Search across guide titles, topics, keywords, and content throughout the Researcher's Field Guide.
Showing 101–125 of 163 results
Research ethics should enter the conversation before your research question is finalized, not only when you prepare an ethics application. Early ethical thinking can reveal whether a worthwhile question can be investigated responsibly and whether the question itself needs refinement.
Read Guide →An important research question does not automatically justify every study that could answer it. When obtaining an answer would expose participants to risks or burdens that cannot be adequately minimized or justified, the method or even the question may need to change.
Read Guide →The method that would produce the strongest evidence is not always a method researchers may ethically use. The solution is usually to find the strongest ethically defensible alternative and adjust the research question or conclusions to match the evidence it can provide.
Read Guide →Ethical problems do not always require changing the research question. But when every acceptable method changes the evidence, population, construct, or inference needed to answer it, the ethical constraint has reached the question itself.
Read Guide →The scope of a research study defines the territory the investigation actually covers. Depending on the study, this may include the population, setting, timeframe, variables or phenomena, context, and other boundaries needed to show exactly what the research addresses.
Read Guide →A research scope should be narrow enough for the question to be answered rigorously with the available evidence, time, access, expertise, and resources, but not so narrow that the resulting question loses significance. The right scope is therefore a balance between feasibility and meaningful contribution.
Read Guide →Population, place, time, variables, and context are common dimensions of research scope, but they are not five boxes every study must fill. Specify the boundaries that materially determine what your research question covers and how its findings should be understood.
Read Guide →Leave something out of a study when it is not necessary to answer the research question, falls outside the phenomenon or population of interest, or adds complexity without sufficient methodological value. Exclusion should sharpen the inquiry without removing evidence the study actually needs.
Read Guide →Narrowing the scope can improve a study when it removes unnecessary complexity while preserving what is needed to answer the research question. The goal is not a smaller study for its own sake, but a more coherent match among the question, evidence, methods, and claims.
Read Guide →Direct and conceptual replications do not simply differ in how much of the original method they copy. They can address different evidential questions: whether a finding recurs under closely similar conditions or whether the underlying claim survives a meaningfully different test.
Read Guide →Losing access to your preferred method does not automatically mean losing the research idea. Return to the research question, identify what evidence the original method was supposed to provide, and determine whether another defensible approach can still produce the answer you need.
Read Guide →The study you first imagine is not necessarily the best way to answer your research question. Compare alternative designs by the evidence they can produce, the assumptions they require, and the time, participants, data, and resources they consume.
Read Guide →Not every promising research idea deserves unlimited attempts at rescue. Define in advance what evidence would make you redesign, pause, or abandon a study so that commitment does not become the reason for continuing.
Read Guide →Time already spent on a research idea is not evidence that the idea remains worth pursuing. Evaluate the project using what you know now, the resources still required, and the scientific value you can reasonably expect from continuing.
Read Guide →Making a research project manageable does not mean making the science simplistic. Reduce complexity that is unnecessary for answering the research question while preserving the design, evidence, comparisons, measurements, and analytical work needed to support credible conclusions.
Read Guide →A research idea is ready to move into study design when it is clear enough to specify what needs to be learned, why the question matters, what evidence could answer it, and whether obtaining that evidence appears realistically possible. You do not need every methodological detail yet, but you need enough conceptual stability for design decisions to become meaningful.
Read Guide →You usually need some engagement with the literature before finalizing a research question, but you do not necessarily need a complete literature review first. In many studies, searching, reading, and question development proceed iteratively.
Read Guide →Starting broad can help when you are still learning a research area, while a focused question becomes increasingly important when you need to identify a defined body of evidence. The most useful approach is often progressive focusing rather than choosing one strategy for the entire project.
Read Guide →You do not need to understand a research topic thoroughly before you begin searching. You need enough orientation to start intelligently, then you can use exploratory searching to develop the vocabulary and conceptual understanding needed for more rigorous searches.
Read Guide →A literature search can legitimately change your research question when it reveals better terminology, existing evidence, conceptual problems, feasibility constraints, or a more meaningful problem. The key is to distinguish evidence-informed refinement from arbitrary or outcome-driven changes.
Read Guide →A practical step-by-step guide to searching the research literature effectively. Learn how to turn a research question into a reproducible search strategy, choose databases, find search terms, refine results, and document what you did.
Read Guide →There is no universal five-year or ten-year rule for a literature search. Your date range should follow from the research question, history of the topic, eligibility criteria, and purpose of the search.
Read Guide →There is no universal number of years you should search backward. Learn when to search from database inception, when a historical cutoff is defensible, and why older literature can still matter.
Read Guide →Your university library's main search box can be an excellent starting point for finding books, articles, and other resources, but it does not necessarily search everything your library provides. Learn when discovery systems are useful and when individual databases are the better choice.
Read Guide →A database can be enormous and still provide weak coverage of your particular field. Learn how to evaluate subject coverage, journals, publication types, years, languages, and known relevant literature before relying on it.
Read Guide →