limitations of the Study
Common Grammar Mistakes
Avoiding Plagiarism
Footnotes or Endnotes?
Further Readings
Annotated Bibliography
Dealing with Nervousness
Using Visual Aids
Grading Someone Else's Paper
How to Manage Group Projects
Multiple Book Review Essay
Reviewing Collected Essays
About Informed Consent
Writing Field Notes
Writing a Policy Memo
Writing a Research Proposal
Acknowledgements

The methods section of a research paper provides the information by which a study’s validity is judged. The method section answers two main questions: 1) How was the data collected or generated? 2) How was it analyzed? The writing should be direct and precise and written in the past tense.

Importance of a Good Methodology Section

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

Readers need to know how the data was obtained because the method you choose affects the results and, by extension, how you likely interpreted those results.
Methodology is crucial for any branch of scholarship because an unreliable method produces unreliable results and it misappropriates interpretations of findings .
In most cases, there are a variety of different methods you can choose to investigate a research problem. Your methodology section of your paper should make clear the reasons why you chose a particular method or procedure .
The reader wants to know that the data was collected or generated in a way that is consistent with accepted practice in the field of study. For example, if you are using a questionnaire, readers need to know that it offered your respondents a reasonable range of answers to choose from.
The research method must be appropriate to the objectives of the study . For example, be sure you have a large enough sample size to be able to generalize and make recommendations based upon the findings.
The methodology should discuss the problems that were anticipated and the steps you took to prevent them from occurring . For any problems that did arise, you must describe the ways in which their impact was minimized or why these problems do not affect the findings in any way that impacts your interpretation of the data.
Often in social science research, it is useful for other researchers to adapt or replicate your methodology. Therefore, it is important to always provide sufficient information to allow others to use or replicate the study . This information is particularly important when a new method had been developed or an innovative use of an existing method has been utilized.

Bem, Daryl J. Writing the Empirical Journal Article . Psychology Writing Center. University of Washington; Lunenburg, Frederick C. Writing a Successful Thesis or Dissertation: Tips and Strategies for Students in the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2008.

Structure and Writing Style

I. Groups of Research Methods

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

The empirical-analytical group approaches the study of social sciences in a similar manner that researchers study the natural sciences. This type of research focuses on objective knowledge, research questions that can be answered yes or no, and operational definitions of variables to be measured. The empirical-analytical group employs deductive reasoning that uses existing theory as a foundation for hypotheses that need to be tested. This approach is focused on explanation .
The interpretative group is focused on understanding phenomenon in a comprehensive, holistic way . This research method allows you to recognize your connection to the subject under study. Because the interpretative group focuses more on subjective knowledge, it requires careful interpretation of variables.

II. Content

An effectively written methodology section should:

Introduce the overall methodological approach for investigating your research problem . Is your study qualitative or quantitative or a combination of both (mixed method)? Are you going to take a special approach, such as action research, or a more neutral stance?
Indicate how the approach fits the overall research design . Your methods should have a clear connection with your research problem. In other words, make sure that your methods will actually address the problem. One of the most common deficiencies found in research papers is that the proposed methodology is unsuited to achieving the stated objective of your paper.
Describe the specific methods of data collection you are going to use , such as, surveys, interviews, questionnaires, observation, archival research. If you are analyzing existing data, such as a data set or archival documents, describe how it was originally created or gathered and by whom.
Explain how you intend to analyze your results . Will you use statistical analysis? Will you use specific theoretical perspectives to help you analyze a text or explain observed behaviors?
Provide background and rationale for methodologies that are unfamiliar for your readers . Very often in the social sciences, research problems and the methods for investigating them require more explanation/rationale than widely accepted rules governing the natural and physical sciences. Be clear and concise in your explanation.
Provide a rationale for subject selection and sampling procedure . For instance, if you propose to conduct interviews, how do you intend to select the sample population? If you are analyzing texts, which texts have you chosen, and why? If you are using statistics, why is this set of statisics being used? If other data sources exist, explain why the data you chose is most appropriate.
Address potential limitations . Are there any practical limitations that could affect your data collection? How will you attempt to control for potential confounding variables and errors? If your methodology may lead to problems you can anticipate, state this openly and show why pursuing this methodology outweighs the risk of these problems cropping up.

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

III. Problems to Avoid

Irrelevant Detail The methodology section of your paper should be thorough but to the point. Don’t provide any background information that doesn’t directly help the reader to understand why a particular method was chosen, how the data was gathered or obtained, and how it was analyzed. Unnecessary Explanation of Basic Procedures Remember that you are not writing a how-to guide about a particular method. You should make the assumption that readers possess a basic understanding of how to investigate the research problem on their own and, therefore, you do not have to go into great detail about specific methodological procedures. The focus should be on how you applied a method , not on the mechanics of doing a method. NOTE: An exception to this rule is if you select an unconventional approach to doing the method; if this is the case, be sure to explain why this approach was chosen and how it enhances the overall research process. Problem Blindness It is almost a given that you will encounter problems when collecting or generating your data. Do not ignore these problems or pretend they did not occur. Often, documenting how you overcame obstacles can form an interesting part of the methodology. It demonstrates to the reader that you can provide a cogent rationale for the decisions you made to minimize the impact of any problems that arose. Literature Review Just as the literature review section of your paper provides an overview of sources you have examined while researching a particular topic, the methodology section should cite any sources that informed your choice and application of a particular method [i.e., the choice of a survey should include any citations to the works you used to help construct the survey].

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

Azevedo, L.F. et al. How to Write a Scientific Paper: Writing the Methods Section. Revista Portuguesa de Pneumologia 17 (2011): 232-238; Butin, Dan W. The Education Dissertation A Guide for Practitioner Scholars . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin, 2010; Carter, Susan. Structuring Your Research Thesis . New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012; Lunenburg, Frederick C. Writing a Successful Thesis or Dissertation: Tips and Strategies for Students in the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2008. Methods Section . The Writer’s Handbook. Writing Center. University of Wisconsin, Madison; Writing the Experimental Report: Methods, Results, and Discussion . The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Methods and Materials . The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper. Department of Biology. Bates College.

Writing Tip

Statistical Designs and Tests? Do Not Fear Them!

Another Writing Tip

Knowing the Relationship Between Theories and Methods

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

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

<< Previous: What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
Next: Qualitative Methods >>
Last Updated: Jul 18, 2023 11:58 AM
URL: https://library.sacredheart.edu/c.php?g=29803
QuickSearch
Library Catalog
Databases A-Z
Publication Finder
Course Reserves
Citation Linker
Digital Commons
Our Website

Research Support

Ask a Librarian
Appointments
Interlibrary Loan (ILL)
Research Guides
Databases by Subject
Citation Help

Using the Library

Reserve a Group Study Room
Renew Books
Honors Study Rooms
Off-Campus Access
Library Policies
Library Technology

User Information

Grad Students
Online Students
COVID-19 Updates
Staff Directory
News & Announcements
Library Newsletter

My Accounts

Interlibrary Loan
Staff Site Login

FIND US ON

Save £500 when you enrol by 30th September! T&C’s apply

How to Do Research for an Excellent Essay: The Complete Guide

One of the biggest secrets to writing a good essay is the Boy Scouts’ motto: ‘be prepared’. Preparing for an essay – by conducting effective research – lays the foundations for a brilliant piece of writing, and it’s every bit as important as the actual writing part. Many students skimp on this crucial stage, or sit in the library not really sure where to start; and it shows in the quality of their essays. This just makes it easier for you to get ahead of your peers, and we’re going to show you how. In this article, we take you through what you need to do in order to conduct effective research and use your research time to best effect.

Allow enough time

First and foremost, it’s vital to allow enough time for your research. For this reason, don’t leave your essay until the last minute . If you start writing without having done adequate research, it will almost certainly show in your essay’s lack of quality. The amount of research time needed will vary according to whether you’re at Sixth Form or university, and according to how well you know the topic and what teaching you’ve had on it, but make sure you factor in more time than you think you’ll need. You may come across a concept that takes you longer to understand than you’d expected, so it’s better to allow too much time than too little.

Read the essay question and thoroughly understand it

If you don’t have a thorough understanding of what the essay question is asking you to do, you put yourself at risk of going in the wrong direction with your research. So take the question, read it several times and pull out the key things it’s asking you to do. The instructions in the question are likely to have some bearing on the nature of your research. If the question says “Compare”, for example, this will set you up for a particular kind of research, during which you’ll be looking specifically for points of comparison; if the question asks you to “Discuss”, your research focus may be more on finding different points of view and formulating your own.

Begin with a brainstorm

Start your research time by brainstorming what you already know. Doing this means that you can be clear about exactly what you’re already aware of, and you can identify the gaps in your knowledge so that you don’t end up wasting time by reading books that will tell you what you already know. This gives your research more of a direction and allows you to be more specific in your efforts to find out certain things. It’s also a gentle way of introducing yourself to the task and putting yourself in the right frame of mind for learning about the topic at hand.

Achieve a basic understanding before delving deeper

If the topic is new to you and your brainstorm has yielded few ideas, you’ll need to acquire a basic understanding of the topic before you begin delving deeper into your research. If you don’t, and you start by your research by jumping straight in at the deep end, as it were, you’ll struggle to grasp the topic. This also means that you may end up being too swayed by a certain source, as you haven’t the knowledge to question it properly. You need sufficient background knowledge to be able to take a critical approach to each of the sources you read. So, start from the very beginning. It’s ok to use Wikipedia or other online resources to give you an introduction to a topic, though bear in mind that these can’t be wholly relied upon. If you’ve covered the topic in class already, re-read the notes you made so that you can refresh your mind before you start further investigation.

Working through your reading list

If you’ve been given a reading list to work from, be organised in how you work through each of the items on it. Try to get hold of as many of the books on it as you can before you start, so that you have them all easily to hand, and can refer back to things you’ve read and compare them with other perspectives. Plan the order in which you’re going to work through them and try to allocate a specific amount of time to each of them; this ensures that you allow enough time to do each of them justice and that focus yourself on making the most of your time with each one. It’s a good idea to go for the more general resources before honing in on the finer points mentioned in more specialised literature. Think of an upside-down pyramid and how it starts off wide at the top and becomes gradually narrower; this is the sort of framework you should apply to your research.

Ask a librarian

Library computer databases can be confusing things, and can add an extra layer of stress and complexity to your research if you’re not used to using them. The librarian is there for a reason, so don’t be afraid to go and ask if you’re not sure where to find a particular book on your reading list. If you’re in need of somewhere to start, they should be able to point you in the direction of the relevant section of the library so that you can also browse for books that may yield useful information.

Use the index

If you haven’t been given specific pages to read in the books on your reading list, make use of the index (and/or table of contents) of each book to help you find relevant material. It sounds obvious, but some students don’t think to do this and battle their way through heaps of irrelevant chapters before finding something that will be useful for their essay.

Taking notes

As you work through your reading, take notes as you go along rather than hoping you’ll remember everything you’ve read. Don’t indiscriminately write down everything – only the bits that will be useful in answering the essay question you’ve been set. If you write down too much, you risk writing an essay that’s full of irrelevant material and getting lower grades as a result. Be concise, and summarise arguments in your own words when you make notes (this helps you learn it better, too, because you actually have to think about how best to summarise it). You may want to make use of small index cards to force you to be brief with what you write about each point or topic. We’ve covered effective note-taking extensively in another article, which you can read here. Note-taking is a major part of the research process, so don’t neglect it. Your notes don’t just come in useful in the short-term, for completing your essay, but they should also be helpful when it comes to revision time, so try to keep them organised.

Research every side of the argument

Never rely too heavily on one resource without referring to other possible opinions; it’s bad academic practice. You need to be able to give a balanced argument in an essay, and that means researching a range of perspectives on whatever problem you’re tackling. Keep a note of the different arguments, along with the evidence in support of or against each one, ready to be deployed into an essay structure that works logically through each one. If you see a scholar’s name cropping up again and again in what you read, it’s worth investigating more about them even if you haven’t specifically been told to do so. Context is vital in academia at any level, so influential figures are always worth knowing about.

Keep a dictionary by your side

You could completely misunderstand a point you read if you don’t know what one important word in the sentence means. For that reason, it’s a good idea to keep a dictionary by your side at all times as you conduct your research. Not only does this help you fully understand what you’re reading, but you also learn new words that you might be able to use in your forthcoming essay or a future one . Growing your vocabulary is never a waste of time!

Start formulating your own opinion

As you work through reading these different points of view, think carefully about what you’ve read and note your own response to different opinions. Get into the habit of questioning sources and make sure you’re not just repeating someone else’s opinion without challenging it. Does an opinion make sense? Does it have plenty of evidence to back it up? What are the counter-arguments, and on balance, which sways you more? Demonstrating your own intelligent thinking will set your essay apart from those of your peers, so think about these things as you conduct your research.

Be careful with web-based research

Although, as we’ve said already, it’s fine to use Wikipedia and other online resources to give you a bit of an introduction to a topic you haven’t covered before, be very careful when using the internet for researching an essay. Don’t take Wikipedia as gospel; don’t forget, anybody can edit it! We wouldn’t advise using the internet as the basis of your essay research – it’s simply not academically rigorous enough, and you don’t know how out of date a particular resource might be. Even if your Sixth Form teachers may not question where you picked up an idea you’ve discussed in your essays, it’s still not a good habit to get into and you’re unlikely to get away with it at a good university. That said, there are still reliable academic resources available via the internet; these can be found in dedicated sites that are essentially online libraries, such as JSTOR. These are likely to be a little too advanced if you’re still in Sixth Form, but you’ll almost certainly come across them once you get to university.

Look out for footnotes

In an academic publication, whether that’s a book or a journal article, footnotes are a great place to look for further ideas for publications that might yield useful information. Plenty can be hidden away in footnotes, and if a writer is disparaging or supporting the ideas of another academic, you could look up the text in question so that you can include their opinion too, and whether or not you agree with them, for extra brownie points.

Don’t save doing all your own references until last

If you’re still in Sixth Form, you might not yet be required to include academic references in your essays, but for the sake of a thorough guide to essay research that will be useful to you in the future, we’re going to include this point anyway (it will definitely come in useful when you get to university, so you may as well start thinking about it now!). As you read through various books and find points you think you’re going to want to make in your essays, make sure you note down where you found these points as you go along (author’s first and last name, the publication title, publisher, publication date and page number). When you get to university you will be expected to identify your sources very precisely, so it’s a good habit to get into. Unfortunately, many students forget to do this and then have a difficult time of going back through their essay adding footnotes and trying to remember where they found a particular point. You’ll save yourself a great deal of time and effort if you simply note down your academic references as you go along. If you are including footnotes, don’t forget to add each publication to a main bibliography, to be included at the end of your essay, at the same time.

Putting in the background work required to write a good essay can seem an arduous task at times, but it’s a fundamental step that can’t simply be skipped. The more effort you put in at this stage, the better your essay will be and the easier it will be to write. Use the tips in this article and you’ll be well on your way to an essay that impresses!

To get even more prepared for essay writing you might also want to consider attending an Oxford Summer School .

Image credits: banner

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

View all journals
Explore content
About the journal
Publish with us
Sign up for alerts
Open access
Published: 31 August 2024

Knowledge mapping and evolution of research on older adults’ technology acceptance: a bibliometric study from 2013 to 2023

Xianru Shang ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0000-8906-3216 1 ,
Zijian Liu 1 ,
Chen Gong 1 ,
Zhigang Hu 1 ,
Yuexuan Wu 1 &
Chengliang Wang ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2208-3508 2

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume 11 , Article number: 1115 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

Science, technology and society

The rapid expansion of information technology and the intensification of population aging are two prominent features of contemporary societal development. Investigating older adults’ acceptance and use of technology is key to facilitating their integration into an information-driven society. Given this context, the technology acceptance of older adults has emerged as a prioritized research topic, attracting widespread attention in the academic community. However, existing research remains fragmented and lacks a systematic framework. To address this gap, we employed bibliometric methods, utilizing the Web of Science Core Collection to conduct a comprehensive review of literature on older adults’ technology acceptance from 2013 to 2023. Utilizing VOSviewer and CiteSpace for data assessment and visualization, we created knowledge mappings of research on older adults’ technology acceptance. Our study employed multidimensional methods such as co-occurrence analysis, clustering, and burst analysis to: (1) reveal research dynamics, key journals, and domains in this field; (2) identify leading countries, their collaborative networks, and core research institutions and authors; (3) recognize the foundational knowledge system centered on theoretical model deepening, emerging technology applications, and research methods and evaluation, uncovering seminal literature and observing a shift from early theoretical and influential factor analyses to empirical studies focusing on individual factors and emerging technologies; (4) moreover, current research hotspots are primarily in the areas of factors influencing technology adoption, human-robot interaction experiences, mobile health management, and aging-in-place technology, highlighting the evolutionary context and quality distribution of research themes. Finally, we recommend that future research should deeply explore improvements in theoretical models, long-term usage, and user experience evaluation. Overall, this study presents a clear framework of existing research in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance, providing an important reference for future theoretical exploration and innovative applications.

Research progress and intellectual structure of design for digital equity (DDE): A bibliometric analysis based on citespace

Exploring the role of interaction in older-adult service innovation: insights from the testing stage

Smart device interest, perceived usefulness, and preferences in rural Alabama seniors

Introduction.

In contemporary society, the rapid development of information technology has been intricately intertwined with the intensifying trend of population aging. According to the latest United Nations forecast, by 2050, the global population aged 65 and above is expected to reach 1.6 billion, representing about 16% of the total global population (UN 2023 ). Given the significant challenges of global aging, there is increasing evidence that emerging technologies have significant potential to maintain health and independence for older adults in their home and healthcare environments (Barnard et al. 2013 ; Soar 2010 ; Vancea and Solé-Casals 2016 ). This includes, but is not limited to, enhancing residential safety with smart home technologies (Touqeer et al. 2021 ; Wang et al. 2022 ), improving living independence through wearable technologies (Perez et al. 2023 ), and increasing medical accessibility via telehealth services (Kruse et al. 2020 ). Technological innovations are redefining the lifestyles of older adults, encouraging a shift from passive to active participation (González et al. 2012 ; Mostaghel 2016 ). Nevertheless, the effective application and dissemination of technology still depends on user acceptance and usage intentions (Naseri et al. 2023 ; Wang et al. 2023a ; Xia et al. 2024 ; Yu et al. 2023 ). Particularly, older adults face numerous challenges in accepting and using new technologies. These challenges include not only physical and cognitive limitations but also a lack of technological experience, along with the influences of social and economic factors (Valk et al. 2018 ; Wilson et al. 2021 ).

User acceptance of technology is a significant focus within information systems (IS) research (Dai et al. 2024 ), with several models developed to explain and predict user behavior towards technology usage, including the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis 1989 ), TAM2, TAM3, and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) (Venkatesh et al. 2003 ). Older adults, as a group with unique needs, exhibit different behavioral patterns during technology acceptance than other user groups, and these uniquenesses include changes in cognitive abilities, as well as motivations, attitudes, and perceptions of the use of new technologies (Chen and Chan 2011 ). The continual expansion of technology introduces considerable challenges for older adults, rendering the understanding of their technology acceptance a research priority. Thus, conducting in-depth research into older adults’ acceptance of technology is critically important for enhancing their integration into the information society and improving their quality of life through technological advancements.

Reviewing relevant literature to identify research gaps helps further solidify the theoretical foundation of the research topic. However, many existing literature reviews primarily focus on the factors influencing older adults’ acceptance or intentions to use technology. For instance, Ma et al. ( 2021 ) conducted a comprehensive analysis of the determinants of older adults’ behavioral intentions to use technology; Liu et al. ( 2022 ) categorized key variables in studies of older adults’ technology acceptance, noting a shift in focus towards social and emotional factors; Yap et al. ( 2022 ) identified seven categories of antecedents affecting older adults’ use of technology from an analysis of 26 articles, including technological, psychological, social, personal, cost, behavioral, and environmental factors; Schroeder et al. ( 2023 ) extracted 119 influencing factors from 59 articles and further categorized these into six themes covering demographics, health status, and emotional awareness. Additionally, some studies focus on the application of specific technologies, such as Ferguson et al. ( 2021 ), who explored barriers and facilitators to older adults using wearable devices for heart monitoring, and He et al. ( 2022 ) and Baer et al. ( 2022 ), who each conducted in-depth investigations into the acceptance of social assistive robots and mobile nutrition and fitness apps, respectively. In summary, current literature reviews on older adults’ technology acceptance exhibit certain limitations. Due to the interdisciplinary nature and complex knowledge structure of this field, traditional literature reviews often rely on qualitative analysis, based on literature analysis and periodic summaries, which lack sufficient objectivity and comprehensiveness. Additionally, systematic research is relatively limited, lacking a macroscopic description of the research trajectory from a holistic perspective. Over the past decade, research on older adults’ technology acceptance has experienced rapid growth, with a significant increase in literature, necessitating the adoption of new methods to review and examine the developmental trends in this field (Chen 2006 ; Van Eck and Waltman 2010 ). Bibliometric analysis, as an effective quantitative research method, analyzes published literature through visualization, offering a viable approach to extracting patterns and insights from a large volume of papers, and has been widely applied in numerous scientific research fields (Achuthan et al. 2023 ; Liu and Duffy 2023 ). Therefore, this study will employ bibliometric methods to systematically analyze research articles related to older adults’ technology acceptance published in the Web of Science Core Collection from 2013 to 2023, aiming to understand the core issues and evolutionary trends in the field, and to provide valuable references for future related research. Specifically, this study aims to explore and answer the following questions:

RQ1: What are the research dynamics in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance over the past decade? What are the main academic journals and fields that publish studies related to older adults’ technology acceptance?

RQ2: How is the productivity in older adults’ technology acceptance research distributed among countries, institutions, and authors?

RQ3: What are the knowledge base and seminal literature in older adults’ technology acceptance research? How has the research theme progressed?

RQ4: What are the current hot topics and their evolutionary trajectories in older adults’ technology acceptance research? How is the quality of research distributed?

Methodology and materials

Research method.

In recent years, bibliometrics has become one of the crucial methods for analyzing literature reviews and is widely used in disciplinary and industrial intelligence analysis (Jing et al. 2023 ; Lin and Yu 2024a ; Wang et al. 2024a ; Xu et al. 2021 ). Bibliometric software facilitates the visualization analysis of extensive literature data, intuitively displaying the network relationships and evolutionary processes between knowledge units, and revealing the underlying knowledge structure and potential information (Chen et al. 2024 ; López-Robles et al. 2018 ; Wang et al. 2024c ). This method provides new insights into the current status and trends of specific research areas, along with quantitative evidence, thereby enhancing the objectivity and scientific validity of the research conclusions (Chen et al. 2023 ; Geng et al. 2024 ). VOSviewer and CiteSpace are two widely used bibliometric software tools in academia (Pan et al. 2018 ), recognized for their robust functionalities based on the JAVA platform. Although each has its unique features, combining these two software tools effectively constructs mapping relationships between literature knowledge units and clearly displays the macrostructure of the knowledge domains. Particularly, VOSviewer, with its excellent graphical representation capabilities, serves as an ideal tool for handling large datasets and precisely identifying the focal points and hotspots of research topics. Therefore, this study utilizes VOSviewer (version 1.6.19) and CiteSpace (version 6.1.R6), combined with in-depth literature analysis, to comprehensively examine and interpret the research theme of older adults’ technology acceptance through an integrated application of quantitative and qualitative methods.

Data source

Web of Science is a comprehensively recognized database in academia, featuring literature that has undergone rigorous peer review and editorial scrutiny (Lin and Yu 2024b ; Mongeon and Paul-Hus 2016 ; Pranckutė 2021 ). This study utilizes the Web of Science Core Collection as its data source, specifically including three major citation indices: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), and Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI). These indices encompass high-quality research literature in the fields of science, social sciences, and arts and humanities, ensuring the comprehensiveness and reliability of the data. We combined “older adults” with “technology acceptance” through thematic search, with the specific search strategy being: TS = (elder OR elderly OR aging OR ageing OR senile OR senior OR old people OR “older adult*”) AND TS = (“technology acceptance” OR “user acceptance” OR “consumer acceptance”). The time span of literature search is from 2013 to 2023, with the types limited to “Article” and “Review” and the language to “English”. Additionally, the search was completed by October 27, 2023, to avoid data discrepancies caused by database updates. The initial search yielded 764 journal articles. Given that searches often retrieve articles that are superficially relevant but actually non-compliant, manual screening post-search was essential to ensure the relevance of the literature (Chen et al. 2024 ). Through manual screening, articles significantly deviating from the research theme were eliminated and rigorously reviewed. Ultimately, this study obtained 500 valid sample articles from the Web of Science Core Collection. The complete PRISMA screening process is illustrated in Fig. 1 .

Presentation of the data culling process in detail.

Data standardization

Raw data exported from databases often contain multiple expressions of the same terminology (Nguyen and Hallinger 2020 ). To ensure the accuracy and consistency of data, it is necessary to standardize the raw data (Strotmann and Zhao 2012 ). This study follows the data standardization process proposed by Taskin and Al ( 2019 ), mainly executing the following operations:

(1) Standardization of author and institution names is conducted to address different name expressions for the same author. For instance, “Chan, Alan Hoi Shou” and “Chan, Alan H. S.” are considered the same author, and distinct authors with the same name are differentiated by adding identifiers. Diverse forms of institutional names are unified to address variations caused by name changes or abbreviations, such as standardizing “FRANKFURT UNIV APPL SCI” and “Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences,” as well as “Chinese University of Hong Kong” and “University of Hong Kong” to consistent names.

(2) Different expressions of journal names are unified. For example, “International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction” and “Int J Hum Comput Interact” are standardized to a single name. This ensures consistency in journal names and prevents misclassification of literature due to differing journal names. Additionally, it involves checking if the journals have undergone name changes in the past decade to prevent any impact on the analysis due to such changes.

(3) Keywords data are cleansed by removing words that do not directly pertain to specific research content (e.g., people, review), merging synonyms (e.g., “UX” and “User Experience,” “aging-in-place” and “aging in place”), and standardizing plural forms of keywords (e.g., “assistive technologies” and “assistive technology,” “social robots” and “social robot”). This reduces redundant information in knowledge mapping.

Bibliometric results and analysis

Distribution power (rq1), literature descriptive statistical analysis.

Table 1 presents a detailed descriptive statistical overview of the literature in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance. After deduplication using the CiteSpace software, this study confirmed a valid sample size of 500 articles. Authored by 1839 researchers, the documents encompass 792 research institutions across 54 countries and are published in 217 different academic journals. As of the search cutoff date, these articles have accumulated 13,829 citations, with an annual average of 1156 citations, and an average of 27.66 citations per article. The h-index, a composite metric of quantity and quality of scientific output (Kamrani et al. 2021 ), reached 60 in this study.

Trends in publications and disciplinary distribution

The number of publications and citations are significant indicators of the research field’s development, reflecting its continuity, attention, and impact (Ale Ebrahim et al. 2014 ). The ranking of annual publications and citations in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance studies is presented chronologically in Fig. 2A . The figure shows a clear upward trend in the amount of literature in this field. Between 2013 and 2017, the number of publications increased slowly and decreased in 2018. However, in 2019, the number of publications increased rapidly to 52 and reached a peak of 108 in 2022, which is 6.75 times higher than in 2013. In 2022, the frequency of document citations reached its highest point with 3466 citations, reflecting the widespread recognition and citation of research in this field. Moreover, the curve of the annual number of publications fits a quadratic function, with a goodness-of-fit R 2 of 0.9661, indicating that the number of future publications is expected to increase even more rapidly.

A Trends in trends in annual publications and citations (2013–2023). B Overlay analysis of the distribution of discipline fields.

Figure 2B shows that research on older adults’ technology acceptance involves the integration of multidisciplinary knowledge. According to Web of Science Categories, these 500 articles are distributed across 85 different disciplines. We have tabulated the top ten disciplines by publication volume (Table 2 ), which include Medical Informatics (75 articles, 15.00%), Health Care Sciences & Services (71 articles, 14.20%), Gerontology (61 articles, 12.20%), Public Environmental & Occupational Health (57 articles, 11.40%), and Geriatrics & Gerontology (52 articles, 10.40%), among others. The high output in these disciplines reflects the concentrated global academic interest in this comprehensive research topic. Additionally, interdisciplinary research approaches provide diverse perspectives and a solid theoretical foundation for studies on older adults’ technology acceptance, also paving the way for new research directions.

Knowledge flow analysis

A dual-map overlay is a CiteSpace map superimposed on top of a base map, which shows the interrelationships between journals in different domains, representing the publication and citation activities in each domain (Chen and Leydesdorff 2014 ). The overlay map reveals the link between the citing domain (on the left side) and the cited domain (on the right side), reflecting the knowledge flow of the discipline at the journal level (Leydesdorff and Rafols 2012 ). We utilize the in-built Z-score algorithm of the software to cluster the graph, as shown in Fig. 3 .

The left side shows the citing journal, and the right side shows the cited journal.

Figure 3 shows the distribution of citing journals clusters for older adults’ technology acceptance on the left side, while the right side refers to the main cited journals clusters. Two knowledge flow citation trajectories were obtained; they are presented by the color of the cited regions, and the thickness of these trajectories is proportional to the Z-score scaled frequency of citations (Chen et al. 2014 ). Within the cited regions, the most popular fields with the most records covered are “HEALTH, NURSING, MEDICINE” and “PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATION, SOCIAL”, and the elliptical aspect ratio of these two fields stands out. Fields have prominent elliptical aspect ratios, highlighting their significant influence on older adults’ technology acceptance research. Additionally, the major citation trajectories originate in these two areas and progress to the frontier research area of “PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATION, HEALTH”. It is worth noting that the citation trajectory from “PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATION, SOCIAL” has a significant Z-value (z = 6.81), emphasizing the significance and impact of this development path. In the future, “MATHEMATICS, SYSTEMS, MATHEMATICAL”, “MOLECULAR, BIOLOGY, IMMUNOLOGY”, and “NEUROLOGY, SPORTS, OPHTHALMOLOGY” may become emerging fields. The fields of “MEDICINE, MEDICAL, CLINICAL” may be emerging areas of cutting-edge research.

Main research journals analysis

Table 3 provides statistics for the top ten journals by publication volume in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance. Together, these journals have published 137 articles, accounting for 27.40% of the total publications, indicating that there is no highly concentrated core group of journals in this field, with publications being relatively dispersed. Notably, Computers in Human Behavior , Journal of Medical Internet Research , and International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction each lead with 15 publications. In terms of citation metrics, International Journal of Medical Informatics and Computers in Human Behavior stand out significantly, with the former accumulating a total of 1,904 citations, averaging 211.56 citations per article, and the latter totaling 1,449 citations, with an average of 96.60 citations per article. These figures emphasize the academic authority and widespread impact of these journals within the research field.

Research power (RQ2)

Countries and collaborations analysis.

The analysis revealed the global research pattern for country distribution and collaboration (Chen et al. 2019 ). Figure 4A shows the network of national collaborations on older adults’ technology acceptance research. The size of the bubbles represents the amount of publications in each country, while the thickness of the connecting lines expresses the closeness of the collaboration among countries. Generally, this research subject has received extensive international attention, with China and the USA publishing far more than any other countries. China has established notable research collaborations with the USA, UK and Malaysia in this field, while other countries have collaborations, but the closeness is relatively low and scattered. Figure 4B shows the annual publication volume dynamics of the top ten countries in terms of total publications. Since 2017, China has consistently increased its annual publications, while the USA has remained relatively stable. In 2019, the volume of publications in each country increased significantly, this was largely due to the global outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has led to increased reliance on information technology among the elderly for medical consultations, online socialization, and health management (Sinha et al. 2021 ). This phenomenon has led to research advances in technology acceptance among older adults in various countries. Table 4 shows that the top ten countries account for 93.20% of the total cumulative number of publications, with each country having published more than 20 papers. Among these ten countries, all of them except China are developed countries, indicating that the research field of older adults’ technology acceptance has received general attention from developed countries. Currently, China and the USA were the leading countries in terms of publications with 111 and 104 respectively, accounting for 22.20% and 20.80%. The UK, Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands also made significant contributions. The USA and China ranked first and second in terms of the number of citations, while the Netherlands had the highest average citations, indicating the high impact and quality of its research. The UK has shown outstanding performance in international cooperation, while the USA highlights its significant academic influence in this field with the highest h-index value.

A National collaboration network. B Annual volume of publications in the top 10 countries.

Institutions and authors analysis

Analyzing the number of publications and citations can reveal an institution’s or author’s research strength and influence in a particular research area (Kwiek 2021 ). Tables 5 and 6 show the statistics of the institutions and authors whose publication counts are in the top ten, respectively. As shown in Table 5 , higher education institutions hold the main position in this research field. Among the top ten institutions, City University of Hong Kong and The University of Hong Kong from China lead with 14 and 9 publications, respectively. City University of Hong Kong has the highest h-index, highlighting its significant influence in the field. It is worth noting that Tilburg University in the Netherlands is not among the top five in terms of publications, but the high average citation count (130.14) of its literature demonstrates the high quality of its research.

After analyzing the authors’ output using Price’s Law (Redner 1998 ), the highest number of publications among the authors counted ( n = 10) defines a publication threshold of 3 for core authors in this research area. As a result of quantitative screening, a total of 63 core authors were identified. Table 6 shows that Chen from Zhejiang University, China, Ziefle from RWTH Aachen University, Germany, and Rogers from Macquarie University, Australia, were the top three authors in terms of the number of publications, with 10, 9, and 8 articles, respectively. In terms of average citation rate, Peek and Wouters, both scholars from the Netherlands, have significantly higher rates than other scholars, with 183.2 and 152.67 respectively. This suggests that their research is of high quality and widely recognized. Additionally, Chen and Rogers have high h-indices in this field.

Knowledge base and theme progress (RQ3)

Research knowledge base.

Co-citation relationships occur when two documents are cited together (Zhang and Zhu 2022 ). Co-citation mapping uses references as nodes to represent the knowledge base of a subject area (Min et al. 2021). Figure 5A illustrates co-occurrence mapping in older adults’ technology acceptance research, where larger nodes signify higher co-citation frequencies. Co-citation cluster analysis can be used to explore knowledge structure and research boundaries (Hota et al. 2020 ; Shiau et al. 2023 ). The co-citation clustering mapping of older adults’ technology acceptance research literature (Fig. 5B ) shows that the Q value of the clustering result is 0.8129 (>0.3), and the average value of the weight S is 0.9391 (>0.7), indicating that the clusters are uniformly distributed with a significant and credible structure. This further proves that the boundaries of the research field are clear and there is significant differentiation in the field. The figure features 18 cluster labels, each associated with thematic color blocks corresponding to different time slices. Highlighted emerging research themes include #2 Smart Home Technology, #7 Social Live, and #10 Customer Service. Furthermore, the clustering labels extracted are primarily classified into three categories: theoretical model deepening, emerging technology applications, research methods and evaluation, as detailed in Table 7 .

A Co-citation analysis of references. B Clustering network analysis of references.

Seminal literature analysis

The top ten nodes in terms of co-citation frequency were selected for further analysis. Table 8 displays the corresponding node information. Studies were categorized into four main groups based on content analysis. (1) Research focusing on specific technology usage by older adults includes studies by Peek et al. ( 2014 ), Ma et al. ( 2016 ), Hoque and Sorwar ( 2017 ), and Li et al. ( 2019 ), who investigated the factors influencing the use of e-technology, smartphones, mHealth, and smart wearables, respectively. (2) Concerning the development of theoretical models of technology acceptance, Chen and Chan ( 2014 ) introduced the Senior Technology Acceptance Model (STAM), and Macedo ( 2017 ) analyzed the predictive power of UTAUT2 in explaining older adults’ intentional behaviors and information technology usage. (3) In exploring older adults’ information technology adoption and behavior, Lee and Coughlin ( 2015 ) emphasized that the adoption of technology by older adults is a multifactorial process that includes performance, price, value, usability, affordability, accessibility, technical support, social support, emotion, independence, experience, and confidence. Yusif et al. ( 2016 ) conducted a literature review examining the key barriers affecting older adults’ adoption of assistive technology, including factors such as privacy, trust, functionality/added value, cost, and stigma. (4) From the perspective of research into older adults’ technology acceptance, Mitzner et al. ( 2019 ) assessed the long-term usage of computer systems designed for the elderly, whereas Guner and Acarturk ( 2020 ) compared information technology usage and acceptance between older and younger adults. The breadth and prevalence of this literature make it a vital reference for researchers in the field, also providing new perspectives and inspiration for future research directions.

Research thematic progress

Burst citation is a node of literature that guides the sudden change in dosage, which usually represents a prominent development or major change in a particular field, with innovative and forward-looking qualities. By analyzing the emergent literature, it is often easy to understand the dynamics of the subject area, mapping the emerging thematic change (Chen et al. 2022 ). Figure 6 shows the burst citation mapping in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance research, with burst citations represented by red nodes (Fig. 6A ). For the ten papers with the highest burst intensity (Fig. 6B ), this study will conduct further analysis in conjunction with literature review.

A Burst detection of co-citation. B The top 10 references with the strongest citation bursts.

As shown in Fig. 6 , Mitzner et al. ( 2010 ) broke the stereotype that older adults are fearful of technology, found that they actually have positive attitudes toward technology, and emphasized the centrality of ease of use and usefulness in the process of technology acceptance. This finding provides an important foundation for subsequent research. During the same period, Wagner et al. ( 2010 ) conducted theory-deepening and applied research on technology acceptance among older adults. The research focused on older adults’ interactions with computers from the perspective of Social Cognitive Theory (SCT). This expanded the understanding of technology acceptance, particularly regarding the relationship between behavior, environment, and other SCT elements. In addition, Pan and Jordan-Marsh ( 2010 ) extended the TAM to examine the interactions among predictors of perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, subjective norm, and convenience conditions when older adults use the Internet, taking into account the moderating roles of gender and age. Heerink et al. ( 2010 ) adapted and extended the UTAUT, constructed a technology acceptance model specifically designed for older users’ acceptance of assistive social agents, and validated it using controlled experiments and longitudinal data, explaining intention to use by combining functional assessment and social interaction variables.

Then the research theme shifted to an in-depth analysis of the factors influencing technology acceptance among older adults. Two papers with high burst strengths emerged during this period: Peek et al. ( 2014 ) (Strength = 12.04), Chen and Chan ( 2014 ) (Strength = 9.81). Through a systematic literature review and empirical study, Peek STM and Chen K, among others, identified multidimensional factors that influence older adults’ technology acceptance. Peek et al. ( 2014 ) analyzed literature on the acceptance of in-home care technology among older adults and identified six factors that influence their acceptance: concerns about technology, expected benefits, technology needs, technology alternatives, social influences, and older adult characteristics, with a focus on differences between pre- and post-implementation factors. Chen and Chan ( 2014 ) constructed the STAM by administering a questionnaire to 1012 older adults and adding eight important factors, including technology anxiety, self-efficacy, cognitive ability, and physical function, based on the TAM. This enriches the theoretical foundation of the field. In addition, Braun ( 2013 ) highlighted the role of perceived usefulness, trust in social networks, and frequency of Internet use in older adults’ use of social networks, while ease of use and social pressure were not significant influences. These findings contribute to the study of older adults’ technology acceptance within specific technology application domains.

Recent research has focused on empirical studies of personal factors and emerging technologies. Ma et al. ( 2016 ) identified key personal factors affecting smartphone acceptance among older adults through structured questionnaires and face-to-face interviews with 120 participants. The study found that cost, self-satisfaction, and convenience were important factors influencing perceived usefulness and ease of use. This study offers empirical evidence to comprehend the main factors that drive smartphone acceptance among Chinese older adults. Additionally, Yusif et al. ( 2016 ) presented an overview of the obstacles that hinder older adults’ acceptance of assistive technologies, focusing on privacy, trust, and functionality.

In summary, research on older adults’ technology acceptance has shifted from early theoretical deepening and analysis of influencing factors to empirical studies in the areas of personal factors and emerging technologies, which have greatly enriched the theoretical basis of older adults’ technology acceptance and provided practical guidance for the design of emerging technology products.

Research hotspots, evolutionary trends, and quality distribution (RQ4)

Core keywords analysis.

Keywords concise the main idea and core of the literature, and are a refined summary of the research content (Huang et al. 2021 ). In CiteSpace, nodes with a centrality value greater than 0.1 are considered to be critical nodes. Analyzing keywords with high frequency and centrality helps to visualize the hot topics in the research field (Park et al. 2018 ). The merged keywords were imported into CiteSpace, and the top 10 keywords were counted and sorted by frequency and centrality respectively, as shown in Table 9 . The results show that the keyword “TAM” has the highest frequency (92), followed by “UTAUT” (24), which reflects that the in-depth study of the existing technology acceptance model and its theoretical expansion occupy a central position in research related to older adults’ technology acceptance. Furthermore, the terms ‘assistive technology’ and ‘virtual reality’ are both high-frequency and high-centrality terms (frequency = 17, centrality = 0.10), indicating that the research on assistive technology and virtual reality for older adults is the focus of current academic attention.

Research hotspots analysis

Using VOSviewer for keyword co-occurrence analysis organizes keywords into groups or clusters based on their intrinsic connections and frequencies, clearly highlighting the research field’s hot topics. The connectivity among keywords reveals correlations between different topics. To ensure accuracy, the analysis only considered the authors’ keywords. Subsequently, the keywords were filtered by setting the keyword frequency to 5 to obtain the keyword clustering map of the research on older adults’ technology acceptance research keyword clustering mapping (Fig. 7 ), combined with the keyword co-occurrence clustering network (Fig. 7A ) and the corresponding density situation (Fig. 7B ) to make a detailed analysis of the following four groups of clustered themes.

A Co-occurrence clustering network. B Keyword density.

Cluster #1—Research on the factors influencing technology adoption among older adults is a prominent topic, covering age, gender, self-efficacy, attitude, and and intention to use (Berkowsky et al. 2017 ; Wang et al. 2017 ). It also examined older adults’ attitudes towards and acceptance of digital health technologies (Ahmad and Mozelius, 2022 ). Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic, significantly impacting older adults’ technology attitudes and usage, has underscored the study’s importance and urgency. Therefore, it is crucial to conduct in-depth studies on how older adults accept, adopt, and effectively use new technologies, to address their needs and help them overcome the digital divide within digital inclusion. This will improve their quality of life and healthcare experiences.

Cluster #2—Research focuses on how older adults interact with assistive technologies, especially assistive robots and health monitoring devices, emphasizing trust, usability, and user experience as crucial factors (Halim et al. 2022 ). Moreover, health monitoring technologies effectively track and manage health issues common in older adults, like dementia and mild cognitive impairment (Lussier et al. 2018 ; Piau et al. 2019 ). Interactive exercise games and virtual reality have been deployed to encourage more physical and cognitive engagement among older adults (Campo-Prieto et al. 2021 ). Personalized and innovative technology significantly enhances older adults’ participation, improving their health and well-being.

Cluster #3—Optimizing health management for older adults using mobile technology. With the development of mobile health (mHealth) and health information technology, mobile applications, smartphones, and smart wearable devices have become effective tools to help older users better manage chronic conditions, conduct real-time health monitoring, and even receive telehealth services (Dupuis and Tsotsos 2018 ; Olmedo-Aguirre et al. 2022 ; Kim et al. 2014 ). Additionally, these technologies can mitigate the problem of healthcare resource inequality, especially in developing countries. Older adults’ acceptance and use of these technologies are significantly influenced by their behavioral intentions, motivational factors, and self-management skills. These internal motivational factors, along with external factors, jointly affect older adults’ performance in health management and quality of life.

Cluster #4—Research on technology-assisted home care for older adults is gaining popularity. Environmentally assisted living enhances older adults’ independence and comfort at home, offering essential support and security. This has a crucial impact on promoting healthy aging (Friesen et al. 2016 ; Wahlroos et al. 2023 ). The smart home is a core application in this field, providing a range of solutions that facilitate independent living for the elderly in a highly integrated and user-friendly manner. This fulfills different dimensions of living and health needs (Majumder et al. 2017 ). Moreover, eHealth offers accurate and personalized health management and healthcare services for older adults (Delmastro et al. 2018 ), ensuring their needs are met at home. Research in this field often employs qualitative methods and structural equation modeling to fully understand older adults’ needs and experiences at home and analyze factors influencing technology adoption.

Evolutionary trends analysis

To gain a deeper understanding of the evolutionary trends in research hotspots within the field of older adults’ technology acceptance, we conducted a statistical analysis of the average appearance times of keywords, using CiteSpace to generate the time-zone evolution mapping (Fig. 8 ) and burst keywords. The time-zone mapping visually displays the evolution of keywords over time, intuitively reflecting the frequency and initial appearance of keywords in research, commonly used to identify trends in research topics (Jing et al. 2024a ; Kumar et al. 2021 ). Table 10 lists the top 15 keywords by burst strength, with the red sections indicating high-frequency citations and their burst strength in specific years. These burst keywords reveal the focus and trends of research themes over different periods (Kleinberg 2002 ). Combining insights from the time-zone mapping and burst keywords provides more objective and accurate research insights (Wang et al. 2023b ).

Reflecting the frequency and time of first appearance of keywords in the study.

An integrated analysis of Fig. 8 and Table 10 shows that early research on older adults’ technology acceptance primarily focused on factors such as perceived usefulness, ease of use, and attitudes towards information technology, including their use of computers and the internet (Pan and Jordan-Marsh 2010 ), as well as differences in technology use between older adults and other age groups (Guner and Acarturk 2020 ). Subsequently, the research focus expanded to improving the quality of life for older adults, exploring how technology can optimize health management and enhance the possibility of independent living, emphasizing the significant role of technology in improving the quality of life for the elderly. With ongoing technological advancements, recent research has shifted towards areas such as “virtual reality,” “telehealth,” and “human-robot interaction,” with a focus on the user experience of older adults (Halim et al. 2022 ). The appearance of keywords such as “physical activity” and “exercise” highlights the value of technology in promoting physical activity and health among older adults. This phase of research tends to make cutting-edge technology genuinely serve the practical needs of older adults, achieving its widespread application in daily life. Additionally, research has focused on expanding and quantifying theoretical models of older adults’ technology acceptance, involving keywords such as “perceived risk”, “validation” and “UTAUT”.

In summary, from 2013 to 2023, the field of older adults’ technology acceptance has evolved from initial explorations of influencing factors, to comprehensive enhancements in quality of life and health management, and further to the application and deepening of theoretical models and cutting-edge technologies. This research not only reflects the diversity and complexity of the field but also demonstrates a comprehensive and in-depth understanding of older adults’ interactions with technology across various life scenarios and needs.

Research quality distribution

To reveal the distribution of research quality in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance, a strategic diagram analysis is employed to calculate and illustrate the internal development and interrelationships among various research themes (Xie et al. 2020 ). The strategic diagram uses Centrality as the X-axis and Density as the Y-axis to divide into four quadrants, where the X-axis represents the strength of the connection between thematic clusters and other themes, with higher values indicating a central position in the research field; the Y-axis indicates the level of development within the thematic clusters, with higher values denoting a more mature and widely recognized field (Li and Zhou 2020 ).

Through cluster analysis and manual verification, this study categorized 61 core keywords (Frequency ≥5) into 11 thematic clusters. Subsequently, based on the keywords covered by each thematic cluster, the research themes and their directions for each cluster were summarized (Table 11 ), and the centrality and density coordinates for each cluster were precisely calculated (Table 12 ). Finally, a strategic diagram of the older adults’ technology acceptance research field was constructed (Fig. 9 ). Based on the distribution of thematic clusters across the quadrants in the strategic diagram, the structure and developmental trends of the field were interpreted.

Classification and visualization of theme clusters based on density and centrality.

As illustrated in Fig. 9 , (1) the theme clusters of #3 Usage Experience and #4 Assisted Living Technology are in the first quadrant, characterized by high centrality and density. Their internal cohesion and close links with other themes indicate their mature development, systematic research content or directions have been formed, and they have a significant influence on other themes. These themes play a central role in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance and have promising prospects. (2) The theme clusters of #6 Smart Devices, #9 Theoretical Models, and #10 Mobile Health Applications are in the second quadrant, with higher density but lower centrality. These themes have strong internal connections but weaker external links, indicating that these three themes have received widespread attention from researchers and have been the subject of related research, but more as self-contained systems and exhibit independence. Therefore, future research should further explore in-depth cooperation and cross-application with other themes. (3) The theme clusters of #7 Human-Robot Interaction, #8 Characteristics of the Elderly, and #11 Research Methods are in the third quadrant, with lower centrality and density. These themes are loosely connected internally and have weak links with others, indicating their developmental immaturity. Compared to other topics, they belong to the lower attention edge and niche themes, and there is a need for further investigation. (4) The theme clusters of #1 Digital Healthcare Technology, #2 Psychological Factors, and #5 Socio-Cultural Factors are located in the fourth quadrant, with high centrality but low density. Although closely associated with other research themes, the internal cohesion within these clusters is relatively weak. This suggests that while these themes are closely linked to other research areas, their own development remains underdeveloped, indicating a core immaturity. Nevertheless, these themes are crucial within the research domain of elderly technology acceptance and possess significant potential for future exploration.

Discussion on distribution power (RQ1)

Over the past decade, academic interest and influence in the area of older adults’ technology acceptance have significantly increased. This trend is evidenced by a quantitative analysis of publication and citation volumes, particularly noticeable in 2019 and 2022, where there was a substantial rise in both metrics. The rise is closely linked to the widespread adoption of emerging technologies such as smart homes, wearable devices, and telemedicine among older adults. While these technologies have enhanced their quality of life, they also pose numerous challenges, sparking extensive research into their acceptance, usage behaviors, and influencing factors among the older adults (Pirzada et al. 2022 ; Garcia Reyes et al. 2023 ). Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic led to a surge in technology demand among older adults, especially in areas like medical consultation, online socialization, and health management, further highlighting the importance and challenges of technology. Health risks and social isolation have compelled older adults to rely on technology for daily activities, accelerating its adoption and application within this demographic. This phenomenon has made technology acceptance a critical issue, driving societal and academic focus on the study of technology acceptance among older adults.

The flow of knowledge at the level of high-output disciplines and journals, along with the primary publishing outlets, indicates the highly interdisciplinary nature of research into older adults’ technology acceptance. This reflects the complexity and breadth of issues related to older adults’ technology acceptance, necessitating the integration of multidisciplinary knowledge and approaches. Currently, research is primarily focused on medical health and human-computer interaction, demonstrating academic interest in improving health and quality of life for older adults and addressing the urgent needs related to their interactions with technology. In the field of medical health, research aims to provide advanced and innovative healthcare technologies and services to meet the challenges of an aging population while improving the quality of life for older adults (Abdi et al. 2020 ; Wilson et al. 2021 ). In the field of human-computer interaction, research is focused on developing smarter and more user-friendly interaction models to meet the needs of older adults in the digital age, enabling them to actively participate in social activities and enjoy a higher quality of life (Sayago, 2019 ). These studies are crucial for addressing the challenges faced by aging societies, providing increased support and opportunities for the health, welfare, and social participation of older adults.

Discussion on research power (RQ2)

This study analyzes leading countries and collaboration networks, core institutions and authors, revealing the global research landscape and distribution of research strength in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance, and presents quantitative data on global research trends. From the analysis of country distribution and collaborations, China and the USA hold dominant positions in this field, with developed countries like the UK, Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands also excelling in international cooperation and research influence. The significant investment in technological research and the focus on the technological needs of older adults by many developed countries reflect their rapidly aging societies, policy support, and resource allocation.

China is the only developing country that has become a major contributor in this field, indicating its growing research capabilities and high priority given to aging societies and technological innovation. Additionally, China has close collaborations with countries such as USA, the UK, and Malaysia, driven not only by technological research needs but also by shared challenges and complementarities in aging issues among these nations. For instance, the UK has extensive experience in social welfare and aging research, providing valuable theoretical guidance and practical experience. International collaborations, aimed at addressing the challenges of aging, integrate the strengths of various countries, advancing in-depth and widespread development in the research of technology acceptance among older adults.

At the institutional and author level, City University of Hong Kong leads in publication volume, with research teams led by Chan and Chen demonstrating significant academic activity and contributions. Their research primarily focuses on older adults’ acceptance and usage behaviors of various technologies, including smartphones, smart wearables, and social robots (Chen et al. 2015 ; Li et al. 2019 ; Ma et al. 2016 ). These studies, targeting specific needs and product characteristics of older adults, have developed new models of technology acceptance based on existing frameworks, enhancing the integration of these technologies into their daily lives and laying a foundation for further advancements in the field. Although Tilburg University has a smaller publication output, it holds significant influence in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance. Particularly, the high citation rate of Peek’s studies highlights their excellence in research. Peek extensively explored older adults’ acceptance and usage of home care technologies, revealing the complexity and dynamics of their technology use behaviors. His research spans from identifying systemic influencing factors (Peek et al. 2014 ; Peek et al. 2016 ), emphasizing familial impacts (Luijkx et al. 2015 ), to constructing comprehensive models (Peek et al. 2017 ), and examining the dynamics of long-term usage (Peek et al. 2019 ), fully reflecting the evolving technology landscape and the changing needs of older adults. Additionally, the ongoing contributions of researchers like Ziefle, Rogers, and Wouters in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance demonstrate their research influence and leadership. These researchers have significantly enriched the knowledge base in this area with their diverse perspectives. For instance, Ziefle has uncovered the complex attitudes of older adults towards technology usage, especially the trade-offs between privacy and security, and how different types of activities affect their privacy needs (Maidhof et al. 2023 ; Mujirishvili et al. 2023 ; Schomakers and Ziefle 2023 ; Wilkowska et al. 2022 ), reflecting a deep exploration and ongoing innovation in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance.

Discussion on knowledge base and thematic progress (RQ3)

Through co-citation analysis and systematic review of seminal literature, this study reveals the knowledge foundation and thematic progress in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance. Co-citation networks and cluster analyses illustrate the structural themes of the research, delineating the differentiation and boundaries within this field. Additionally, burst detection analysis offers a valuable perspective for understanding the thematic evolution in the field of technology acceptance among older adults. The development and innovation of theoretical models are foundational to this research. Researchers enhance the explanatory power of constructed models by deepening and expanding existing technology acceptance theories to address theoretical limitations. For instance, Heerink et al. ( 2010 ) modified and expanded the UTAUT model by integrating functional assessment and social interaction variables to create the almere model. This model significantly enhances the ability to explain the intentions of older users in utilizing assistive social agents and improves the explanation of actual usage behaviors. Additionally, Chen and Chan ( 2014 ) extended the TAM to include age-related health and capability features of older adults, creating the STAM, which substantially improves predictions of older adults’ technology usage behaviors. Personal attributes, health and capability features, and facilitating conditions have a direct impact on technology acceptance. These factors more effectively predict older adults’ technology usage behaviors than traditional attitudinal factors.

With the advancement of technology and the application of emerging technologies, new research topics have emerged, increasingly focusing on older adults’ acceptance and use of these technologies. Prior to this, the study by Mitzner et al. ( 2010 ) challenged the stereotype of older adults’ conservative attitudes towards technology, highlighting the central roles of usability and usefulness in the technology acceptance process. This discovery laid an important foundation for subsequent research. Research fields such as “smart home technology,” “social life,” and “customer service” are emerging, indicating a shift in focus towards the practical and social applications of technology in older adults’ lives. Research not only focuses on the technology itself but also on how these technologies integrate into older adults’ daily lives and how they can improve the quality of life through technology. For instance, studies such as those by Ma et al. ( 2016 ), Hoque and Sorwar ( 2017 ), and Li et al. ( 2019 ) have explored factors influencing older adults’ use of smartphones, mHealth, and smart wearable devices.

Furthermore, the diversification of research methodologies and innovation in evaluation techniques, such as the use of mixed methods, structural equation modeling (SEM), and neural network (NN) approaches, have enhanced the rigor and reliability of the findings, enabling more precise identification of the factors and mechanisms influencing technology acceptance. Talukder et al. ( 2020 ) employed an effective multimethodological strategy by integrating SEM and NN to leverage the complementary strengths of both approaches, thus overcoming their individual limitations and more accurately analyzing and predicting older adults’ acceptance of wearable health technologies (WHT). SEM is utilized to assess the determinants’ impact on the adoption of WHT, while neural network models validate SEM outcomes and predict the significance of key determinants. This combined approach not only boosts the models’ reliability and explanatory power but also provides a nuanced understanding of the motivations and barriers behind older adults’ acceptance of WHT, offering deep research insights.

Overall, co-citation analysis of the literature in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance has uncovered deeper theoretical modeling and empirical studies on emerging technologies, while emphasizing the importance of research methodological and evaluation innovations in understanding complex social science issues. These findings are crucial for guiding the design and marketing strategies of future technology products, especially in the rapidly growing market of older adults.

Discussion on research hotspots and evolutionary trends (RQ4)

By analyzing core keywords, we can gain deep insights into the hot topics, evolutionary trends, and quality distribution of research in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance. The frequent occurrence of the keywords “TAM” and “UTAUT” indicates that the applicability and theoretical extension of existing technology acceptance models among older adults remain a focal point in academia. This phenomenon underscores the enduring influence of the studies by Davis ( 1989 ) and Venkatesh et al. ( 2003 ), whose models provide a robust theoretical framework for explaining and predicting older adults’ acceptance and usage of emerging technologies. With the widespread application of artificial intelligence (AI) and big data technologies, these theoretical models have incorporated new variables such as perceived risk, trust, and privacy issues (Amin et al. 2024 ; Chen et al. 2024 ; Jing et al. 2024b ; Seibert et al. 2021 ; Wang et al. 2024b ), advancing the theoretical depth and empirical research in this field.

Keyword co-occurrence cluster analysis has revealed multiple research hotspots in the field, including factors influencing technology adoption, interactive experiences between older adults and assistive technologies, the application of mobile health technology in health management, and technology-assisted home care. These studies primarily focus on enhancing the quality of life and health management of older adults through emerging technologies, particularly in the areas of ambient assisted living, smart health monitoring, and intelligent medical care. In these domains, the role of AI technology is increasingly significant (Qian et al. 2021 ; Ho 2020 ). With the evolution of next-generation information technologies, AI is increasingly integrated into elder care systems, offering intelligent, efficient, and personalized service solutions by analyzing the lifestyles and health conditions of older adults. This integration aims to enhance older adults’ quality of life in aspects such as health monitoring and alerts, rehabilitation assistance, daily health management, and emotional support (Lee et al. 2023 ). A survey indicates that 83% of older adults prefer AI-driven solutions when selecting smart products, demonstrating the increasing acceptance of AI in elder care (Zhao and Li 2024 ). Integrating AI into elder care presents both opportunities and challenges, particularly in terms of user acceptance, trust, and long-term usage effects, which warrant further exploration (Mhlanga 2023 ). These studies will help better understand the profound impact of AI technology on the lifestyles of older adults and provide critical references for optimizing AI-driven elder care services.

The Time-zone evolution mapping and burst keyword analysis further reveal the evolutionary trends of research hotspots. Early studies focused on basic technology acceptance models and user perceptions, later expanding to include quality of life and health management. In recent years, research has increasingly focused on cutting-edge technologies such as virtual reality, telehealth, and human-robot interaction, with a concurrent emphasis on the user experience of older adults. This evolutionary process demonstrates a deepening shift from theoretical models to practical applications, underscoring the significant role of technology in enhancing the quality of life for older adults. Furthermore, the strategic coordinate mapping analysis clearly demonstrates the development and mutual influence of different research themes. High centrality and density in the themes of Usage Experience and Assisted Living Technology indicate their mature research status and significant impact on other themes. The themes of Smart Devices, Theoretical Models, and Mobile Health Applications demonstrate self-contained research trends. The themes of Human-Robot Interaction, Characteristics of the Elderly, and Research Methods are not yet mature, but they hold potential for development. Themes of Digital Healthcare Technology, Psychological Factors, and Socio-Cultural Factors are closely related to other themes, displaying core immaturity but significant potential.

In summary, the research hotspots in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance are diverse and dynamic, demonstrating the academic community’s profound understanding of how older adults interact with technology across various life contexts and needs. Under the influence of AI and big data, research should continue to focus on the application of emerging technologies among older adults, exploring in depth how they adapt to and effectively use these technologies. This not only enhances the quality of life and healthcare experiences for older adults but also drives ongoing innovation and development in this field.

Research agenda

Based on the above research findings, to further understand and promote technology acceptance and usage among older adults, we recommend future studies focus on refining theoretical models, exploring long-term usage, and assessing user experience in the following detailed aspects:

Refinement and validation of specific technology acceptance models for older adults: Future research should focus on developing and validating technology acceptance models based on individual characteristics, particularly considering variations in technology acceptance among older adults across different educational levels and cultural backgrounds. This includes factors such as age, gender, educational background, and cultural differences. Additionally, research should examine how well specific technologies, such as wearable devices and mobile health applications, meet the needs of older adults. Building on existing theoretical models, this research should integrate insights from multiple disciplines such as psychology, sociology, design, and engineering through interdisciplinary collaboration to create more accurate and comprehensive models, which should then be validated in relevant contexts.

Deepening the exploration of the relationship between long-term technology use and quality of life among older adults: The acceptance and use of technology by users is a complex and dynamic process (Seuwou et al. 2016 ). Existing research predominantly focuses on older adults’ initial acceptance or short-term use of new technologies; however, the impact of long-term use on their quality of life and health is more significant. Future research should focus on the evolution of older adults’ experiences and needs during long-term technology usage, and the enduring effects of technology on their social interactions, mental health, and life satisfaction. Through longitudinal studies and qualitative analysis, this research reveals the specific needs and challenges of older adults in long-term technology use, providing a basis for developing technologies and strategies that better meet their requirements. This understanding aids in comprehensively assessing the impact of technology on older adults’ quality of life and guiding the optimization and improvement of technological products.

Evaluating the Importance of User Experience in Research on Older Adults’ Technology Acceptance: Understanding the mechanisms of information technology acceptance and use is central to human-computer interaction research. Although technology acceptance models and user experience models differ in objectives, they share many potential intersections. Technology acceptance research focuses on structured prediction and assessment, while user experience research concentrates on interpreting design impacts and new frameworks. Integrating user experience to assess older adults’ acceptance of technology products and systems is crucial (Codfrey et al. 2022 ; Wang et al. 2019 ), particularly for older users, where specific product designs should emphasize practicality and usability (Fisk et al. 2020 ). Researchers need to explore innovative age-appropriate design methods to enhance older adults’ usage experience. This includes studying older users’ actual usage preferences and behaviors, optimizing user interfaces, and interaction designs. Integrating feedback from older adults to tailor products to their needs can further promote their acceptance and continued use of technology products.

Conclusions

This study conducted a systematic review of the literature on older adults’ technology acceptance over the past decade through bibliometric analysis, focusing on the distribution power, research power, knowledge base and theme progress, research hotspots, evolutionary trends, and quality distribution. Using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods, this study has reached the following conclusions:

Technology acceptance among older adults has become a hot topic in the international academic community, involving the integration of knowledge across multiple disciplines, including Medical Informatics, Health Care Sciences Services, and Ergonomics. In terms of journals, “PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATION, HEALTH” represents a leading field, with key publications including Computers in Human Behavior , Journal of Medical Internet Research , and International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction . These journals possess significant academic authority and extensive influence in the field.

Research on technology acceptance among older adults is particularly active in developed countries, with China and USA publishing significantly more than other nations. The Netherlands leads in high average citation rates, indicating the depth and impact of its research. Meanwhile, the UK stands out in terms of international collaboration. At the institutional level, City University of Hong Kong and The University of Hong Kong in China are in leading positions. Tilburg University in the Netherlands demonstrates exceptional research quality through its high average citation count. At the author level, Chen from China has the highest number of publications, while Peek from the Netherlands has the highest average citation count.

Co-citation analysis of references indicates that the knowledge base in this field is divided into three main categories: theoretical model deepening, emerging technology applications, and research methods and evaluation. Seminal literature focuses on four areas: specific technology use by older adults, expansion of theoretical models of technology acceptance, information technology adoption behavior, and research perspectives. Research themes have evolved from initial theoretical deepening and analysis of influencing factors to empirical studies on individual factors and emerging technologies.

Keyword analysis indicates that TAM and UTAUT are the most frequently occurring terms, while “assistive technology” and “virtual reality” are focal points with high frequency and centrality. Keyword clustering analysis reveals that research hotspots are concentrated on the influencing factors of technology adoption, human-robot interaction experiences, mobile health management, and technology for aging in place. Time-zone evolution mapping and burst keyword analysis have revealed the research evolution from preliminary exploration of influencing factors, to enhancements in quality of life and health management, and onto advanced technology applications and deepening of theoretical models. Furthermore, analysis of research quality distribution indicates that Usage Experience and Assisted Living Technology have become core topics, while Smart Devices, Theoretical Models, and Mobile Health Applications point towards future research directions.

Through this study, we have systematically reviewed the dynamics, core issues, and evolutionary trends in the field of older adults’ technology acceptance, constructing a comprehensive Knowledge Mapping of the domain and presenting a clear framework of existing research. This not only lays the foundation for subsequent theoretical discussions and innovative applications in the field but also provides an important reference for relevant scholars.

Limitations

To our knowledge, this is the first bibliometric analysis concerning technology acceptance among older adults, and we adhered strictly to bibliometric standards throughout our research. However, this study relies on the Web of Science Core Collection, and while its authority and breadth are widely recognized, this choice may have missed relevant literature published in other significant databases such as PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar, potentially overlooking some critical academic contributions. Moreover, given that our analysis was confined to literature in English, it may not reflect studies published in other languages, somewhat limiting the global representativeness of our data sample.

It is noteworthy that with the rapid development of AI technology, its increasingly widespread application in elderly care services is significantly transforming traditional care models. AI is profoundly altering the lifestyles of the elderly, from health monitoring and smart diagnostics to intelligent home systems and personalized care, significantly enhancing their quality of life and health care standards. The potential for AI technology within the elderly population is immense, and research in this area is rapidly expanding. However, due to the restrictive nature of the search terms used in this study, it did not fully cover research in this critical area, particularly in addressing key issues such as trust, privacy, and ethics.

Consequently, future research should not only expand data sources, incorporating multilingual and multidatabase literature, but also particularly focus on exploring older adults’ acceptance of AI technology and its applications, in order to construct a more comprehensive academic landscape of older adults’ technology acceptance, thereby enriching and extending the knowledge system and academic trends in this field.

Data availability

The datasets analyzed during the current study are available in the Dataverse repository: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/6K0GJH .

Abdi S, de Witte L, Hawley M (2020) Emerging technologies with potential care and support applications for older people: review of gray literature. JMIR Aging 3(2):e17286. https://doi.org/10.2196/17286

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Achuthan K, Nair VK, Kowalski R, Ramanathan S, Raman R (2023) Cyberbullying research—Alignment to sustainable development and impact of COVID-19: Bibliometrics and science mapping analysis. Comput Human Behav 140:107566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107566

Article Google Scholar

Ahmad A, Mozelius P (2022) Human-Computer Interaction for Older Adults: a Literature Review on Technology Acceptance of eHealth Systems. J Eng Res Sci 1(4):119–126. https://doi.org/10.55708/js0104014

Ale Ebrahim N, Salehi H, Embi MA, Habibi F, Gholizadeh H, Motahar SM (2014) Visibility and citation impact. Int Educ Stud 7(4):120–125. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v7n4p120

Amin MS, Johnson VL, Prybutok V, Koh CE (2024) An investigation into factors affecting the willingness to disclose personal health information when using AI-enabled caregiver robots. Ind Manag Data Syst 124(4):1677–1699. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-09-2023-0608

Baer NR, Vietzke J, Schenk L (2022) Middle-aged and older adults’ acceptance of mobile nutrition and fitness apps: a systematic mixed studies review. PLoS One 17(12):e0278879. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0278879

Article PubMed PubMed Central CAS Google Scholar

Barnard Y, Bradley MD, Hodgson F, Lloyd AD (2013) Learning to use new technologies by older adults: Perceived difficulties, experimentation behaviour and usability. Comput Human Behav 29(4):1715–1724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.006

Berkowsky RW, Sharit J, Czaja SJ (2017) Factors predicting decisions about technology adoption among older adults. Innov Aging 3(1):igy002. https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igy002

Braun MT (2013) Obstacles to social networking website use among older adults. Comput Human Behav 29(3):673–680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.004

Article MathSciNet Google Scholar

Campo-Prieto P, Rodríguez-Fuentes G, Cancela-Carral JM (2021) Immersive virtual reality exergame promotes the practice of physical activity in older people: An opportunity during COVID-19. Multimodal Technol Interact 5(9):52. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti5090052

Chen C (2006) CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 57(3):359–377. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20317

Chen C, Dubin R, Kim MC (2014) Emerging trends and new developments in regenerative medicine: a scientometric update (2000–2014). Expert Opin Biol Ther 14(9):1295–1317. https://doi.org/10.1517/14712598.2014.920813

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Chen C, Leydesdorff L (2014) Patterns of connections and movements in dual‐map overlays: A new method of publication portfolio analysis. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol 65(2):334–351. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22968

Chen J, Wang C, Tang Y (2022) Knowledge mapping of volunteer motivation: A bibliometric analysis and cross-cultural comparative study. Front Psychol 13:883150. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.883150

Chen JY, Liu YD, Dai J, Wang CL (2023) Development and status of moral education research: Visual analysis based on knowledge graph. Front Psychol 13:1079955. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1079955

Chen K, Chan AH (2011) A review of technology acceptance by older adults. Gerontechnology 10(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.4017/gt.2011.10.01.006.00

Chen K, Chan AH (2014) Gerontechnology acceptance by elderly Hong Kong Chinese: a senior technology acceptance model (STAM). Ergonomics 57(5):635–652. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2014.895855

Chen K, Zhang Y, Fu X (2019) International research collaboration: An emerging domain of innovation studies? Res Policy 48(1):149–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.005

Article CAS Google Scholar

Chen X, Hu Z, Wang C (2024) Empowering education development through AIGC: A systematic literature review. Educ Inf Technol 1–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12549-7

Chen Y, Chen CM, Liu ZY, Hu ZG, Wang XW (2015) The methodology function of CiteSpace mapping knowledge domains. Stud Sci Sci 33(2):242–253. https://doi.org/10.16192/j.cnki.1003-2053.2015.02.009

Codfrey GS, Baharum A, Zain NHM, Omar M, Deris FD (2022) User Experience in Product Design and Development: Perspectives and Strategies. Math Stat Eng Appl 71(2):257–262. https://doi.org/10.17762/msea.v71i2.83

Dai J, Zhang X, Wang CL (2024) A meta-analysis of learners’ continuance intention toward online education platforms. Educ Inf Technol 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12654-7

Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q 13(3):319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

Delmastro F, Dolciotti C, Palumbo F, Magrini M, Di Martino F, La Rosa D, Barcaro U (2018) Long-term care: how to improve the quality of life with mobile and e-health services. In 2018 14th International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications (WiMob), pp. 12–19. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/WiMOB.2018.8589157

Dupuis K, Tsotsos LE (2018) Technology for remote health monitoring in an older population: a role for mobile devices. Multimodal Technol Interact 2(3):43. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti2030043

Ferguson C, Hickman LD, Turkmani S, Breen P, Gargiulo G, Inglis SC (2021) Wearables only work on patients that wear them”: Barriers and facilitators to the adoption of wearable cardiac monitoring technologies. Cardiovasc Digit Health J 2(2):137–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cvdhj.2021.02.001

Fisk AD, Czaja SJ, Rogers WA, Charness N, Sharit J (2020) Designing for older adults: Principles and creative human factors approaches. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420080681

Friesen S, Brémault-Phillips S, Rudrum L, Rogers LG (2016) Environmental design that supports healthy aging: Evaluating a new supportive living facility. J Hous Elderly 30(1):18–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763893.2015.1129380

Garcia Reyes EP, Kelly R, Buchanan G, Waycott J (2023) Understanding Older Adults’ Experiences With Technologies for Health Self-management: Interview Study. JMIR Aging 6:e43197. https://doi.org/10.2196/43197

Geng Z, Wang J, Liu J, Miao J (2024) Bibliometric analysis of the development, current status, and trends in adult degenerative scoliosis research: A systematic review from 1998 to 2023. J Pain Res 17:153–169. https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S437575

González A, Ramírez MP, Viadel V (2012) Attitudes of the elderly toward information and communications technologies. Educ Gerontol 38(9):585–594. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601277.2011.595314

Guner H, Acarturk C (2020) The use and acceptance of ICT by senior citizens: a comparison of technology acceptance model (TAM) for elderly and young adults. Univ Access Inf Soc 19(2):311–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-018-0642-4

Halim I, Saptari A, Perumal PA, Abdullah Z, Abdullah S, Muhammad MN (2022) A Review on Usability and User Experience of Assistive Social Robots for Older Persons. Int J Integr Eng 14(6):102–124. https://penerbit.uthm.edu.my/ojs/index.php/ijie/article/view/8566

He Y, He Q, Liu Q (2022) Technology acceptance in socially assistive robots: Scoping review of models, measurement, and influencing factors. J Healthc Eng 2022(1):6334732. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6334732

Heerink M, Kröse B, Evers V, Wielinga B (2010) Assessing acceptance of assistive social agent technology by older adults: the almere model. Int J Soc Robot 2:361–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-010-0068-5

Ho A (2020) Are we ready for artificial intelligence health monitoring in elder care? BMC Geriatr 20(1):358. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-020-01764-9

Hoque R, Sorwar G (2017) Understanding factors influencing the adoption of mHealth by the elderly: An extension of the UTAUT model. Int J Med Inform 101:75–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.02.002

Hota PK, Subramanian B, Narayanamurthy G (2020) Mapping the intellectual structure of social entrepreneurship research: A citation/co-citation analysis. J Bus Ethics 166(1):89–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04129-4

Huang R, Yan P, Yang X (2021) Knowledge map visualization of technology hotspots and development trends in China’s textile manufacturing industry. IET Collab Intell Manuf 3(3):243–251. https://doi.org/10.1049/cim2.12024

Article ADS Google Scholar

Jing Y, Wang C, Chen Y, Wang H, Yu T, Shadiev R (2023) Bibliometric mapping techniques in educational technology research: A systematic literature review. Educ Inf Technol 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12178-6

Jing YH, Wang CL, Chen ZY, Shen SS, Shadiev R (2024a) A Bibliometric Analysis of Studies on Technology-Supported Learning Environments: Hotopics and Frontier Evolution. J Comput Assist Learn 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12934

Jing YH, Wang HM, Chen XJ, Wang CL (2024b) What factors will affect the effectiveness of using ChatGPT to solve programming problems? A quasi-experimental study. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11:319. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02751-w

Kamrani P, Dorsch I, Stock WG (2021) Do researchers know what the h-index is? And how do they estimate its importance? Scientometrics 126(7):5489–5508. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03968-1

Kim HS, Lee KH, Kim H, Kim JH (2014) Using mobile phones in healthcare management for the elderly. Maturitas 79(4):381–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2014.08.013

Article MathSciNet PubMed Google Scholar

Kleinberg J (2002) Bursty and hierarchical structure in streams. In Proceedings of the eighth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, pp. 91–101. https://doi.org/10.1145/775047.775061

Kruse C, Fohn J, Wilson N, Patlan EN, Zipp S, Mileski M (2020) Utilization barriers and medical outcomes commensurate with the use of telehealth among older adults: systematic review. JMIR Med Inform 8(8):e20359. https://doi.org/10.2196/20359

Kumar S, Lim WM, Pandey N, Christopher Westland J (2021) 20 years of electronic commerce research. Electron Commer Res 21:1–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-021-09464-1

Kwiek M (2021) What large-scale publication and citation data tell us about international research collaboration in Europe: Changing national patterns in global contexts. Stud High Educ 46(12):2629–2649. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1749254

Lee C, Coughlin JF (2015) PERSPECTIVE: Older adults’ adoption of technology: an integrated approach to identifying determinants and barriers. J Prod Innov Manag 32(5):747–759. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12176

Lee CH, Wang C, Fan X, Li F, Chen CH (2023) Artificial intelligence-enabled digital transformation in elderly healthcare field: scoping review. Adv Eng Inform 55:101874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2023.101874

Leydesdorff L, Rafols I (2012) Interactive overlays: A new method for generating global journal maps from Web-of-Science data. J Informetr 6(2):318–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2011.11.003

Li J, Ma Q, Chan AH, Man S (2019) Health monitoring through wearable technologies for older adults: Smart wearables acceptance model. Appl Ergon 75:162–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2018.10.006

Article ADS PubMed Google Scholar

Li X, Zhou D (2020) Product design requirement information visualization approach for intelligent manufacturing services. China Mech Eng 31(07):871, http://www.cmemo.org.cn/EN/Y2020/V31/I07/871

Google Scholar

Lin Y, Yu Z (2024a) An integrated bibliometric analysis and systematic review modelling students’ technostress in higher education. Behav Inf Technol 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2024.2332458

Lin Y, Yu Z (2024b) A bibliometric analysis of artificial intelligence chatbots in educational contexts. Interact Technol Smart Educ 21(2):189–213. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-12-2022-0165

Liu L, Duffy VG (2023) Exploring the future development of Artificial Intelligence (AI) applications in chatbots: a bibliometric analysis. Int J Soc Robot 15(5):703–716. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-022-00956-0

Liu R, Li X, Chu J (2022) Evolution of applied variables in the research on technology acceptance of the elderly. In: International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp 500–520. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05581-23_5

Luijkx K, Peek S, Wouters E (2015) “Grandma, you should do it—It’s cool” Older Adults and the Role of Family Members in Their Acceptance of Technology. Int J Environ Res Public Health 12(12):15470–15485. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph121214999

Lussier M, Lavoie M, Giroux S, Consel C, Guay M, Macoir J, Bier N (2018) Early detection of mild cognitive impairment with in-home monitoring sensor technologies using functional measures: a systematic review. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform 23(2):838–847. https://doi.org/10.1109/JBHI.2018.2834317

López-Robles JR, Otegi-Olaso JR, Porto Gomez I, Gamboa-Rosales NK, Gamboa-Rosales H, Robles-Berumen H (2018) Bibliometric network analysis to identify the intellectual structure and evolution of the big data research field. In: International Conference on Intelligent Data Engineering and Automated Learning, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp 113–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03496-2_13

Ma Q, Chan AH, Chen K (2016) Personal and other factors affecting acceptance of smartphone technology by older Chinese adults. Appl Ergon 54:62–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2015.11.015

Ma Q, Chan AHS, Teh PL (2021) Insights into Older Adults’ Technology Acceptance through Meta-Analysis. Int J Hum-Comput Interact 37(11):1049–1062. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1865005

Macedo IM (2017) Predicting the acceptance and use of information and communication technology by older adults: An empirical examination of the revised UTAUT2. Comput Human Behav 75:935–948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.06.013

Maidhof C, Offermann J, Ziefle M (2023) Eyes on privacy: acceptance of video-based AAL impacted by activities being filmed. Front Public Health 11:1186944. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1186944

Majumder S, Aghayi E, Noferesti M, Memarzadeh-Tehran H, Mondal T, Pang Z, Deen MJ (2017) Smart homes for elderly healthcare—Recent advances and research challenges. Sensors 17(11):2496. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17112496

Article ADS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Mhlanga D (2023) Artificial Intelligence in elderly care: Navigating ethical and responsible AI adoption for seniors. Available at SSRN 4675564. 4675564 min) Identifying citation patterns of scientific breakthroughs: A perspective of dynamic citation process. Inf Process Manag 58(1):102428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2020.102428

Mitzner TL, Boron JB, Fausset CB, Adams AE, Charness N, Czaja SJ, Sharit J (2010) Older adults talk technology: Technology usage and attitudes. Comput Human Behav 26(6):1710–1721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.020

Mitzner TL, Savla J, Boot WR, Sharit J, Charness N, Czaja SJ, Rogers WA (2019) Technology adoption by older adults: Findings from the PRISM trial. Gerontologist 59(1):34–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gny113

Mongeon P, Paul-Hus A (2016) The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics 106:213–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5

Mostaghel R (2016) Innovation and technology for the elderly: Systematic literature review. J Bus Res 69(11):4896–4900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.049

Mujirishvili T, Maidhof C, Florez-Revuelta F, Ziefle M, Richart-Martinez M, Cabrero-García J (2023) Acceptance and privacy perceptions toward video-based active and assisted living technologies: Scoping review. J Med Internet Res 25:e45297. https://doi.org/10.2196/45297

Naseri RNN, Azis SN, Abas N (2023) A Review of Technology Acceptance and Adoption Models in Consumer Study. FIRM J Manage Stud 8(2):188–199. https://doi.org/10.33021/firm.v8i2.4536

Nguyen UP, Hallinger P (2020) Assessing the distinctive contributions of Simulation & Gaming to the literature, 1970–2019: A bibliometric review. Simul Gaming 51(6):744–769. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878120941569

Olmedo-Aguirre JO, Reyes-Campos J, Alor-Hernández G, Machorro-Cano I, Rodríguez-Mazahua L, Sánchez-Cervantes JL (2022) Remote healthcare for elderly people using wearables: A review. Biosensors 12(2):73. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios12020073

Pan S, Jordan-Marsh M (2010) Internet use intention and adoption among Chinese older adults: From the expanded technology acceptance model perspective. Comput Human Behav 26(5):1111–1119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.015

Pan X, Yan E, Cui M, Hua W (2018) Examining the usage, citation, and diffusion patterns of bibliometric map software: A comparative study of three tools. J Informetr 12(2):481–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.03.005

Park JS, Kim NR, Han EJ (2018) Analysis of trends in science and technology using keyword network analysis. J Korea Ind Inf Syst Res 23(2):63–73. https://doi.org/10.9723/jksiis.2018.23.2.063

Peek ST, Luijkx KG, Rijnaard MD, Nieboer ME, Van Der Voort CS, Aarts S, Wouters EJ (2016) Older adults’ reasons for using technology while aging in place. Gerontology 62(2):226–237. https://doi.org/10.1159/000430949

Peek ST, Luijkx KG, Vrijhoef HJ, Nieboer ME, Aarts S, van der Voort CS, Wouters EJ (2017) Origins and consequences of technology acquirement by independent-living seniors: Towards an integrative model. BMC Geriatr 17:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-017-0582-5

Peek ST, Wouters EJ, Van Hoof J, Luijkx KG, Boeije HR, Vrijhoef HJ (2014) Factors influencing acceptance of technology for aging in place: a systematic review. Int J Med Inform 83(4):235–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.01.004

Peek STM, Luijkx KG, Vrijhoef HJM, Nieboer ME, Aarts S, Van Der Voort CS, Wouters EJM (2019) Understanding changes and stability in the long-term use of technologies by seniors who are aging in place: a dynamical framework. BMC Geriatr 19:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-019-1241-9

Perez AJ, Siddiqui F, Zeadally S, Lane D (2023) A review of IoT systems to enable independence for the elderly and disabled individuals. Internet Things 21:100653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iot.2022.100653

Piau A, Wild K, Mattek N, Kaye J (2019) Current state of digital biomarker technologies for real-life, home-based monitoring of cognitive function for mild cognitive impairment to mild Alzheimer disease and implications for clinical care: systematic review. J Med Internet Res 21(8):e12785. https://doi.org/10.2196/12785

Pirzada P, Wilde A, Doherty GH, Harris-Birtill D (2022) Ethics and acceptance of smart homes for older adults. Inform Health Soc Care 47(1):10–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538157.2021.1923500

Pranckutė R (2021) Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world. Publications 9(1):12. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010012

Qian K, Zhang Z, Yamamoto Y, Schuller BW (2021) Artificial intelligence internet of things for the elderly: From assisted living to health-care monitoring. IEEE Signal Process Mag 38(4):78–88. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSP.2021.3057298

Redner S (1998) How popular is your paper? An empirical study of the citation distribution. Eur Phys J B-Condens Matter Complex Syst 4(2):131–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s100510050359

Sayago S (ed.) (2019) Perspectives on human-computer interaction research with older people. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-06076-3

Schomakers EM, Ziefle M (2023) Privacy vs. security: trade-offs in the acceptance of smart technologies for aging-in-place. Int J Hum Comput Interact 39(5):1043–1058. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2078463

Schroeder T, Dodds L, Georgiou A, Gewald H, Siette J (2023) Older adults and new technology: Mapping review of the factors associated with older adults’ intention to adopt digital technologies. JMIR Aging 6(1):e44564. https://doi.org/10.2196/44564

Seibert K, Domhoff D, Bruch D, Schulte-Althoff M, Fürstenau D, Biessmann F, Wolf-Ostermann K (2021) Application scenarios for artificial intelligence in nursing care: rapid review. J Med Internet Res 23(11):e26522. https://doi.org/10.2196/26522

Seuwou P, Banissi E, Ubakanma G (2016) User acceptance of information technology: A critical review of technology acceptance models and the decision to invest in Information Security. In: Global Security, Safety and Sustainability-The Security Challenges of the Connected World: 11th International Conference, ICGS3 2017, London, UK, January 18-20, 2017, Proceedings 11:230-251. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51064-4_19

Shiau WL, Wang X, Zheng F (2023) What are the trend and core knowledge of information security? A citation and co-citation analysis. Inf Manag 60(3):103774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2023.103774

Sinha S, Verma A, Tiwari P (2021) Technology: Saving and enriching life during COVID-19. Front Psychol 12:647681. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.647681

Soar J (2010) The potential of information and communication technologies to support ageing and independent living. Ann Telecommun 65:479–483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12243-010-0167-1

Strotmann A, Zhao D (2012) Author name disambiguation: What difference does it make in author‐based citation analysis? J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 63(9):1820–1833. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22695

Talukder MS, Sorwar G, Bao Y, Ahmed JU, Palash MAS (2020) Predicting antecedents of wearable healthcare technology acceptance by elderly: A combined SEM-Neural Network approach. Technol Forecast Soc Change 150:119793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119793

Taskin Z, Al U (2019) Natural language processing applications in library and information science. Online Inf Rev 43(4):676–690. https://doi.org/10.1108/oir-07-2018-0217

Touqeer H, Zaman S, Amin R, Hussain M, Al-Turjman F, Bilal M (2021) Smart home security: challenges, issues and solutions at different IoT layers. J Supercomput 77(12):14053–14089. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-021-03825-1

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2023) World population ageing 2023: Highlights. https://www.un.org/zh/193220

Valk CAL, Lu Y, Randriambelonoro M, Jessen J (2018) Designing for technology acceptance of wearable and mobile technologies for senior citizen users. In: 21st DMI: Academic Design Management Conference (ADMC 2018), Design Management Institute, pp 1361–1373. https://www.dmi.org/page/ADMC2018

Van Eck N, Waltman L (2010) Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 84(2):523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3

Vancea M, Solé-Casals J (2016) Population aging in the European Information Societies: towards a comprehensive research agenda in eHealth innovations for elderly. Aging Dis 7(4):526. https://doi.org/10.14336/AD.2015.1214

Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD (2003) User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Q 27(3):425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540

Wagner N, Hassanein K, Head M (2010) Computer use by older adults: A multi-disciplinary review. Comput Human Behav 26(5):870–882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.029

Wahlroos N, Narsakka N, Stolt M, Suhonen R (2023) Physical environment maintaining independence and self-management of older people in long-term care settings—An integrative literature review. J Aging Environ 37(3):295–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/26892618.2022.2092927

Wang CL, Chen XJ, Yu T, Liu YD, Jing YH (2024a) Education reform and change driven by digital technology: a bibliometric study from a global perspective. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11(1):1–17. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02717-y

Wang CL, Dai J, Zhu KK, Yu T, Gu XQ (2023a) Understanding the Continuance Intention of College Students Toward New E-learning Spaces Based on an Integrated Model of the TAM and TTF. Int J Hum-comput Int 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2291609

Wang CL, Wang HM, Li YY, Dai J, Gu XQ, Yu T (2024b) Factors Influencing University Students’ Behavioral Intention to Use Generative Artificial Intelligence: Integrating the Theory of Planned Behavior and AI Literacy. Int J Hum-comput Int 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2383033

Wang J, Zhao W, Zhang Z, Liu X, Xie T, Wang L, Zhang Y (2024c) A journey of challenges and victories: a bibliometric worldview of nanomedicine since the 21st century. Adv Mater 36(15):2308915. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202308915

Wang J, Chen Y, Huo S, Mai L, Jia F (2023b) Research hotspots and trends of social robot interaction design: A bibliometric analysis. Sensors 23(23):9369. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23239369

Wang KH, Chen G, Chen HG (2017) A model of technology adoption by older adults. Soc Behav Personal 45(4):563–572. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.5778

Wang S, Bolling K, Mao W, Reichstadt J, Jeste D, Kim HC, Nebeker C (2019) Technology to Support Aging in Place: Older Adults’ Perspectives. Healthcare 7(2):60. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare7020060

Wang Z, Liu D, Sun Y, Pang X, Sun P, Lin F, Ren K (2022) A survey on IoT-enabled home automation systems: Attacks and defenses. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor 24(4):2292–2328. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2022.3201557

Wilkowska W, Offermann J, Spinsante S, Poli A, Ziefle M (2022) Analyzing technology acceptance and perception of privacy in ambient assisted living for using sensor-based technologies. PloS One 17(7):e0269642. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269642

Wilson J, Heinsch M, Betts D, Booth D, Kay-Lambkin F (2021) Barriers and facilitators to the use of e-health by older adults: a scoping review. BMC Public Health 21:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-11623-w

Xia YQ, Deng YL, Tao XY, Zhang SN, Wang CL (2024) Digital art exhibitions and psychological well-being in Chinese Generation Z: An analysis based on the S-O-R framework. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11:266. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02718-x

Xie H, Zhang Y, Duan K (2020) Evolutionary overview of urban expansion based on bibliometric analysis in Web of Science from 1990 to 2019. Habitat Int 95:102100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2019.10210

Xu Z, Ge Z, Wang X, Skare M (2021) Bibliometric analysis of technology adoption literature published from 1997 to 2020. Technol Forecast Soc Change 170:120896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120896

Yap YY, Tan SH, Choon SW (2022) Elderly’s intention to use technologies: a systematic literature review. Heliyon 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08765

Yu T, Dai J, Wang CL (2023) Adoption of blended learning: Chinese university students’ perspectives. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10:390. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01904-7

Yusif S, Soar J, Hafeez-Baig A (2016) Older people, assistive technologies, and the barriers to adoption: A systematic review. Int J Med Inform 94:112–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2016.07.004

Zhang J, Zhu L (2022) Citation recommendation using semantic representation of cited papers’ relations and content. Expert Syst Appl 187:115826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115826

Zhao Y, Li J (2024) Opportunities and challenges of integrating artificial intelligence in China’s elderly care services. Sci Rep 14(1):9254. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-60067-w

Article ADS MathSciNet PubMed PubMed Central CAS Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Social Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province in China (Grant No. 2023J014).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Art and Design, Shaanxi University of Science and Technology, Xi’an, China

Xianru Shang, Zijian Liu, Chen Gong, Zhigang Hu & Yuexuan Wu

Department of Education Information Technology, Faculty of Education, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China

Chengliang Wang

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization, XS, YW, CW; methodology, XS, ZL, CG, CW; software, XS, CG, YW; writing-original draft preparation, XS, CW; writing-review and editing, XS, CG, ZH, CW; supervision, ZL, ZH, CW; project administration, ZL, ZH, CW; funding acquisition, XS, CG. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. All authors have read and approved the re-submission of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chengliang Wang .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was not required as the study did not involve human participants.

Informed consent

Informed consent was not required as the study did not involve human participants.

Additional information

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

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Shang, X., Liu, Z., Gong, C. et al. Knowledge mapping and evolution of research on older adults’ technology acceptance: a bibliometric study from 2013 to 2023. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 1115 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03658-2

Download citation

Received : 20 June 2024

Accepted : 21 August 2024

Published : 31 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03658-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

Explore articles by subject
Guide to authors
Editorial policies

Online Students

For All Online Programs

International Students

On Campus, need or have Visa

Campus Students

For All Campus Programs

What a Thesis Paper is and How to Write One

A student sitting at her laptop working on her college thesis paper.

From choosing a topic and conducting research to crafting a strong argument, writing a thesis paper can be a rewarding experience.

It can also be a challenging experience. If you've never written a thesis paper before, you may not know where to start. You may not even be sure exactly what a thesis paper is. But don't worry; the right support and resources can help you navigate this writing process.

What is a Thesis Paper?

A thesis paper is a type of academic essay that you might write as a graduation requirement for certain bachelor's, master's or honors programs. Thesis papers present your own original research or analysis on a specific topic related to your field.

“In some ways, a thesis paper can look a lot like a novella,” said Shana Chartier , director of information literacy at Southern New Hampshire University (SNHU). “It’s too short to be a full-length novel, but with the standard size of 40-60 pages (for a bachelor’s) and 60-100 pages (for a master’s), it is a robust exploration of a topic, explaining one’s understanding of a topic based on personal research.”

Chartier has worked in academia for over 13 years and at SNHU for nearly eight. In her role as an instructor and director, Chartier has helped to guide students through the writing process, like editing and providing resources.

Chartier has written and published academic papers such as "Augmented Reality Gamifies the Library: A Ride Through the Technological Frontier" and "Going Beyond the One-Shot: Spiraling Information Literacy Across Four Years." Both of these academic papers required Chartier to have hands-on experience with the subject matter. Like a thesis paper, they also involved hypothesizing and doing original research to come to a conclusion.

“When writing a thesis paper, the importance of staying organized cannot be overstated,” said Chartier. “Mapping out each step of the way, making firm and soft deadlines... and having other pairs of eyes on your work to ensure academic accuracy and clean editing are crucial to writing a successful paper.”

How Do I Choose a Topic For My Thesis Paper?

What your thesis paper is for will determine some of the specific requirements and steps you might take, but the first step is usually the same: Choosing a topic.

“Choosing a topic can be daunting," said Rochelle Attari , a peer tutor at SNHU. "But if (you) stick with a subject (you're) interested in... choosing a topic is much more manageable.”

Similar to a thesis, Attari recently finished the capstone for her bachelor’s in psychology . Her bachelor’s concentration is in forensics, and her capstone focused on the topic of using a combined therapy model for inmates who experience substance abuse issues to reduce recidivism.

“The hardest part was deciding what I wanted to focus on,” Attari said. “But once I nailed down my topic, each milestone was more straightforward.”

In her own writing experience, Attari said brainstorming was an important step when choosing her topic. She recommends writing down different ideas on a piece of paper and doing some preliminary research on what’s already been written on your topic.

By doing this exercise, you can narrow or broaden your ideas until you’ve found a topic you’re excited about. " Brainstorming is essential when writing a paper and is not a last-minute activity,” Attari said.

How Do I Structure My Thesis Paper?

Thesis papers tend to have a standard format with common sections as the building blocks.

While the structure Attari describes below will work for many theses, it’s important to double-check with your program to see if there are any specific requirements. Writing a thesis for a Master of Fine Arts, for example, might actually look more like a fiction novel.

According to Attari, a thesis paper is often structured with the following major sections:

Introduction

Literature review
Methods, results

Now, let’s take a closer look at what each different section should include.

Your introduction is your opportunity to present the topic of your thesis paper. In this section, you can explain why that topic is important. The introduction is also the place to include your thesis statement, which shows your stance in the paper.

Attari said that writing an introduction can be tricky, especially when you're trying to capture your reader’s attention and state your argument.

“I have found that starting with a statement of truth about a topic that pertains to an issue I am writing about typically does the trick,” Attari said. She demonstrated this advice in an example introduction she wrote for a paper on the effects of daylight in Alaska:

In the continental United States, we can always count on the sun rising and setting around the same time each day, but in Alaska, during certain times of the year, the sun rises and does not set for weeks. Research has shown that the sun provides vitamin D and is an essential part of our health, but little is known about how daylight twenty-four hours a day affects the circadian rhythm and sleep.

In the example Attari wrote, she introduces the topic and informs the reader what the paper will cover. Somewhere in her intro, she said she would also include her thesis statement, which might be:

Twenty-four hours of daylight over an extended period does not affect sleep patterns in humans and is not the cause of daytime fatigue in northern Alaska .

Literature Review

In the literature review, you'll look at what information is already out there about your topic. “This is where scholarly articles about your topic are essential,” said Attari. “These articles will help you find the gap in research that you have identified and will also support your thesis statement."

Telling your reader what research has already been done will help them see how your research fits into the larger conversation. Most university libraries offer databases of scholarly/peer-reviewed articles that can be helpful in your search.

In the methods section of your thesis paper, you get to explain how you learned what you learned. This might include what experiment you conducted as a part of your independent research.

“For instance,” Attari said, “if you are a psychology major and have identified a gap in research on which therapies are effective for anxiety, your methods section would consist of the number of participants, the type of experiment and any other particulars you would use for that experiment.”

In this section, you'll explain the results of your study. For example, building on the psychology example Attari outlined, you might share self-reported anxiety levels for participants trying different kinds of therapies. To help you communicate your results clearly, you might include data, charts, tables or other visualizations.

The discussion section of your thesis paper is where you will analyze and interpret the results you presented in the previous section. This is where you can discuss what your findings really mean or compare them to the research you found in your literature review.

The discussion section is your chance to show why the data you collected matters and how it fits into bigger conversations in your field.

The conclusion of your thesis paper is your opportunity to sum up your argument and leave your reader thinking about why your research matters.

Attari breaks the conclusion down into simple parts. “You restate the original issue and thesis statement, explain the experiment's results and discuss possible next steps for further research,” she said.

Find Your Program

Resources to help write your thesis paper.

While your thesis paper may be based on your independent research, writing it doesn’t have to be a solitary process. Asking for help and using the resources that are available to you can make the process easier.

If you're writing a thesis paper, some resources Chartier encourages you to use are:

Citation Handbooks: An online citation guide or handbook can help you ensure your citations are correct. APA , MLA and Chicago styles have all published their own guides.
Citation Generators: There are many citation generator tools that help you to create citations. Some — like RefWorks — even let you directly import citations from library databases as you research.
Your Library's Website: Many academic and public libraries allow patrons to access resources like databases or FAQs. Some FAQs at the SNHU library that might be helpful in your thesis writing process include “ How do I read a scholarly article? ” or “ What is a research question and how do I develop one? ”

It can also be helpful to check out what coaching or tutoring options are available through your school. At SNHU, for example, the Academic Support Center offers writing and grammar workshops , and students can access 24/7 tutoring and 1:1 sessions with peer tutors, like Attari.

"Students can even submit their papers and receive written feedback... like revisions and editing suggestions," she said.

If you are writing a thesis paper, there are many resources available to you. It's a long paper, but with the right mindset and support, you can successfully navigate the process.

“Pace yourself,” said Chartier. “This is a marathon, not a sprint. Setting smaller goals to get to the big finish line can make the process seem less daunting, and remember to be proud of yourself and celebrate your accomplishment once you’re done. Writing a thesis is no small task, and it’s important work for the scholarly community.”

A degree can change your life. Choose your program from 200+ SNHU degrees that can take you where you want to go.

Meg Palmer ’18 is a writer and scholar by trade who loves reading, riding her bike and singing in a barbershop quartet. She earned her bachelor’s degree in English, language and literature at Southern New Hampshire University (SNHU) and her master’s degree in writing, rhetoric and discourse at DePaul University (’20). While attending SNHU, she served as the editor-in-chief of the campus student newspaper, The Penmen Press, where she deepened her passion for writing. Meg is an adjunct professor at Johnson and Wales University, where she teaches first year writing, honors composition, and public speaking. Connect with her on LinkedIn .

Explore more content like this article

An icon of a college diploma wrapped in blue and yellow ribbon.

Dual Degree vs. Double Major: What's the Difference?

A person with a laptop and notebook, considering the difference between a bachelor's degree and a master's degree.

What is the Difference Between Bachelor’s and Master’s Degrees?

A student holding a stack of books in a library working on academic referencing for their research paper.

Academic Referencing: How to Cite a Research Paper

About southern new hampshire university.

Two students walking in front of Monadnock Hall

SNHU is a nonprofit, accredited university with a mission to make high-quality education more accessible and affordable for everyone.

Founded in 1932, and online since 1995, we’ve helped countless students reach their goals with flexible, career-focused programs . Our 300-acre campus in Manchester, NH is home to over 3,000 students, and we serve over 135,000 students online. Visit our about SNHU page to learn more about our mission, accreditations, leadership team, national recognitions and awards.

ASA Connect

Community Home
Discussion 12.4K
Library 791
Members 16.6K

Emerging Methods and Applications in Bio-Data Science Research - December 31, 2024

1. emerging methods and applications in bio-data science research - december 31, 2024.

Emerging Methods and Applications in Bio-Data Science Research

The editors are inviting you to submit papers for the special issue - "Emerging Methods and Applications in Bio-data Science Research." The submission deadline is December 31, 2024 . Springer will publish the volume. Please see the areas that will be covered in the volume in the description below -

The biomedical field stands on the precipice of an unprecedented data revolution. Vast and diverse bio-data sets – registry platforms, large-scale surveys, electronic medical records, and multi-omics analyses – paint a vibrant picture of human health and disease. Yet, unlocking the

potential of this information deluge requires sophisticated tools and innovative approaches. This is where Artificial Intelligence (AI) and data mining techniques take center stage, offering a powerful symphony of analytical tools to extract valuable insights, predict health outcomes, and personalize healthcare. This special issue delves into the cutting-edge landscape of AI and data mining applications within bio-data science research. We aim to: • Showcase the potential of these techniques in harnessing the diverse wealth of bio-data – registry trends, survey insights, EMR narratives, and multiomics symphonies. • Highlight the specific AI and data mining algorithms and models driving breakthroughs in disease prediction, personalized medicine, and public health interventions. We invite scholars and researchers across the spectrum of bio-data science to contribute their expertise. We welcome original research articles, review papers, and critical perspectives on: • AI-powered analysis of registry data: Unveiling disease patterns, predicting risk, and personalizing prevention strategies. • Mining insights from large surveys: Utilizing natural language processing, sentiment analysis, and network approaches to understand public health concerns and inform targeted interventions. • Extracting knowledge from EMRs: Predicting disease complications, personalized treatment plans, and leveraging deep learning for accurate medical image diagnosis. • Harnessing multiomics data: Unraveling high throughput genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics data for identifying disease subtypes, and driving personalized medicine advancements. This special issue aspires to: • Spark a vibrant dialogue on the transformative potential of AI and data mining in bio-data science research. • Offer a comprehensive resource for researchers and clinicians to leverage these cutting-edge tools in their studies and practice. • Pave the way for a future where data-driven insights empower personalized healthcare, shape effective public health strategies, and fuel groundbreaking discoveries in disease mechanisms and prevention. Beyond the technicalities of AI and data mining, we encourage submissions that address the broader implications of this field: • The economic and social impact of AI-driven healthcare transformations. • The workforce challenges and educational needs for a data-driven bio-science landscape. • The importance of global collaboration and open data initiatives in maximizing the benefits of bio-data research. By embracing the opportunities and challenges presented by AI and data mining, this special issue aims to orchestrate a symphony of scientific progress, illuminating the path towards a healthier future for all.

https://link.springer.com/collections/jigicdhdjh

Editors: Shesh N Rai, Dwijesh Chandra Mishra, Sudhir Srivastava, and Anand Seth

New Best Answer

Related content, emerging methods and applications in bio-data science research, student award competition: emr-ibs.

Bayesian Bio Stats

Personalized recommendations for jsm talks, thanks for the insights.....

American Statistical Association 732 North Washington Street Alexandria, VA 22314-1943 Email: [email protected] Phone: (703) 684-1221

Join Benefits Learn More

About Us Code of Conduct

Information

Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

Active Journals
Find a Journal
Proceedings Series
For Authors
For Reviewers
For Editors
For Librarians
For Publishers
For Societies
For Conference Organizers
Open Access Policy
Institutional Open Access Program
Special Issues Guidelines
Editorial Process
Research and Publication Ethics
Article Processing Charges
Testimonials
Preprints.org
SciProfiles
Encyclopedia

Article Menu

Subscribe SciFeed
Google Scholar
on Google Scholar
Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Are aptamer-based biosensors the future of the detection of the human gut microbiome—a systematic review and meta-analysis.

1. Introduction

2. links between the gut microbiome, their metabolites, and diseases, 3. materials and methods, 3.1. selection of eligibility and exclusion criteria, 3.2. results, 4. from the past to present: biosensors applied to the detection of microorganisms and metabolites, 5. biorecognition elements applied to gut microbiome, 5.1. microbial sensor, 5.2. aptamers, 6. immobilization of biorecognition elements—an important technical process, 6.1. covalent binding, 6.2. adsorption, 6.3. self-assembled monolayer, 6.4. cross-linking, 6.5. entrapment, 7. transducers, 7.1. electrochemical transducing, 7.1.1. electrochemical point-of-care devices challenges, 7.1.2. amperometric sensors, 7.1.3. conductometric sensors, 7.1.4. potentiometric sensors, 7.1.5. piezoelectric sensors, 7.2. optical transducing, 7.2.1. surface plasmon resonance, 7.2.2. surface-enhanced raman spectroscopy, 7.2.3. fiber optic biosensors, 8. challenge and future perspectives: why is there a continuous need for developing biosensors for the gut, 8.1. developing aptamer-based biosensors for the detection of the human gut microbiome, 8.2. developing alternative detection platforms for the complex matrix—gut microbiome, 9. conclusions, supplementary materials, author contributions, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest.

Stojanov, S.; Berlec, A.; Štrukelj, B. The Influence of Probiotics on the Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes Ratio in the Treatment of Obesity and Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Microorganisms 2020 , 8 , 1715. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Madhogaria, B.; Bhowmik, P.; Kundu, A. Correlation between Human Gut Microbiome and Diseases. Infect. Med. 2022 , 1 , 180–191. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Panyod, S.; Wu, W.-K.; Chen, C.-C.; Wu, M.-S.; Ho, C.-T.; Sheen, L.-Y. Modulation of Gut Microbiota by Foods and Herbs to Prevent Cardiovascular Diseases. J. Tradit. Complement. Med. 2023 , 13 , 107–118. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Lebovich, M.; Andrews, L.B. Surveying the Genetic Design Space for Transcription Factor-Based Metabolite Biosensors: Synthetic Gamma-Aminobutyric Acid and Propionate Biosensors in E. coli Nissle 1917. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2022 , 10 , 938056. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Tang, H.; Huang, W.; Yao, Y.-F. The Metabolites of Lactic Acid Bacteria: Classification, Biosynthesis and Modulation of Gut Microbiota. Microb. Cell 2023 , 10 , 49–62. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Colosimo, R.; Harris, H.C.; Ahn-Jarvis, J.; Troncoso-Rey, P.; Finnigan, T.J.A.; Wilde, P.J.; Warren, F.J. Colonic in Vitro Fermentation of Mycoprotein Promotes Shifts in Gut Microbiota, with Enrichment of Bacteroides Species. Commun. Biol. 2024 , 7 , 272. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Forner, E.; Ezenarro, J.J.; Pérez-Montero, M.; Vigués, N.; Asensio-Grau, A.; Andrés, A.; Mas, J.; Baeza, M.; Muñoz-Berbel, X.; Villa, R.; et al. Electrochemical Biosensor for Aerobic Acetate Detection. Talanta 2023 , 265 , 124882. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Serebrinsky-Duek, K.; Barra, M.; Danino, T.; Garrido, D. Engineered Bacteria for Short-Chain-Fatty-Acid-Repressed Expression of Biotherapeutic Molecules. Microbiol. Spectr. 2023 , 11 , e0004923. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Lippolis, T.; Cofano, M.; Caponio, G.R.; De Nunzio, V.; Notarnicola, M. Bioaccessibility and Bioavailability of Diet Polyphenols and Their Modulation of Gut Microbiota. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023 , 24 , 3813. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Song, Z.; Cheng, L.; Liu, Y.; Zhan, S.; Wu, Z.; Zhang, X. Plant-Derived Bioactive Components Regulate Gut Microbiota to Prevent Depression and Depressive-Related Neurodegenerative Diseases: Focus on Neurotransmitters. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2022 , 129 , 581–590. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Weng, C.-Y.C.; Suarez, C.; Cheang, S.E.; Couture, G.; Goodson, M.L.; Barboza, M.; Kalanetra, K.M.; Masarweh, C.F.; Mills, D.A.; Raybould, H.E.; et al. Quantifying Gut Microbial Short-Chain Fatty Acids and Their Isotopomers in Mechanistic Studies Using a Rapid, Readily Expandable LC–MS Platform. Anal. Chem. 2024 , 96 , 2415–2424. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Díaz-Amaya, S.; Lin, L.-K.; Deering, A.J.; Stanciu, L.A. Aptamer-Based SERS Biosensor for Whole Cell Analytical Detection of E. coli O157:H7. Anal. Chim. Acta 2019 , 1081 , 146–156. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Chen, Z.; Xie, M.; Zhao, F.; Han, S. Application of Nanomaterial Modified Aptamer-Based Electrochemical Sensor in Detection of Heavy Metal Ions. Foods 2022 , 11 , 1404. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Singh, A.K.; Mittal, S.; Das, M.; Saharia, A.; Tiwari, M. Optical Biosensors: A Decade in Review. Alex. Eng. J. 2023 , 67 , 673–691. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Kulkarni, M.B.; Ayachit, N.H.; Aminabhavi, T.M. Biosensors and Microfluidic Biosensors: From Fabrication to Application. Biosensors 2022 , 12 , 543. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Mann, M.M.; Berger, B.W. A Genetically-Encoded Biosensor for Direct Detection of Perfluorooctanoic Acid. Sci. Rep. 2023 , 13 , 15186. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Papreja, P.; Thakur, A. A Review: Applications of Electrochemical Biosensors. In AIP Conference Proceedings ; AIP Publishing: Long Island, NY, USA, 2023; p. 020008. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Lakshmanan, A.P.; Mingione, A.; Pivari, F.; Dogliotti, E.; Brasacchio, C.; Murugesan, S.; Cusi, D.; Lazzaroni, M.; Soldati, L.; Terranegra, A. Modulation of Gut Microbiota: The Effects of a Fruits and Vegetables Supplement. Front. Nutr. 2022 , 9 , 930883. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Shi, M.; Watson, E.; Conlon, M.; Sanguansri, L.; Augustin, M.A. Impact of Co-Delivery of EGCG and Tuna Oil within a Broccoli Matrix on Human Gut Microbiota, Phenolic Metabolites and Short Chain Fatty Acids In Vitro. Molecules 2022 , 27 , 656. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Wang, Y.; Wang, B.; Wu, J.; Jiang, X.; Tang, H.; Nielsen, O.H. Modulation of Gut Microbiota in Pathological States. Engineering 2017 , 3 , 83–89. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Zhao, J.; Zhao, F.; Yuan, J.; Liu, H.; Wang, Y. Gut Microbiota Metabolites, Redox Status, and the Related Regulatory Effects of Probiotics. Heliyon 2023 , 9 , e21431. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Fei, Y.; Fang, R.; Xiao, L.; Zhang, Y.; Fan, K.; Jiang, Y.; Lei, S.; Xu, R.; Yang, D.; Ye, Y.; et al. The Development of a Colorimetric Biosensing Assay for the Detection of Helicobacter pylori in Feces. Anal. Biochem. 2022 , 651 , 114737. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Wang, Z.; Wang, H.; Cheng, X.; Geng, J.; Wang, L.; Dong, Q.; Liu, C.; Chi, Z.; Chi, Z. Aptamer-Superparamagnetic Nanoparticles Capture Coupling Siderophore-Fe3+ Scavenging Actuated with Carbon Dots to Confer an “off-on” Mechanism for the Ultrasensitive Detection of Helicobacter pylori . Biosens. Bioelectron. 2021 , 193 , 113551. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Khan, S.; Akrema; Qazi, S.; Ahmad, R.; Raza, K.; Rahisuddin. In Silico and Electrochemical Studies for a ZnO-CuO-Based Immunosensor for Sensitive and Selective Detection of E. coli . ACS Omega 2021 , 6 , 16076–16085. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Farsi, D.N.; Gallegos, J.L.; Finnigan, T.J.A.; Cheung, W.; Munoz, J.M.; Commane, D.M. The Effects of Substituting Red and Processed Meat for Mycoprotein on Biomarkers of Cardiovascular Risk in Healthy Volunteers: An Analysis of Secondary Endpoints from Mycomeat. Eur. J. Nutr. 2023 , 62 , 3349–3359. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Xing, H.; Zhang, Y.; Krämer, M.; Kissmann, A.-K.; Amann, V.; Raber, H.F.; Weil, T.; Stieger, K.R.; Knippschild, U.; Henkel, M.; et al. A Polyclonal Aptamer Library for the Specific Binding of the Gut Bacterium Roseburia Intestinalis in Mixtures with Other Gut Microbiome Bacteria and Human Stool Samples. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022 , 23 , 7744. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Raber, H.F.; Kubiczek, D.H.; Bodenberger, N.; Kissmann, A.-K.; D’souza, D.; Xing, H.; Mayer, D.; Xu, P.; Knippschild, U.; Spellerberg, B.; et al. FluCell-SELEX Aptamers as Specific Binding Molecules for Diagnostics of the Health Relevant Gut Bacterium Akkermansia Muciniphila. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021 , 22 , 425. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Wu, T.; Chu, X.; Cheng, Y.; Tang, S.; Zogona, D.; Pan, S.; Xu, X. Modulation of Gut Microbiota by Lactobacillus Casei Fermented Raspberry Juice In Vitro and In Vivo. Foods 2021 , 10 , 3055. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
O’Riordan, K.J.; Collins, M.K.; Moloney, G.M.; Knox, E.G.; Aburto, M.R.; Fülling, C.; Morley, S.J.; Clarke, G.; Schellekens, H.; Cryan, J.F. Short Chain Fatty Acids: Microbial Metabolites for Gut-Brain Axis Signalling. Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 2022 , 546 , 111572. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Recharla, N.; Geesala, R.; Shi, X.-Z. Gut Microbial Metabolite Butyrate and Its Therapeutic Role in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Literature Review. Nutrients 2023 , 15 , 2275. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Detman, A.; Laubitz, D.; Chojnacka, A.; Kiela, P.R.; Salamon, A.; Barberán, A.; Chen, Y.; Yang, F.; Błaszczyk, M.K.; Sikora, A. Dynamics of Dark Fermentation Microbial Communities in the Light of Lactate and Butyrate Production. Microbiome 2021 , 9 , 158. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Gao, S.; Guo, Y.; Ma, C.; Ma, D.; Chen, K.; Ouyang, P.; Wang, X. Characterization and Application of a Recombinant Dopa Decarboxylase from Harmonia Axyridis for the Efficient Biosynthesis of Dopamine. Chin. J. Chem. Eng. 2022 , 41 , 449–456. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Braga, J.D.; Thongngam, M.; Kumrungsee, T. Gamma-Aminobutyric Acid as a Potential Postbiotic Mediator in the Gut–Brain Axis. NPJ Sci. Food 2024 , 8 , 16. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Chen, Z.; Yu, L.; Liu, J.; Kong, J.; Deng, X.; Guo, X.; Shan, J.; Zhou, D.; Li, W.; Lin, Y.; et al. Gut Microbiota Dynamics and Fecal SCFAs after Colonoscopy: Accelerating Microbiome Stabilization by Clostridium butyricum . J. Transl. Med. 2024 , 22 , 222. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Barker-Tejeda, T.C.; Zubeldia-Varela, E.; Macías-Camero, A.; Alonso, L.; Martín-Antoniano, I.A.; Rey-Stolle, M.F.; Mera-Berriatua, L.; Bazire, R.; Cabrera-Freitag, P.; Shanmuganathan, M.; et al. Comparative Characterization of the Infant Gut Microbiome and Their Maternal Lineage by a Multi-Omics Approach. Nat. Commun. 2024 , 15 , 3004. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Ahallil, H.; Abdullah, A.; Maskat, M.Y.; Sarbini, S.R. Fermentation of Gum Arabic by Gut Microbiota Using in Vitro Colon Model. In AIP Conference Proceedings ; AIP Publishing: Long Island, NY, USA, 2019; p. 050004. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Inriani, S.; Ansariadi; Abdullah, A.Z.; Birawida, A.B.; Saleh, L.M.; Bustan, N.; Wijaya, E. Fecal Myeloperoxidase Levels in Pregnant Women and Risk Factors to Low Birth Weight in A Makassar Slum Settlement: A Sub-Study of The Indonesian Birth Cohort Study. Natl. J. Community Med. 2023 , 14 , 549–555. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Yang, S.-M.; Kim, E.; Kim, D.; Baek, J.; Yoon, H.; Kim, H.-Y. Rapid Detection of Salmonella Enteritidis, Typhimurium, and Thompson by Specific Peak Analysis Using Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry. Foods 2021 , 10 , 933. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Wozniak, K.J.; Simmons, L.A. Genome Editing Methods for Bacillus subtilis . In Recombineering: Methods and Protocols ; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2022. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Zhang, X.; Wang, X.; Yang, Q.; Jiang, X.; Li, Y.; Zhao, J.; Qu, K. Conductometric Sensor for Viable Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus Based on Magnetic Analyte Separation via Aptamer. Microchim. Acta 2020 , 187 , 43. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Zhang, Y.; Xing, H.; Bolotnikov, G.; Krämer, M.; Gotzmann, N.; Knippschild, U.; Kissmann, A.-K.; Rosenau, F. Enriched Aptamer Libraries in Fluorescence-Based Assays for Rikenella Microfusus-Specific Gut Microbiome Analyses. Microorganisms 2023 , 11 , 2266. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Das, T.; Harshey, A.; Srivastava, A.; Nigam, K.; Yadav, V.K.; Sharma, K.; Sharma, A. Analysis of the Ex-Vivo Transformation of Semen, Saliva and Urine as They Dry out Using ATR-FTIR Spectroscopy and Chemometric Approach. Sci. Rep. 2021 , 11 , 11855. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Fadlelmoula, A.; Pinho, D.; Carvalho, V.H.; Catarino, S.O.; Minas, G. Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy to Analyse Human Blood over the Last 20 Years: A Review towards Lab-on-a-Chip Devices. Micromachines 2022 , 13 , 187. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Silva, L.G.; Péres, A.F.S.; Freitas, D.L.D.; Morais, C.L.M.; Martin, F.L.; Crispim, J.C.O.; Lima, K.M.G. ATR-FTIR Spectroscopy in Blood Plasma Combined with Multivariate Analysis to Detect HIV Infection in Pregnant Women. Sci. Rep. 2020 , 10 , 20156. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Ghimire, H.; Garlapati, C.; Janssen, E.A.M.; Krishnamurti, U.; Qin, G.; Aneja, R.; Perera, A.G.U. Protein Conformational Changes in Breast Cancer Sera Using Infrared Spectroscopic Analysis. Cancers 2020 , 12 , 1708. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Cui, D.; Kong, L.; Wang, Y.; Zhu, Y.; Zhang, C. In Situ Identification of Environmental Microorganisms with Raman Spectroscopy. Environ. Sci. Ecotechnol. 2022 , 11 , 100187. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Xu, J.-L.; Herrero-Langreo, A.; Lamba, S.; Ferone, M.; Scannell, A.G.M.; Caponigro, V.; Gowen, A.A. Characterisation and Classification of Foodborne Bacteria Using Reflectance FTIR Microscopic Imaging. Molecules 2021 , 26 , 6318. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Tan, L.; Effah, C.Y.; He, S.; Drokow, E.K.; Agboyibor, C.; Sangmor, A.; Yuan, H.; Ding, L.; Li, X.; Sun, T.; et al. Surface-Enhanced Raman Spectroscopy: A Novel Diagnostic Method for Pathogenic Organisms. Vib. Spectrosc. 2023 , 127 , 103560. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Moreira, M.J.P.; Silva, A.; Saraiva, C.; Marques Martins de Almeida, J.M. Prediction of Adulteration of Game Meat Using FTIR and Chemometrics. Nutr. Food Sci. 2018 , 48 , 245–258. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Cao, X.; Chen, C.; Zhu, Q. Biosensors Based on Functional Nucleic Acids and Isothermal Amplification Techniques. Talanta 2023 , 253 , 123977. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Wesener, D.A.; Beller, Z.W.; Peters, S.L.; Rajabi, A.; Dimartino, G.; Giannone, R.J.; Hettich, R.L.; Gordon, J.I. Microbiota Functional Activity Biosensors for Characterizing Nutrient Metabolism in Vivo. ELife 2021 , 10 , e64478. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Kaur, B.; Kumar, S.; Kaushik, B.K. Trends, Challenges, and Advances in Optical Sensing for Pathogenic Bacteria Detection (PathoBactD). Biosens. Bioelectron. X 2023 , 14 , 100352. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Kaushik, S.; Pandey, A.; Tiwari, U.K.; Sinha, R.K. A Label-Free Fiber Optic Biosensor for Salmonella typhimurium Detection. Opt. Fiber Technol. 2018 , 46 , 95–103. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Kim, D.M.; Park, J.S.; Jung, S.-W.; Yeom, J.; Yoo, S.M. Biosensing Applications Using Nanostructure-Based Localized Surface Plasmon Resonance Sensors. Sensors 2021 , 21 , 3191. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Vasconcelos, H.; Coelho, L.C.C.; Matias, A.; Saraiva, C.; Jorge, P.A.S.; de Almeida, J.M.M.M. Biosensors for Biogenic Amines: A Review. Biosensors 2021 , 11 , 82. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Sandhyarani, N. Surface Modification Methods for Electrochemical Biosensors. In Electrochemical Biosensors ; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 45–75. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Chen, Y.; Ye, Z.; Ma, M.; Yang, J.; Liu, R.; Zhang, Y.; Ma, P.; Song, D. Electrochemiluminescence Biosensor for Specific Detection of Pancreatic Ductal Carcinoma through Dual Targeting of MUC1 and MiRNA-196a. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2024 , 254 , 116241. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Chen, K.; Shen, Z.; Wang, G.; Gu, W.; Zhao, S.; Lin, Z.; Liu, W.; Cai, Y.; Mushtaq, G.; Jia, J.; et al. Research Progress of CRISPR-Based Biosensors and Bioassays for Molecular Diagnosis. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2022 , 10 , 986233. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Wang, M.; Yang, Y.; Min, J.; Song, Y.; Tu, J.; Mukasa, D.; Ye, C.; Xu, C.; Heflin, N.; McCune, J.S.; et al. A Wearable Electrochemical Biosensor for the Monitoring of Metabolites and Nutrients. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 2022 , 6 , 1225–1235. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Özbek, O.; Berkel, C.; Isildak, Ö. Applications of Potentiometric Sensors for the Determination of Drug Molecules in Biological Samples. Crit. Rev. Anal. Chem. 2022 , 52 , 768–779. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Masteller, A.; Sankar, S.; Kim, H.B.; Ding, K.; Liu, X.; All, A.H. Recent Developments in Prosthesis Sensors, Texture Recognition, and Sensory Stimulation for Upper Limb Prostheses. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 2021 , 49 , 57–74. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Herrera-Domínguez, M.; Morales-Luna, G.; Mahlknecht, J.; Cheng, Q.; Aguilar-Hernández, I.; Ornelas-Soto, N. Optical Biosensors and Their Applications for the Detection of Water Pollutants. Biosensors 2023 , 13 , 370. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Justino, C.; Duarte, A.; Rocha-Santos, T. Recent Progress in Biosensors for Environmental Monitoring: A Review. Sensors 2017 , 17 , 2918. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Ye, W.; Liu, T.; Zhang, W.; Zhu, M.; Liu, Z.; Kong, Y.; Liu, S. Marine Toxins Detection by Biosensors Based on Aptamers. Toxins 2019 , 12 , 1. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Adane, W.D.; Chandravanshi, B.S.; Tessema, M. A Novel Electrochemical Sensor for the Detection of Metronidazole Residues in Food Samples. Chemosphere 2024 , 359 , 142279. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Maas, M.B.; Maybery, G.H.C.; Perold, W.J.; Neveling, D.P.; Dicks, L.M.T. Borosilicate Glass Fiber-Optic Biosensor for the Detection of Escherichia coli . Curr. Microbiol. 2018 , 75 , 150–155. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Jin, L.; Cai, X.; Ren, F.; Yang, J. An Aptamer-Based SERS Method for Rapid Screening and Identification of Pathogens Assisted by Machine Learning Technique with Robustness Evaluation. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2024 , 405 , 135356. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Zhang, C.; Wang, C.; Xiao, R.; Tang, L.; Huang, J.; Wu, D.; Liu, S.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, D.; Wang, S.; et al. Sensitive and Specific Detection of Clinical Bacteria via Vancomycin-Modified Fe 3 O 4 @Au Nanoparticles and Aptamer-Functionalized SERS Tags. J. Mater. Chem. B 2018 , 6 , 3751–3761. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Das, R.; Chaterjee, B.; Kapil, A.; Sharma, T.K. Aptamer-NanoZyme Mediated Sensing Platform for the Rapid Detection of Escherichia coli in Fruit Juice. Sens. Biosensing Res. 2020 , 27 , 100313. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Wang, X.; Li, W.; Dai, S.; Dou, M.; Jiao, S.; Yang, J.; Li, W.; Su, Y.; Li, Q.; Li, J. High-Throughput, Highly Sensitive and Rapid SERS Detection of Escherichia coli O157:H7 Using Aptamer-Modified Au@macroporous Silica Magnetic Photonic Microsphere Array. Food Chem. 2023 , 424 , 136433. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Zúñiga, A.; Muñoz-Guamuro, G.; Boivineau, L.; Mayonove, P.; Conejero, I.; Pageaux, G.-P.; Altwegg, R.; Bonnet, J. A Rapid and Standardized Workflow for Functional Assessment of Bacterial Biosensors in Fecal Samples. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2022 , 10 , 859600. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Rehman, A.; Di Benedetto, G.; Bird, J.K.; Dabene, V.; Vadakumchery, L.; May, A.; Schyns, G.; Sybesma, W.; Mak, T.N. Development of a Workflow for the Selection, Identification and Optimization of Lactic Acid Bacteria with High γ-Aminobutyric Acid Production. Sci. Rep. 2023 , 13 , 13663. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Wang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Xu, J.; Ye, C. Development of Multiple Cross Displacement Amplification Label-Based Gold Nanoparticles Lateral Flow Biosensor for Detection of Shigella spp. Front. Microbiol. 2016 , 7 , 1834. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Nuñez, S.; Barra, M.; Garrido, D. Developing a Fluorescent Inducible System for Free Fucose Quantification in Escherichia coli . Biosensors 2023 , 13 , 388. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Vaaben, T.H.; Vazquez-Uribe, R.; Sommer, M.O.A. Characterization of Eight Bacterial Biosensors for Microbial Diagnostic and Therapeutic Applications. ACS Synth. Biol. 2022 , 11 , 4184–4192. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Matulis, P.; Kutraite, I.; Augustiniene, E.; Valanciene, E.; Jonuskiene, I.; Malys, N. Development and Characterization of Indole-Responsive Whole-Cell Biosensor Based on the Inducible Gene Expression System from Pseudomonas Putida KT2440. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022 , 23 , 4649. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Woo, S.-G.; Moon, S.-J.; Kim, S.K.; Kim, T.H.; Lim, H.S.; Yeon, G.-H.; Sung, B.H.; Lee, C.-H.; Lee, S.-G.; Hwang, J.H.; et al. A Designed Whole-Cell Biosensor for Live Diagnosis of Gut Inflammation through Nitrate Sensing. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2020 , 168 , 112523. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Talap, J.; Zhao, J.; Shen, M.; Song, Z.; Zhou, H.; Kang, Y.; Sun, L.; Yu, L.; Zeng, S.; Cai, S. Recent Advances in Therapeutic Nucleic Acids and Their Analytical Methods. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 2021 , 206 , 114368. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Sinitsyna, V.V.; Vetcher, A.A. Nucleic Acid Aptamers in Nanotechnology. Biomedicines 2022 , 10 , 1079. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Xing, H.; Zhang, Y.; Krämer, M.; Kissmann, A.-K.; Henkel, M.; Weil, T.; Knippschild, U.; Rosenau, F. A Polyclonal Selex Aptamer Library Directly Allows Specific Labelling of the Human Gut Bacterium Blautia Producta without Isolating Individual Aptamers. Molecules 2022 , 27 , 5693. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Xing, H.; Kissmann, A.-K.; Raber, H.F.; Krämer, M.; Amann, V.; Kohn, K.; Weil, T.; Rosenau, F. Polyclonal Aptamers for Specific Fluorescence Labeling and Quantification of the Health Relevant Human Gut Bacterium Parabacteroides Distasonis. Microorganisms 2021 , 9 , 2284. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Zhang, Y.; Xing, H.; Bolotnikov, G.; Krämer, M.; Bozdogan, A.; Kissmann, A.-K.; Weil, T.; Spellerberg, B.; Stenger, S.; Rosenau, F. Robust Fluorometric Aptamer Assay for Direct and Rapid Detection of Clinical Isolates of Candida Spec. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024 , 25 , 3444. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Shanbhag, M.M.; Manasa, G.; Mascarenhas, R.J.; Mondal, K.; Shetti, N.P. Fundamentals of Bio-Electrochemical Sensing. Chem. Eng. J. Adv. 2023 , 16 , 100516. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Liébana, S.; Drago, G.A. Bioconjugation and Stabilisation of Biomolecules in Biosensors. Essays Biochem. 2016 , 60 , 59–68. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Mollarasouli, F.; Kurbanoglu, S.; Ozkan, S.A. The Role of Electrochemical Immunosensors in Clinical Analysis. Biosensors 2019 , 9 , 86. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Smith, S.; Goodge, K.; Delaney, M.; Struzyk, A.; Tansey, N.; Frey, M. A Comprehensive Review of the Covalent Immobilization of Biomolecules onto Electrospun Nanofibers. Nanomaterials 2020 , 10 , 2142. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Wang, X.; Zhou, J.; Wang, H. Bioreceptors as the Key Components for Electrochemical Biosensing in Medicine. Cell Rep. Phys. Sci. 2024 , 5 , 101801. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Nguyen, H.H.; Lee, S.H.; Lee, U.J.; Fermin, C.D.; Kim, M. Immobilized Enzymes in Biosensor Applications. Materials 2019 , 12 , 121. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
YazdanYar, A.; Liu, S.S.Y.; Fyta, M. Evidence of Molecular Clicking on Self-Assembled Monolayers on Au (111) and Their Properties. Comput. Mater. Sci. 2023 , 216 , 111809. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Kim, S.; Yoo, H. Self-Assembled Monolayers: Versatile Uses in Electronic Devices from Gate Dielectrics, Dopants, and Biosensing Linkers. Micromachines 2021 , 12 , 565. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Wu, H.; Fujii, Y.; Nakano, T.; Arimoto, T.; Murata, M.; Matsumoto, H.; Yoshiura, Y.; Ohnuki, H.; Endo, H. Development of a Novel Enhanced Biosensor System for Real-Time Monitoring of Fish Stress Using a Self-Assembled Monolayer. Sensors 2019 , 19 , 1518. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Niknejad, H.; Mahmoudzadeh, R. Comparison of Different Crosslinking Methods for Preparation of Docetaxel-Loaded Albumin Nanoparticles. Iran. J. Pharm. Res. 2015 , 14 , 385–394. [ Google Scholar ]
Ionescu, R.E. Use of Cysteamine and Glutaraldehyde Chemicals for Robust Functionalization of Substrates with Protein Biomarkers—An Overview on the Construction of Biosensors with Different Transductions. Biosensors 2022 , 12 , 581. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Imam, H.T.; Marr, P.C.; Marr, A.C. Enzyme Entrapment, Biocatalyst Immobilization without Covalent Attachment. Green Chem. 2021 , 23 , 4980–5005. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Lim, R.R.X.; Sofer, Z.; Bonanni, A. Functionalized 2D Germanene and Its Derivatives for Electrochemical Detection of Gut-Derived Metabolites in Human Serum. Eng. Proc. 2023 , 48 , 45. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Baranwal, J.; Barse, B.; Gatto, G.; Broncova, G.; Kumar, A. Electrochemical Sensors and Their Applications: A Review. Chemosensors 2022 , 10 , 363. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Umapathi, R.; Ghoreishian, S.M.; Sonwal, S.; Rani, G.M.; Huh, Y.S. Portable Electrochemical Sensing Methodologies for On-Site Detection of Pesticide Residues in Fruits and Vegetables. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2022 , 453 , 214305. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Umapathi, R.; Ghoreishian, S.M.; Rani, G.M.; Cho, Y.; Huh, Y.S. Review—Emerging Trends in the Development of Electrochemical Devices for the On-Site Detection of Food Contaminants. ECS Sens. Plus 2022 , 1 , 044601. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Wang, X.; Shi, S.; Zhang, F.; Li, S.; Tan, J.; Su, B.; Cheng, Q.; Gou, Y.; Zhang, Y. Application of a Nanotip Array-Based Electrochemical Sensing Platform for Detection of Indole Derivatives as Key Indicators of Gut Microbiota Health. Alex. Eng. J. 2023 , 85 , 294–299. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Ngashangva, L.; Chattopadhyay, S. Biosensors for Point-of-Care Testing and Personalized Monitoring of Gastrointestinal Microbiota. Front. Microbiol. 2023 , 14 , 1114707. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Ibadullaeva, S.Z.; Appazov, N.O.; Tarahovsky, Y.S.; Zamyatina, E.A.; Fomkina, M.G.; Kim, Y.A. Amperometric Multi-Enzyme Biosensors: Development and Application, a Short Review. Biophysics 2019 , 64 , 696–707. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Zouaoui, F.; Zine, N.; Errachid, A.; Jaffrezic-Renault, N. Mathematical Model and Numerical Simulation of Conductometric Biosensor of Urea. Electroanalysis 2022 , 34 , 1131–1140. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Hou, K.; Zhao, P.; Chen, Y.; Li, G.; Lin, Y.; Chen, D.; Zhu, D.; Wu, Z.; Lian, D.; Huang, X.; et al. Rapid Detection of Bifidobacterium Bifidum in Feces Sample by Highly Sensitive Quartz Crystal Microbalance Immunosensor. Front. Chem. 2020 , 8 , 548. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Zhou, S.; Lu, C.; Li, Y.; Xue, L.; Zhao, C.; Tian, G.; Bao, Y.; Tang, L.; Lin, J.; Zheng, J. Gold Nanobones Enhanced Ultrasensitive Surface-Enhanced Raman Scattering Aptasensor for Detecting Escherichia coli O157:H7. ACS Sens. 2020 , 5 , 588–596. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Song, X.; Wang, H.; Shao, X.; Yu, X.; Xu, X. Au@Ag Core-Shell Nanorods Enhance Surface-Enhanced Raman Scattering Aptasensor for Ultrasensitive Detection of Salmonella typhimurium . Food Control 2024 , 161 , 110379. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Li, Y.; Wang, X.; Ning, W.; Yang, E.; Li, Y.; Luo, Z.; Duan, Y. Sandwich Method-Based Sensitivity Enhancement of Ω-Shaped Fiber Optic LSPR for Time-Flexible Bacterial Detection. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2022 , 201 , 113911. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Basaran, S.; Dey, S.; Bhusari, S.; Sankaran, S.; Kraus, T. Plasmonic Stimulation of Gold Nanorods for the Photothermal Control of Engineered Living Materials. Biomater. Adv. 2023 , 147 , 213332. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Song, H.; Wang, Q.; Zhao, W.-M. A Novel SPR Sensor Sensitivity-Enhancing Method for Immunoassay by Inserting MoS2 Nanosheets between Metal Film and Fiber. Opt. Lasers Eng. 2020 , 132 , 106135. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Akanny, E.; Bonhommé, A.; Bois, L.; Minot, S.; Bourgeois, S.; Bordes, C.; Bessueille, F. Development and Comparison of Surface-Enhanced Raman Scattering Gold Substrates for In Situ Characterization of ‘Model’ Analytes in Organic and Aqueous Media. Chem. Afr. 2019 , 2 , 309–320. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Akanny, E.; Bonhommé, A.; Commun, C.; Doleans-Jordheim, A.; Farre, C.; Bessueille, F.; Bourgeois, S.; Bordes, C. Surface-enhanced Raman Spectroscopy Using Uncoated Gold Nanoparticles for Bacteria Discrimination. J. Raman Spectrosc. 2020 , 51 , 619–629. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Tavakkoli Yaraki, M.; Tukova, A.; Wang, Y. Emerging SERS Biosensors for the Analysis of Cells and Extracellular Vesicles. Nanoscale 2022 , 14 , 15242–15268. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Fang, S.; Wu, S.; Chen, Z.; He, C.; Lin, L.L.; Ye, J. Recent Progress and Applications of Raman Spectrum Denoising Algorithms in Chemical and Biological Analyses: A Review. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem. 2024 , 172 , 117578. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
You, S.-M.; Luo, K.; Jung, J.-Y.; Jeong, K.-B.; Lee, E.-S.; Oh, M.-H.; Kim, Y.-R. Gold Nanoparticle-Coated Starch Magnetic Beads for the Separation, Concentration, and SERS-Based Detection of E. coli O157:H7. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020 , 12 , 18292–18300. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Duan, N.; Chang, B.; Zhang, H.; Wang, Z.; Wu, S. Salmonella Typhimurium Detection Using a Surface-Enhanced Raman Scattering-Based Aptasensor. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2016 , 218 , 38–43. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Zhuang, J.; Zhao, Z.; Lian, K.; Yin, L.; Wang, J.; Man, S.; Liu, G.; Ma, L. SERS-Based CRISPR/Cas Assay on Microfluidic Paper Analytical Devices for Supersensitive Detection of Pathogenic Bacteria in Foods. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2022 , 207 , 114167. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Duan, N.; Shen, M.; Qi, S.; Wang, W.; Wu, S.; Wang, Z. A SERS Aptasensor for Simultaneous Multiple Pathogens Detection Using Gold Decorated PDMS Substrate. Spectrochim. Acta A Mol. Biomol. Spectrosc. 2020 , 230 , 118103. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Jin, L.; Wang, S.; Shao, Q.; Cheng, Y. A Rapid and Facile Analytical Approach to Detecting Salmonella Enteritidis with Aptamer-Based Surface-Enhanced Raman Spectroscopy. Spectrochim. Acta A Mol. Biomol. Spectrosc. 2022 , 267 , 120625. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
Cano Perez, J.L.; Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez, J.; Perezcampos Mayoral, C.; Pérez-Campos, E.L.; Pina Canseco, M.d.S.; Tepech Carrillo, L.; Mayoral, L.P.-C.; Vargas Treviño, M.; Apreza, E.L.; Rojas Laguna, R. Fiber Optic Sensors: A Review for Glucose Measurement. Biosensors 2021 , 11 , 61. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Song, D.; Han, X.; Xu, W.; Liu, J.; Zhuo, Y.; Zhu, A.; Long, F. Target Nucleic Acid Amplification-Free Detection of Escherichia coli O157:H7 by CRISPR/Cas12a and Hybridization Chain Reaction Based on an Evanescent Wave Fluorescence Biosensor. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2023 , 376 , 133005. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Uniyal, A.; Srivastava, G.; Pal, A.; Taya, S.; Muduli, A. Recent Advances in Optical Biosensors for Sensing Applications: A Review. Plasmonics 2023 , 18 , 735–750. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Zhu, Q.; Liu, L.; Wang, R.; Zhou, X. A Split Aptamer (SPA)-Based Sandwich-Type Biosensor for Facile and Rapid Detection of Streptomycin. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021 , 403 , 123941. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Ma, H.; Pan, S.-Q.; Wang, W.-L.; Yue, X.; Xi, X.-H.; Yan, S.; Wu, D.-Y.; Wang, X.; Liu, G.; Ren, B. Surface-Enhanced Raman Spectroscopy: Current Understanding, Challenges, and Opportunities. ACS Nano 2024 , 18 , 14000–14019. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Barhoum, A.; Sadak, O.; Ramirez, I.A.; Iverson, N. Stimuli-Bioresponsive Hydrogels as New Generation Materials for Implantable, Wearable, and Disposable Biosensors for Medical Diagnostics: Principles, Opportunities, and Challenges. Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 2023 , 317 , 102920. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Ayati, M.H.; Araj-Khodaei, M.; Haghgouei, T.; Ahmadalipour, A.; Mobed, A.; Sanaie, S. Biosensors: The Nanomaterial-Based Method in Detection of Human Gut Microbiota. Mater. Chem. Phys. 2023 , 307 , 127854. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

Moreira, M.J.; Pintado, M.; Almeida, J.M.M.M.D. Are Aptamer-Based Biosensors the Future of the Detection of the Human Gut Microbiome?—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Biosensors 2024 , 14 , 423. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios14090423

Moreira MJ, Pintado M, Almeida JMMMD. Are Aptamer-Based Biosensors the Future of the Detection of the Human Gut Microbiome?—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Biosensors . 2024; 14(9):423. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios14090423

Moreira, Maria João, Manuela Pintado, and José M. M. M. De Almeida. 2024. "Are Aptamer-Based Biosensors the Future of the Detection of the Human Gut Microbiome?—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis" Biosensors 14, no. 9: 423. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios14090423

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, supplementary material.

ZIP-Document (ZIP, 203 KiB)

Further Information

Mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

Mental Health, Substance Use, and Child Maltreatment

Child maltreatment is a pressing concern in the United States, with more than four million children referred to child protective services in 2022. Reducing child maltreatment is a national health objective given the substantial, negative consequences for children who experience maltreatment, both in the short- and long-term. Parental mental health and substance use disorders are strongly associated with child maltreatment. In this study, we use administrative data over the period 2004 to 2021 to study the relationship between the number of mental health and substance use treatment centers per county and child maltreatment reports. Our findings provide evidence that better access to mental health and substance use treatment reduces child maltreatment reports. In particular, an 8% increase in the supply of treatment would reduce maltreatment reports by 1%. These findings suggest that recent and ongoing efforts by the federal government to expand mental health and substance use treatment availability may lead to reduced child maltreatment.

All authors contributed equally to this study. Authors are listed in alphabetical order. Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Institute on Mental Health of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number 1R01MH132552 (PI: Johanna Catherine Maclean). Dr. Meinhofer acknowledges support from the Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts GR00015582 and the National Institute on Drug Abuse K01DA051777. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Institutes of Health or the Foundation for Opioid Response Efforts. We thank Douglas Webber and Jiaxin Wei for excellent comments. All errors are our own. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research.

MARC RIS BibTeΧ

Download Citation Data

More from NBER

In addition to working papers , the NBER disseminates affiliates’ latest findings through a range of free periodicals — the NBER Reporter , the NBER Digest , the Bulletin on Retirement and Disability , the Bulletin on Health , and the Bulletin on Entrepreneurship — as well as online conference reports , video lectures , and interviews .

2024, 16th Annual Feldstein Lecture, Cecilia E. Rouse," Lessons for Economists from the Pandemic" cover slide

Peer Reviewed

GPT-fabricated scientific papers on Google Scholar: Key features, spread, and implications for preempting evidence manipulation

Article metrics.

CrossRef Citations

Altmetric Score

PDF Downloads

Academic journals, archives, and repositories are seeing an increasing number of questionable research papers clearly produced using generative AI. They are often created with widely available, general-purpose AI applications, most likely ChatGPT, and mimic scientific writing. Google Scholar easily locates and lists these questionable papers alongside reputable, quality-controlled research. Our analysis of a selection of questionable GPT-fabricated scientific papers found in Google Scholar shows that many are about applied, often controversial topics susceptible to disinformation: the environment, health, and computing. The resulting enhanced potential for malicious manipulation of society’s evidence base, particularly in politically divisive domains, is a growing concern.

Swedish School of Library and Information Science, University of Borås, Sweden

Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University, Sweden

Division of Environmental Communication, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Sweden

Research Questions

Where are questionable publications produced with generative pre-trained transformers (GPTs) that can be found via Google Scholar published or deposited?
What are the main characteristics of these publications in relation to predominant subject categories?
How are these publications spread in the research infrastructure for scholarly communication?
How is the role of the scholarly communication infrastructure challenged in maintaining public trust in science and evidence through inappropriate use of generative AI?

research note Summary

A sample of scientific papers with signs of GPT-use found on Google Scholar was retrieved, downloaded, and analyzed using a combination of qualitative coding and descriptive statistics. All papers contained at least one of two common phrases returned by conversational agents that use large language models (LLM) like OpenAI’s ChatGPT. Google Search was then used to determine the extent to which copies of questionable, GPT-fabricated papers were available in various repositories, archives, citation databases, and social media platforms.
Roughly two-thirds of the retrieved papers were found to have been produced, at least in part, through undisclosed, potentially deceptive use of GPT. The majority (57%) of these questionable papers dealt with policy-relevant subjects (i.e., environment, health, computing), susceptible to influence operations. Most were available in several copies on different domains (e.g., social media, archives, and repositories).
Two main risks arise from the increasingly common use of GPT to (mass-)produce fake, scientific publications. First, the abundance of fabricated “studies” seeping into all areas of the research infrastructure threatens to overwhelm the scholarly communication system and jeopardize the integrity of the scientific record. A second risk lies in the increased possibility that convincingly scientific-looking content was in fact deceitfully created with AI tools and is also optimized to be retrieved by publicly available academic search engines, particularly Google Scholar. However small, this possibility and awareness of it risks undermining the basis for trust in scientific knowledge and poses serious societal risks.

Implications

The use of ChatGPT to generate text for academic papers has raised concerns about research integrity. Discussion of this phenomenon is ongoing in editorials, commentaries, opinion pieces, and on social media (Bom, 2023; Stokel-Walker, 2024; Thorp, 2023). There are now several lists of papers suspected of GPT misuse, and new papers are constantly being added. 1 See for example Academ-AI, https://www.academ-ai.info/ , and Retraction Watch, https://retractionwatch.com/papers-and-peer-reviews-with-evidence-of-chatgpt-writing/ . While many legitimate uses of GPT for research and academic writing exist (Huang & Tan, 2023; Kitamura, 2023; Lund et al., 2023), its undeclared use—beyond proofreading—has potentially far-reaching implications for both science and society, but especially for their relationship. It, therefore, seems important to extend the discussion to one of the most accessible and well-known intermediaries between science, but also certain types of misinformation, and the public, namely Google Scholar, also in response to the legitimate concerns that the discussion of generative AI and misinformation needs to be more nuanced and empirically substantiated (Simon et al., 2023).

Google Scholar, https://scholar.google.com , is an easy-to-use academic search engine. It is available for free, and its index is extensive (Gusenbauer & Haddaway, 2020). It is also often touted as a credible source for academic literature and even recommended in library guides, by media and information literacy initiatives, and fact checkers (Tripodi et al., 2023). However, Google Scholar lacks the transparency and adherence to standards that usually characterize citation databases. Instead, Google Scholar uses automated crawlers, like Google’s web search engine (Martín-Martín et al., 2021), and the inclusion criteria are based on primarily technical standards, allowing any individual author—with or without scientific affiliation—to upload papers to be indexed (Google Scholar Help, n.d.). It has been shown that Google Scholar is susceptible to manipulation through citation exploits (Antkare, 2020) and by providing access to fake scientific papers (Dadkhah et al., 2017). A large part of Google Scholar’s index consists of publications from established scientific journals or other forms of quality-controlled, scholarly literature. However, the index also contains a large amount of gray literature, including student papers, working papers, reports, preprint servers, and academic networking sites, as well as material from so-called “questionable” academic journals, including paper mills. The search interface does not offer the possibility to filter the results meaningfully by material type, publication status, or form of quality control, such as limiting the search to peer-reviewed material.

To understand the occurrence of ChatGPT (co-)authored work in Google Scholar’s index, we scraped it for publications, including one of two common ChatGPT responses (see Appendix A) that we encountered on social media and in media reports (DeGeurin, 2024). The results of our descriptive statistical analyses showed that around 62% did not declare the use of GPTs. Most of these GPT-fabricated papers were found in non-indexed journals and working papers, but some cases included research published in mainstream scientific journals and conference proceedings. 2 Indexed journals mean scholarly journals indexed by abstract and citation databases such as Scopus and Web of Science, where the indexation implies journals with high scientific quality. Non-indexed journals are journals that fall outside of this indexation. More than half (57%) of these GPT-fabricated papers concerned policy-relevant subject areas susceptible to influence operations. To avoid increasing the visibility of these publications, we abstained from referencing them in this research note. However, we have made the data available in the Harvard Dataverse repository.

The publications were related to three issue areas—health (14.5%), environment (19.5%) and computing (23%)—with key terms such “healthcare,” “COVID-19,” or “infection”for health-related papers, and “analysis,” “sustainable,” and “global” for environment-related papers. In several cases, the papers had titles that strung together general keywords and buzzwords, thus alluding to very broad and current research. These terms included “biology,” “telehealth,” “climate policy,” “diversity,” and “disrupting,” to name just a few. While the study’s scope and design did not include a detailed analysis of which parts of the articles included fabricated text, our dataset did contain the surrounding sentences for each occurrence of the suspicious phrases that formed the basis for our search and subsequent selection. Based on that, we can say that the phrases occurred in most sections typically found in scientific publications, including the literature review, methods, conceptual and theoretical frameworks, background, motivation or societal relevance, and even discussion. This was confirmed during the joint coding, where we read and discussed all articles. It became clear that not just the text related to the telltale phrases was created by GPT, but that almost all articles in our sample of questionable articles likely contained traces of GPT-fabricated text everywhere.

Evidence hacking and backfiring effects

Generative pre-trained transformers (GPTs) can be used to produce texts that mimic scientific writing. These texts, when made available online—as we demonstrate—leak into the databases of academic search engines and other parts of the research infrastructure for scholarly communication. This development exacerbates problems that were already present with less sophisticated text generators (Antkare, 2020; Cabanac & Labbé, 2021). Yet, the public release of ChatGPT in 2022, together with the way Google Scholar works, has increased the likelihood of lay people (e.g., media, politicians, patients, students) coming across questionable (or even entirely GPT-fabricated) papers and other problematic research findings. Previous research has emphasized that the ability to determine the value and status of scientific publications for lay people is at stake when misleading articles are passed off as reputable (Haider & Åström, 2017) and that systematic literature reviews risk being compromised (Dadkhah et al., 2017). It has also been highlighted that Google Scholar, in particular, can be and has been exploited for manipulating the evidence base for politically charged issues and to fuel conspiracy narratives (Tripodi et al., 2023). Both concerns are likely to be magnified in the future, increasing the risk of what we suggest calling evidence hacking —the strategic and coordinated malicious manipulation of society’s evidence base.

The authority of quality-controlled research as evidence to support legislation, policy, politics, and other forms of decision-making is undermined by the presence of undeclared GPT-fabricated content in publications professing to be scientific. Due to the large number of archives, repositories, mirror sites, and shadow libraries to which they spread, there is a clear risk that GPT-fabricated, questionable papers will reach audiences even after a possible retraction. There are considerable technical difficulties involved in identifying and tracing computer-fabricated papers (Cabanac & Labbé, 2021; Dadkhah et al., 2023; Jones, 2024), not to mention preventing and curbing their spread and uptake.

However, as the rise of the so-called anti-vaxx movement during the COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing obstruction and denial of climate change show, retracting erroneous publications often fuels conspiracies and increases the following of these movements rather than stopping them. To illustrate this mechanism, climate deniers frequently question established scientific consensus by pointing to other, supposedly scientific, studies that support their claims. Usually, these are poorly executed, not peer-reviewed, based on obsolete data, or even fraudulent (Dunlap & Brulle, 2020). A similar strategy is successful in the alternative epistemic world of the global anti-vaccination movement (Carrion, 2018) and the persistence of flawed and questionable publications in the scientific record already poses significant problems for health research, policy, and lawmakers, and thus for society as a whole (Littell et al., 2024). Considering that a person’s support for “doing your own research” is associated with increased mistrust in scientific institutions (Chinn & Hasell, 2023), it will be of utmost importance to anticipate and consider such backfiring effects already when designing a technical solution, when suggesting industry or legal regulation, and in the planning of educational measures.

Recommendations

Solutions should be based on simultaneous considerations of technical, educational, and regulatory approaches, as well as incentives, including social ones, across the entire research infrastructure. Paying attention to how these approaches and incentives relate to each other can help identify points and mechanisms for disruption. Recognizing fraudulent academic papers must happen alongside understanding how they reach their audiences and what reasons there might be for some of these papers successfully “sticking around.” A possible way to mitigate some of the risks associated with GPT-fabricated scholarly texts finding their way into academic search engine results would be to provide filtering options for facets such as indexed journals, gray literature, peer-review, and similar on the interface of publicly available academic search engines. Furthermore, evaluation tools for indexed journals 3 Such as LiU Journal CheckUp, https://ep.liu.se/JournalCheckup/default.aspx?lang=eng . could be integrated into the graphical user interfaces and the crawlers of these academic search engines. To enable accountability, it is important that the index (database) of such a search engine is populated according to criteria that are transparent, open to scrutiny, and appropriate to the workings of science and other forms of academic research. Moreover, considering that Google Scholar has no real competitor, there is a strong case for establishing a freely accessible, non-specialized academic search engine that is not run for commercial reasons but for reasons of public interest. Such measures, together with educational initiatives aimed particularly at policymakers, science communicators, journalists, and other media workers, will be crucial to reducing the possibilities for and effects of malicious manipulation or evidence hacking. It is important not to present this as a technical problem that exists only because of AI text generators but to relate it to the wider concerns in which it is embedded. These range from a largely dysfunctional scholarly publishing system (Haider & Åström, 2017) and academia’s “publish or perish” paradigm to Google’s near-monopoly and ideological battles over the control of information and ultimately knowledge. Any intervention is likely to have systemic effects; these effects need to be considered and assessed in advance and, ideally, followed up on.

Our study focused on a selection of papers that were easily recognizable as fraudulent. We used this relatively small sample as a magnifying glass to examine, delineate, and understand a problem that goes beyond the scope of the sample itself, which however points towards larger concerns that require further investigation. The work of ongoing whistleblowing initiatives 4 Such as Academ-AI, https://www.academ-ai.info/ , and Retraction Watch, https://retractionwatch.com/papers-and-peer-reviews-with-evidence-of-chatgpt-writing/ . , recent media reports of journal closures (Subbaraman, 2024), or GPT-related changes in word use and writing style (Cabanac et al., 2021; Stokel-Walker, 2024) suggest that we only see the tip of the iceberg. There are already more sophisticated cases (Dadkhah et al., 2023) as well as cases involving fabricated images (Gu et al., 2022). Our analysis shows that questionable and potentially manipulative GPT-fabricated papers permeate the research infrastructure and are likely to become a widespread phenomenon. Our findings underline that the risk of fake scientific papers being used to maliciously manipulate evidence (see Dadkhah et al., 2017) must be taken seriously. Manipulation may involve undeclared automatic summaries of texts, inclusion in literature reviews, explicit scientific claims, or the concealment of errors in studies so that they are difficult to detect in peer review. However, the mere possibility of these things happening is a significant risk in its own right that can be strategically exploited and will have ramifications for trust in and perception of science. Society’s methods of evaluating sources and the foundations of media and information literacy are under threat and public trust in science is at risk of further erosion, with far-reaching consequences for society in dealing with information disorders. To address this multifaceted problem, we first need to understand why it exists and proliferates.

Finding 1: 139 GPT-fabricated, questionable papers were found and listed as regular results on the Google Scholar results page. Non-indexed journals dominate.

Most questionable papers we found were in non-indexed journals or were working papers, but we did also find some in established journals, publications, conferences, and repositories. We found a total of 139 papers with a suspected deceptive use of ChatGPT or similar LLM applications (see Table 1). Out of these, 19 were in indexed journals, 89 were in non-indexed journals, 19 were student papers found in university databases, and 12 were working papers (mostly in preprint databases). Table 1 divides these papers into categories. Health and environment papers made up around 34% (47) of the sample. Of these, 66% were present in non-indexed journals.


Indexed journals*	5	3	4	7	19
Non-indexed journals	18	18	13	40	89
Student papers	4	3	1	11	19
Working papers	5	3	2	2	12
Total	32	27	20	60	139

Finding 2: GPT-fabricated, questionable papers are disseminated online, permeating the research infrastructure for scholarly communication, often in multiple copies. Applied topics with practical implications dominate.

The 20 papers concerning health-related issues are distributed across 20 unique domains, accounting for 46 URLs. The 27 papers dealing with environmental issues can be found across 26 unique domains, accounting for 56 URLs. Most of the identified papers exist in multiple copies and have already spread to several archives, repositories, and social media. It would be difficult, or impossible, to remove them from the scientific record.

As apparent from Table 2, GPT-fabricated, questionable papers are seeping into most parts of the online research infrastructure for scholarly communication. Platforms on which identified papers have appeared include ResearchGate, ORCiD, Journal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical Pharmacology (JPTCP), Easychair, Frontiers, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineer (IEEE), and X/Twitter. Thus, even if they are retracted from their original source, it will prove very difficult to track, remove, or even just mark them up on other platforms. Moreover, unless regulated, Google Scholar will enable their continued and most likely unlabeled discoverability.


Environment	researchgate.net (13)	orcid.org (4)	easychair.org (3)	ijope.com* (3)	publikasiindonesia.id (3)
Health	researchgate.net (15)	ieee.org (4)	twitter.com (3)	jptcp.com** (2)	frontiersin.org (2)

A word rain visualization (Centre for Digital Humanities Uppsala, 2023), which combines word prominences through TF-IDF 5 Term frequency–inverse document frequency , a method for measuring the significance of a word in a document compared to its frequency across all documents in a collection. scores with semantic similarity of the full texts of our sample of GPT-generated articles that fall into the “Environment” and “Health” categories, reflects the two categories in question. However, as can be seen in Figure 1, it also reveals overlap and sub-areas. The y-axis shows word prominences through word positions and font sizes, while the x-axis indicates semantic similarity. In addition to a certain amount of overlap, this reveals sub-areas, which are best described as two distinct events within the word rain. The event on the left bundles terms related to the development and management of health and healthcare with “challenges,” “impact,” and “potential of artificial intelligence”emerging as semantically related terms. Terms related to research infrastructures, environmental, epistemic, and technological concepts are arranged further down in the same event (e.g., “system,” “climate,” “understanding,” “knowledge,” “learning,” “education,” “sustainable”). A second distinct event further to the right bundles terms associated with fish farming and aquatic medicinal plants, highlighting the presence of an aquaculture cluster. Here, the prominence of groups of terms such as “used,” “model,” “-based,” and “traditional” suggests the presence of applied research on these topics. The two events making up the word rain visualization, are linked by a less dominant but overlapping cluster of terms related to “energy” and “water.”

The bar chart of the terms in the paper subset (see Figure 2) complements the word rain visualization by depicting the most prominent terms in the full texts along the y-axis. Here, word prominences across health and environment papers are arranged descendingly, where values outside parentheses are TF-IDF values (relative frequencies) and values inside parentheses are raw term frequencies (absolute frequencies).

Finding 3: Google Scholar presents results from quality-controlled and non-controlled citation databases on the same interface, providing unfiltered access to GPT-fabricated questionable papers.

Google Scholar’s central position in the publicly accessible scholarly communication infrastructure, as well as its lack of standards, transparency, and accountability in terms of inclusion criteria, has potentially serious implications for public trust in science. This is likely to exacerbate the already-known potential to exploit Google Scholar for evidence hacking (Tripodi et al., 2023) and will have implications for any attempts to retract or remove fraudulent papers from their original publication venues. Any solution must consider the entirety of the research infrastructure for scholarly communication and the interplay of different actors, interests, and incentives.

We searched and scraped Google Scholar using the Python library Scholarly (Cholewiak et al., 2023) for papers that included specific phrases known to be common responses from ChatGPT and similar applications with the same underlying model (GPT3.5 or GPT4): “as of my last knowledge update” and/or “I don’t have access to real-time data” (see Appendix A). This facilitated the identification of papers that likely used generative AI to produce text, resulting in 227 retrieved papers. The papers’ bibliographic information was automatically added to a spreadsheet and downloaded into Zotero. 6 An open-source reference manager, https://zotero.org .

We employed multiple coding (Barbour, 2001) to classify the papers based on their content. First, we jointly assessed whether the paper was suspected of fraudulent use of ChatGPT (or similar) based on how the text was integrated into the papers and whether the paper was presented as original research output or the AI tool’s role was acknowledged. Second, in analyzing the content of the papers, we continued the multiple coding by classifying the fraudulent papers into four categories identified during an initial round of analysis—health, environment, computing, and others—and then determining which subjects were most affected by this issue (see Table 1). Out of the 227 retrieved papers, 88 papers were written with legitimate and/or declared use of GPTs (i.e., false positives, which were excluded from further analysis), and 139 papers were written with undeclared and/or fraudulent use (i.e., true positives, which were included in further analysis). The multiple coding was conducted jointly by all authors of the present article, who collaboratively coded and cross-checked each other’s interpretation of the data simultaneously in a shared spreadsheet file. This was done to single out coding discrepancies and settle coding disagreements, which in turn ensured methodological thoroughness and analytical consensus (see Barbour, 2001). Redoing the category coding later based on our established coding schedule, we achieved an intercoder reliability (Cohen’s kappa) of 0.806 after eradicating obvious differences.

The ranking algorithm of Google Scholar prioritizes highly cited and older publications (Martín-Martín et al., 2016). Therefore, the position of the articles on the search engine results pages was not particularly informative, considering the relatively small number of results in combination with the recency of the publications. Only the query “as of my last knowledge update” had more than two search engine result pages. On those, questionable articles with undeclared use of GPTs were evenly distributed across all result pages (min: 4, max: 9, mode: 8), with the proportion of undeclared use being slightly higher on average on later search result pages.

To understand how the papers making fraudulent use of generative AI were disseminated online, we programmatically searched for the paper titles (with exact string matching) in Google Search from our local IP address (see Appendix B) using the googlesearch – python library(Vikramaditya, 2020). We manually verified each search result to filter out false positives—results that were not related to the paper—and then compiled the most prominent URLs by field. This enabled the identification of other platforms through which the papers had been spread. We did not, however, investigate whether copies had spread into SciHub or other shadow libraries, or if they were referenced in Wikipedia.

We used descriptive statistics to count the prevalence of the number of GPT-fabricated papers across topics and venues and top domains by subject. The pandas software library for the Python programming language (The pandas development team, 2024) was used for this part of the analysis. Based on the multiple coding, paper occurrences were counted in relation to their categories, divided into indexed journals, non-indexed journals, student papers, and working papers. The schemes, subdomains, and subdirectories of the URL strings were filtered out while top-level domains and second-level domains were kept, which led to normalizing domain names. This, in turn, allowed the counting of domain frequencies in the environment and health categories. To distinguish word prominences and meanings in the environment and health-related GPT-fabricated questionable papers, a semantically-aware word cloud visualization was produced through the use of a word rain (Centre for Digital Humanities Uppsala, 2023) for full-text versions of the papers. Font size and y-axis positions indicate word prominences through TF-IDF scores for the environment and health papers (also visualized in a separate bar chart with raw term frequencies in parentheses), and words are positioned along the x-axis to reflect semantic similarity (Skeppstedt et al., 2024), with an English Word2vec skip gram model space (Fares et al., 2017). An English stop word list was used, along with a manually produced list including terms such as “https,” “volume,” or “years.”

Artificial Intelligence
/ Search engines

Cite this Essay

Haider, J., Söderström, K. R., Ekström, B., & Rödl, M. (2024). GPT-fabricated scientific papers on Google Scholar: Key features, spread, and implications for preempting evidence manipulation. Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Misinformation Review . https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-156

/ Appendix B

Bibliography

Antkare, I. (2020). Ike Antkare, his publications, and those of his disciples. In M. Biagioli & A. Lippman (Eds.), Gaming the metrics (pp. 177–200). The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11087.003.0018

Barbour, R. S. (2001). Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: A case of the tail wagging the dog? BMJ , 322 (7294), 1115–1117. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115

Bom, H.-S. H. (2023). Exploring the opportunities and challenges of ChatGPT in academic writing: A roundtable discussion. Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging , 57 (4), 165–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13139-023-00809-2

Cabanac, G., & Labbé, C. (2021). Prevalence of nonsensical algorithmically generated papers in the scientific literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology , 72 (12), 1461–1476. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24495

Cabanac, G., Labbé, C., & Magazinov, A. (2021). Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science. Evidence of critical issues affecting established journals . arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2107.06751

Carrion, M. L. (2018). “You need to do your research”: Vaccines, contestable science, and maternal epistemology. Public Understanding of Science , 27 (3), 310–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662517728024

Centre for Digital Humanities Uppsala (2023). CDHUppsala/word-rain [Computer software]. https://github.com/CDHUppsala/word-rain

Chinn, S., & Hasell, A. (2023). Support for “doing your own research” is associated with COVID-19 misperceptions and scientific mistrust. Harvard Kennedy School (HSK) Misinformation Review, 4 (3). https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-117

Cholewiak, S. A., Ipeirotis, P., Silva, V., & Kannawadi, A. (2023). SCHOLARLY: Simple access to Google Scholar authors and citation using Python (1.5.0) [Computer software]. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5764801

Dadkhah, M., Lagzian, M., & Borchardt, G. (2017). Questionable papers in citation databases as an issue for literature review. Journal of Cell Communication and Signaling , 11 (2), 181–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12079-016-0370-6

Dadkhah, M., Oermann, M. H., Hegedüs, M., Raman, R., & Dávid, L. D. (2023). Detection of fake papers in the era of artificial intelligence. Diagnosis , 10 (4), 390–397. https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2023-0090

DeGeurin, M. (2024, March 19). AI-generated nonsense is leaking into scientific journals. Popular Science. https://www.popsci.com/technology/ai-generated-text-scientific-journals/

Dunlap, R. E., & Brulle, R. J. (2020). Sources and amplifiers of climate change denial. In D.C. Holmes & L. M. Richardson (Eds.), Research handbook on communicating climate change (pp. 49–61). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789900408.00013

Fares, M., Kutuzov, A., Oepen, S., & Velldal, E. (2017). Word vectors, reuse, and replicability: Towards a community repository of large-text resources. In J. Tiedemann & N. Tahmasebi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Nordic Conference on Computational Linguistics (pp. 271–276). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://aclanthology.org/W17-0237

Google Scholar Help. (n.d.). Inclusion guidelines for webmasters . https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/inclusion.html

Gu, J., Wang, X., Li, C., Zhao, J., Fu, W., Liang, G., & Qiu, J. (2022). AI-enabled image fraud in scientific publications. Patterns , 3 (7), 100511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2022.100511

Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods , 11 (2), 181–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378

Haider, J., & Åström, F. (2017). Dimensions of trust in scholarly communication: Problematizing peer review in the aftermath of John Bohannon’s “Sting” in science. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology , 68 (2), 450–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23669

Huang, J., & Tan, M. (2023). The role of ChatGPT in scientific communication: Writing better scientific review articles. American Journal of Cancer Research , 13 (4), 1148–1154. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10164801/

Jones, N. (2024). How journals are fighting back against a wave of questionable images. Nature , 626 (8000), 697–698. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00372-6

Kitamura, F. C. (2023). ChatGPT is shaping the future of medical writing but still requires human judgment. Radiology , 307 (2), e230171. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.230171

Littell, J. H., Abel, K. M., Biggs, M. A., Blum, R. W., Foster, D. G., Haddad, L. B., Major, B., Munk-Olsen, T., Polis, C. B., Robinson, G. E., Rocca, C. H., Russo, N. F., Steinberg, J. R., Stewart, D. E., Stotland, N. L., Upadhyay, U. D., & Ditzhuijzen, J. van. (2024). Correcting the scientific record on abortion and mental health outcomes. BMJ , 384 , e076518. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2023-076518

Lund, B. D., Wang, T., Mannuru, N. R., Nie, B., Shimray, S., & Wang, Z. (2023). ChatGPT and a new academic reality: Artificial Intelligence-written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly publishing. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 74 (5), 570–581. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24750

Martín-Martín, A., Orduna-Malea, E., Ayllón, J. M., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2016). Back to the past: On the shoulders of an academic search engine giant. Scientometrics , 107 , 1477–1487. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1917-2

Martín-Martín, A., Thelwall, M., Orduna-Malea, E., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2021). Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: A multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations. Scientometrics , 126 (1), 871–906. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03690-4

Simon, F. M., Altay, S., & Mercier, H. (2023). Misinformation reloaded? Fears about the impact of generative AI on misinformation are overblown. Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Misinformation Review, 4 (5). https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-127

Skeppstedt, M., Ahltorp, M., Kucher, K., & Lindström, M. (2024). From word clouds to Word Rain: Revisiting the classic word cloud to visualize climate change texts. Information Visualization , 23 (3), 217–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/14738716241236188

Swedish Research Council. (2017). Good research practice. Vetenskapsrådet.

Stokel-Walker, C. (2024, May 1.). AI Chatbots Have Thoroughly Infiltrated Scientific Publishing . Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/chatbots-have-thoroughly-infiltrated-scientific-publishing/

Subbaraman, N. (2024, May 14). Flood of fake science forces multiple journal closures: Wiley to shutter 19 more journals, some tainted by fraud. The Wall Street Journal . https://www.wsj.com/science/academic-studies-research-paper-mills-journals-publishing-f5a3d4bc

The pandas development team. (2024). pandas-dev/pandas: Pandas (v2.2.2) [Computer software]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10957263

Thorp, H. H. (2023). ChatGPT is fun, but not an author. Science , 379 (6630), 313–313. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adg7879

Tripodi, F. B., Garcia, L. C., & Marwick, A. E. (2023). ‘Do your own research’: Affordance activation and disinformation spread. Information, Communication & Society , 27 (6), 1212–1228. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2023.2245869

Vikramaditya, N. (2020). Nv7-GitHub/googlesearch [Computer software]. https://github.com/Nv7-GitHub/googlesearch

This research has been supported by Mistra, the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research, through the research program Mistra Environmental Communication (Haider, Ekström, Rödl) and the Marcus and Amalia Wallenberg Foundation [2020.0004] (Söderström).

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

The research described in this article was carried out under Swedish legislation. According to the relevant EU and Swedish legislation (2003:460) on the ethical review of research involving humans (“Ethical Review Act”), the research reported on here is not subject to authorization by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (“etikprövningsmyndigheten”) (SRC, 2017).

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original author and source are properly credited.

Data Availability

All data needed to replicate this study are available at the Harvard Dataverse: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/WUVD8X

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on the article manuscript as well as the editorial group of Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Misinformation Review for their thoughtful feedback and input.

IMAGES

(PDF) A short essay of three research methods in qualitative
📗 Essay Sample on Research Methodology: A Detailed Guide
Example Method Paper / 28 Research Paper Formats
Descriptive essay: Essay on research methodology
Methodology Sample In Research
Research methodsss

VIDEO

The scientific approach and alternative approaches to investigation
Comparison Essay part 3
Research Methods Definitions Types and Examples
Extended Essay
Write a College Essay in 120 Minutes: Free Video Course
HOW TO WRITE THE METHODOLOGY

COMMENTS

What Is a Research Methodology?
What Is a Research Methodology? | Steps & Tips. Published on August 25, 2022 by Shona McCombes and Tegan George. Revised on November 20, 2023. Your research methodology discusses and explains the data collection and analysis methods you used in your research. A key part of your thesis, dissertation, or research paper, the methodology chapter explains what you did and how you did it, allowing ...
What is Research Methodology? Definition, Types, and Examples
Definition, Types, and Examples. Research methodology 1,2 is a structured and scientific approach used to collect, analyze, and interpret quantitative or qualitative data to answer research questions or test hypotheses. A research methodology is like a plan for carrying out research and helps keep researchers on track by limiting the scope of ...
Research Methods
Research Methods | Definitions, Types, Examples
Research Methodology
Qualitative Research Methodology. This is a research methodology that involves the collection and analysis of non-numerical data such as words, images, and observations. This type of research is often used to explore complex phenomena, to gain an in-depth understanding of a particular topic, and to generate hypotheses.
What Is Research Methodology? Definition + Examples
What Is Research Methodology? Definition + Examples
What Is a Research Methodology?
Revised on 10 October 2022. Your research methodology discusses and explains the data collection and analysis methods you used in your research. A key part of your thesis, dissertation, or research paper, the methodology chapter explains what you did and how you did it, allowing readers to evaluate the reliability and validity of your research.
What is research methodology? [Update 2024]
The purpose of a research methodology is to explain the reasoning behind your approach to your research - you'll need to support your collection methods, methods of analysis, and other key points of your work. Think of it like writing a plan or an outline for you what you intend to do. When carrying out research, it can be easy to go off-track ...
Your Step-by-Step Guide to Writing a Good Research Methodology
Provide the rationality behind your chosen approach. Based on logic and reason, let your readers know why you have chosen said research methodologies. Additionally, you have to build strong arguments supporting why your chosen research method is the best way to achieve the desired outcome. 3. Explain your mechanism.
Research Methods
Research methods are ways of collecting and analysing data. Common methods include surveys, experiments, interviews, and observations. ... In shorter scientific papers, where the aim is to report the findings of a specific study, you might simply describe what you did in a methods section.
How To Choose The Right Research Methodology
How To Choose The Right Research Methodology
Research Methods
Quantitative research methods are used to collect and analyze numerical data. This type of research is useful when the objective is to test a hypothesis, determine cause-and-effect relationships, and measure the prevalence of certain phenomena. Quantitative research methods include surveys, experiments, and secondary data analysis.
Literature review as a research methodology: An ...
This is why the literature review as a research method is more relevant than ever. Traditional literature reviews often lack thoroughness and rigor and are conducted ad hoc, rather than following a specific methodology. Therefore, questions can be raised about the quality and trustworthiness of these types of reviews.
Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper
I. Groups of Research Methods. There are two main groups of research methods in the social sciences: The empirical-analytical group approaches the study of social sciences in a similar manner that researchers study the natural sciences.This type of research focuses on objective knowledge, research questions that can be answered yes or no, and operational definitions of variables to be measured.
What Is Qualitative Research?
Qualitative research involves collecting and analyzing non-numerical data (e.g., text, video, or audio) to understand concepts, opinions, or experiences. It can be used to gather in-depth insights into a problem or generate new ideas for research. Qualitative research is the opposite of quantitative research, which involves collecting and ...
15 Types of Research Methods
These methods are useful when a detailed understanding of a phenomenon is sought. 1. Ethnographic Research. Ethnographic research emerged out of anthropological research, where anthropologists would enter into a setting for a sustained period of time, getting to know a cultural group and taking detailed observations.
Exam Tips: How to write a research methods essay
In research methods essays, however, it's a little different. Many students make the mistake of explaining what the results show about behaviour, whereas in research methods essays you need to explain how the study shows the use of the method. For example, if using a study that's a true experiment you explain how the manipulation of the IV ...
Research Methods Essays
Essay planning and writing for the AS and A Level sociology exams - hints and tips. The research methods section of the AS sociology 7191 (2) exam (research methods and topics in sociology) consists of one short answer question (out of 4 marks) and one essay question (out of 16 marks). You should aim to spend approximately 20-25 minutes ...
PDF Writing your Reflective Essay on Research Strategies
Your essay should be 500 to 750 words. • Use the reflective essay to communicate specifics about your improved understanding and use of library services, resources, and collections as they applied to your paper or project. • Explain what advancements you see in your library research and what skills, techniques or strategies you have learned.
Organizing Academic Research Papers: 6. The Methodology
I. Groups of Research Methods. There are two main groups of research methods in the social sciences: The empirical-analytical group approaches the study of social sciences in a similar manner that researchers study the natural sciences. This type of research focuses on objective knowledge, research questions that can be answered yes or no, and operational definitions of variables to be measured.
Overview and Analysis of Research Methodologies
INTRODUCTION. This chapter presents the research methodologies adopted for the research. A combination of both qualitative and quantitative methodological approaches was adopted by the researcher in order to attain a realistic result from the research. Specifically, the chapter discusses the range of methods used by the researcher for the ...
How to Do Research for an Excellent Essay: The Complete Guide
Allow enough time. First and foremost, it's vital to allow enough time for your research. For this reason, don't leave your essay until the last minute. If you start writing without having done adequate research, it will almost certainly show in your essay's lack of quality. The amount of research time needed will vary according to ...
Chapter 3
Chapter 3 - Research Methodology a nd Research Method. This chapter looks at the various research methodologies and research methods that are commonly. used by researchers in the field of ...
Research Methods Essay
Research Methods Essay. Decent Essays. 1440 Words. 6 Pages. Open Document. Quantitative and Qualitative are said to be systematic in different design. Both design have to follow a process system that involved defining a principle of research. General speaking, quantitative research is thought to be objective, however qualitative research often ...
Knowledge mapping and evolution of research on older adults ...
Research method. In recent years, bibliometrics has become one of the crucial methods for analyzing literature reviews and is widely used in disciplinary and industrial intelligence analysis (Jing ...
What is a Thesis Paper and How to Write One
Telling your reader what research has already been done will help them see how your research fits into the larger conversation. Most university libraries offer databases of scholarly/peer-reviewed articles that can be helpful in your search. Methods. In the methods section of your thesis paper, you get to explain how you learned what you learned.
Emerging Methods and Applications in Bio-Data Science Research
Emerging Methods and Applications in Bio-Data Science ResearchThe editors are inviting you to submit papers for the special issue - "Emerging Methods and Applic ... We welcome original research articles, review papers, and critical perspectives on: • AI-powered analysis of registry data: Unveiling disease patterns, predicting risk, and ...
Are Aptamer-Based Biosensors the Future of the Detection of the Human
The gut microbiome is shaped early in life by dietary and lifestyle factors. Specific compounds in the gut affect the growth of different bacterial species and the production of beneficial or harmful byproducts. Dysbiosis of the gut microbiome has been linked to various diseases resulting from the presence of harmful bacteria and their byproducts. Existing methods for detecting microbial ...
Network Competition in the Airline Industry: An Empirical Framework
The Hub-and-Spoke network is a defining feature of the airline industry. This paper is among the first in the literature to introduce an empirical framework for analyzing network competition among airlines. Airlines make market entry decisions and choose flight frequencies in the first stage ...
Mental Health, Substance Use, and Child Maltreatment
In addition to working papers, the NBER disseminates affiliates' latest findings through a range of free periodicals — the NBER Reporter, the NBER Digest, the Bulletin on Retirement and Disability, the Bulletin on Health, and the Bulletin on Entrepreneurship — as well as online conference reports, video lectures, and interviews.
GPT-fabricated scientific papers on Google Scholar: Key features
Academic journals, archives, and repositories are seeing an increasing number of questionable research papers clearly produced using generative AI. They are often created with widely available, general-purpose AI applications, most likely ChatGPT, and mimic scientific writing. Google Scholar easily locates and lists these questionable papers alongside reputable, quality-controlled research.

What is Research Methodology? Definition, Types, and Examples

What is research methodology ?

Writing the methods section of a research paper? Let Paperpal help you achieve perfection

What are the types of sampling designs in research methodology?

What are data collection methods?

Let Paperpal help you write the perfect research methods section. Start now!

How to choose a research methodology?

Got writer’s block? Kickstart your research paper writing with Paperpal now!

Streamline Your Research Paper Writing Process with Paperpal

Frequently Asked Questions

Accelerate your research paper writing with Paperpal. Try for free now!

Related Reads:

Language and Grammar Rules for Academic Writing

What is research methodology?

The basics of research methodology

Here's What You Need to Understand About Research Methodology

Table of Contents

What is the definition of a research methodology?

The need for a good research methodology

What is the basic structure of a research methodology?

1. Your research procedure

2. Provide the rationality behind your chosen approach

3. Explain your mechanism

4. Significance of outcomes

5. Reader’s advice

6. Explain your sample space

7. Challenges and limitations

The importance of a good research methodology

Instruments you could use while writing a good research methodology

a. Interviews (One-on-One or a Group)

c. Sample Groups

d. Observations

Types of research methodology

1. Qualitative research methodology

2. Quantitative research methodology

3. Amalgam methodology

Final words: How to decide which is the best research methodology?

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Research Methodology

2. What are the types of research methodology?

3. What is the true meaning of research methodology?

4. Where lies the importance of research methodology?

You might also like

Consensus GPT vs. SciSpace GPT: Choose the Best GPT for Research

Literature Review and Theoretical Framework: Understanding the Differences

Using AI for research: A beginner’s guide

Have a language expert improve your writing

Research Methods | Definition, Types, Examples

Table of contents

Qualitative vs quantitative data

Primary vs secondary data

Descriptive vs experimental data

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Qualitative analysis methods

Quantitative analysis methods

Is this article helpful?

How To Choose Your Research Methodology

Overview: Choosing Your Methodology

1. Understanding the options

2. How to choose a research methodology

Factor #1: The nature of your research

Need a helping hand?

Factor #2: The disciplinary norms

Factor #3: Practicalities

Constraint #1: Data access

Constraint #2: Time

Constraint #3: Money

Constraint #4: Equipment & software

Constraint #5: Your knowledge and skillset

Recap: Choosing a methodology

Psst... there’s more!

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Research Methods – Types, Examples and Guide

Research Methods

Types of Research Methods

Qualitative research Method

Quantitative Research Method

Mixed Method Research

Key Differences Between Research Methods

Examples of Research Methods

Applications of Research Methods