parts of a research chapter 3

• 225,003 Views

HOW TO WRITE CHAPTER THREE OF YOUR RESEARCH PROJECT (RESEARCH METHODOLOGY) | ResearchWap Blog

• Posted: Friday, 17 April 2020
• By: ResearchWap Admin

How To Write Chapter Three Of Your Research Project (Research Methodology)

Methodology In Research Paper

Chapter three of the research project or the research methodology is another significant part of the research project writing. In developing the chapter three of the research project, you state the purpose of research, research method you wish to adopt, the instruments to be used, where you will collect your data, types of data collection, and how you collected it.

This chapter explains the different methods to be used in the research project. Here you mention the procedures and strategies you will employ in the study such as research design, study design in research, research area (area of the study), the population of the study, etc.

You also tell the reader your research design methods, why you chose a particular method, method of analysis, how you planned to analyze your data. Your methodology should be written in a simple language such that other researchers can follow the method and arrive at the same conclusion or findings.

You can choose a survey design when you want to survey a particular location or behavior by administering instruments such as structured questionnaires, interviews, or experimental; if you intend manipulating some variables.

The purpose of chapter three (research methodology) is to give an experienced investigator enough information to replicate the study. Some supervisors do not understand this and require students to write what is in effect, a textbook.

A research design is used to structure the research and to show how all of the major parts of the research project, including the sample, measures, and methods of assignment, work together to address the central research questions in the study. The chapter three should begin with a paragraph reiterating the purpose of research.

It is very important that before choosing design methods, try and ask yourself the following questions:

Will I generate enough information that will help me to solve the research problem by adopting this method?

Method vs Methodology

I think the most appropriate in methods versus methodology is to think in terms of their inter-connectedness and relationship between both. You should not beging thinking so much about research methods without thinking of developing a research methodology.

Metodologia or methodology is the consideration of your research objectives and the most effective method  and approach to meet those objectives. That is to say that methodology in research paper is the first step in planning a research project work. 

Design Methodology: Methodological Approach                

Example of methodology in research paper, you are attempting to identify the influence of personality on a road accident, you may wish to look at different personality types, you may also look at accident records from the FRSC, you may also wish to look at the personality of drivers that are accident victims, once you adopt this method, you are already doing a survey, and that becomes your  metodologia or methodology .

Your methodology should aim to provide you with the information to allow you to come to some conclusions about the personalities that are susceptible to a road accident or those personality types that are likely to have a road accident. The following subjects may or may not be in the order required by a particular institution of higher education, but all of the subjects constitute a defensible in metodologia or methodology chapter.

 READ ALSO:  HOW TO WRITE EFFECTIVE RESEARCH PROJECT ABSTRACT

Methodology

A  methodology  is the rationale for the research approach, and the lens through which the analysis occurs. Said another way, a methodology describes the “general research strategy that outlines the way in which research is to be undertaken” The methodology should impact which method(s) for a research endeavor are selected in order to generate the compelling data.

Example Of Methodology In Research Paper :

• Phenomenology: describes the “lived experience” of a particular phenomenon
• Ethnography: explores the social world or culture, shared beliefs and behaviors
• Participatory: views the participants as active researchers
• Ethno methodology: examines how people use dialogue and body language to construct a world view
• Grounding theory*: assumes a blank slate and uses an inductive approach to develop a new theory

A  method  is simply the tool used to answer your research questions — how, in short, you will go about collecting your data.

Methods Section Of Research Paper Example :

• Contextual inquiry
• Usability study
• Diary study

If you are choosing among these, you might say “what method should I use?” and settle on one or more methods to answer your research question.

 READ ALSO:  HOW TO DEVELOP EFFECTIVE AND UNIQUE PROJECT TOPICS

Research Design Definition: WRITING A RESEARCH DESIGN

A qualitative study does not have variables. A scientific study has variables, which are sometimes mentioned in Chapter 1 and defined in more depth in Chapter 3. Spell out the independent and dependent, variables. An unfortunate trend in some institutions is to repeat the research questions and/or hypotheses in both Chapter 1 and Chapter 3. Sometimes an operational statement of the research hypotheses in the null form is given to set the stage for later statistical inferences. In a quantitative study, state the level of significance that will be used to accept or reject the hypotheses.

Pilot Study

In a quantitative study, a survey instrument that the researcher designed needs a pilot study to validate the effectiveness of the instrument, and the value of the questions to elicit the right information to answer the primary research questions in. In a scientific study, a pilot study may precede the main observation to correct any problems with the instrumentation or other elements in the data collection technique. Describe the pilot study as it relates to the research design, development of the instrument, data collection procedures, or characteristics of the sample.

Instruments

In a research study, the instrument used to collect data may be created by the researcher or based on an existing instrument. If the instrument is the researcher created, the process used to select the questions should be described and justified. If an existing instrument is used, the background of the instrument is described including who originated it, and what measures were used to validate it.

If a Likert scale is used, the scale should be described. If the study involves interviews, an interview protocol should be developed that will result in a consistent process of data collection across all interviews. Two types of questions are found in an interview protocol: the primary research questions, which are not asked of the participants, and the interview questions that are based on the primary research questions and are asked of the participants.

In a qualitative study, this is the section where most of the appendices are itemized, starting with letters of permission to conduct the study and letters of invitation to participate with the attached consent forms. Sample: this has to do with the number of your participants or subjects as the case may be. Analysis (how are you planning to analyze the results?)

ALSO READ:  TRENDING PROJECT TOPICS FOR FINAL YEAR STUDENTS AT A GLANCE

EFFECTIVE GUIDE AND METHODOLOGY SAMPLES

This chapter deals effectively with the research methods to be adopted in conducting the research, and it is organized under the following sub-headings:

• Research Design
• Area of Study

The population of the Study

• Sample and Sampling Techniques
• Instruments for Data Collection

The validity of the Instrument

Reliability of the Instrument

• Administration of the instruments
• Scoring the instruments

Method of Data Collection

Method of Data Analysis

Research Design:

This has to do with the structure of the research instrument to be used in collecting data. It could be in sections depending on different variables that form the construct for the entire topic of the research problems. A reliable instrument with a wrong research design will adversely affect the reliability and generalization of the research. The choice of design suitable for each research is determined by many factors among which are: kind of research, research hypothesis, the scope of the research, and the sensitive nature of the research.

Area of Study:

Research Area; this has to do with the geographical environment of the study area where the places are located, the historical background when necessary and commercial activities of that geographical area. For example, the area of the study is Ebonyi State University. At the creation of Ebonyi State in 1996, the Abakaliki campus of the then ESUT was upgraded to Ebonyi State University College by Edict no. 5 of Ebonyi State, 1998 still affiliated to ESUT with Prof. Fidelis Ogah, former ESUT Deputy Vice-Chancellor as the first Rector. In 1997, the Faculty of Applied and Natural Sciences with 8 departments was added to the fledging University, and later in 1998 when the ESUT Pre-Science Programme was relocated to Nsukka, the EBSUC Pre-Degree School commenced lectures in both Science and Arts in replacement of the former. This study focused on the students of the Business Education department in Ebonyi state university.

The population is regarded in research work as the type of people and the group of people under investigation. It has to be specific or specified. For example educational study teachers in Lagos state. Once the population is chosen, the next thing is to choose the samples from the population.

According to Uma (2007), the population is referred to as the totality of items or object which the researcher is interested in. It can also be the total number of people in an area of study. Hence, the population of this study comprised of all the students in the department of Business Education, Ebonyi State University which is made up of year one to four totaling 482. The actual number for the study was ascertained using Yaro-Yamane's formula which stated thus:

n   =        N

N is the Population

1 is constant

e is the error margin

Then, n   =         482

1+482(0.05)2

= 214.35 approximately 214

Sample and sampling technique:

It may not be possible to reach out to the number of people that form the entire population for the study to either interview, observe, or serve them with copies of the questionnaire. To be realistic, the sample should be up to 20% of the total population. Two sampling techniques are popular among all the sampling techniques. These are random and stratified random sampling techniques. (A). in Random Sampling, the writers select any specific number from a place like a school, village, etc. (B). In Stratified Random Sampling, one has to indicate a specific number from a stratum which could be a group of people according to age, qualification, etc. or different groups from different locations and different considerations attached.

Instruments for Data Collection:

This is a device or different devices used in collecting data. Example: interview, questionnaire, checklist, etc. instrument is prepared in sets or subsections, each set should be an entity thus asking questions about a particular variable to be tested after collecting data. The type of instrument used will determine the responses expected. All questions should be well set so as to determine the reliability of the instrument.

This has to do with different measures in order to determine the validity and reliability of the research instrument. For example, presenting the drafted questionnaire to the supervisor for scrutiny. Giving the questionnaire to the supervisor for useful comments and corrections would help to validate the instrument.

The test-retest reliability method is one of the simplest ways of testing the stability and reliability of an instrument over time. The test-retest approach was adopted by the researcher in establishing the reliability of the instrument. In doing this 25 copies of the questionnaire were administered on twenty-five selected respondents. After two weeks another 25 copies of the same questionnaire were re-administered on the same group. Their responses on the two occasions were correlated using Parsons Product Moment Correlation. A co-efficient of 0.81 was gotten and this was high enough to consider the instrument reliable.

Administration of the instruments:

Here, the writer states whether he or she administers the test personally or through an assistant. He also indicates the rate of return of the copies of the questionnaire administered.

Scoring the instruments:

Here items on the questionnaire or any other device used must be assigned numerical values. For example, 4 points to strongly agree, 3 points to agree, 2 points to disagree, and 1 point to strongly disagree.

Table of Analysis

The researcher collected data using the questionnaire. Copies of the questionnaire were administered by the researcher on the respondents. All the respondents were expected to give maximum co-operation, as the information on the questionnaire is all on things that revolve around their study. Hence, enough time was taken to explain how to tick or indicate their opinion on the items stated in the research questionnaire.

In this study, the mean was used to analyze the data collected. A four (4) point Likert scale was used to analyze each of the questionnaire items.

The weighing was as follows:

VGE—————- Very Great Extent (4 points)

GE—————– Great Extent (3 points)

LE—————– Little Extent (2 points)

VLE—————- Very Little Extent (1 point)

SA—————– Strongly Agree (4 points)

A——————- Agree (3 points)

D—————— Disagree (2 points)

SD—————- Strongly Disagree (1 point)

The mean of the scale will then be determined by summing up the points and dividing their number as follows with the formula:

Where; x= mean

f= frequency

X= Nominal value of the option

∑= summation

N= Total Number

Therefore, the mean of the scale is 2.5.

This means that any item statement with a mean of 2.50 and above is considered agreed by the respondents and any item statement below 2.5 is considered disagreed.

EDITORS SOURCE: How To Write Chapter Three Of Your Research Project (Research Methodology)

Tags: Research project, chapter three, methodology, project topics,

Project Categories

• AFRICAN LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTIC
• ACCOUNTING EDUCATION
• ACTUARIAL SCIENCE
• ADULT EDUCATION
• AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
• AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION
• ANIMAL SCIENCE
• ARCHITECTURE
• BANKING AND FINANCE
• BIBLICAL AND THEOLOGY
• BIOCHEMISTRY
• BREWING SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
• BUILDING TECHNOLOGY
• BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
• BUSINESS EDUCATION

SEE MORE PROJECT CATEGORIES

Copyright © 2024. All rights reserved researchwap.com - Project Topics Ideas and Materials for Final Year Students

How To Write The Methodology Chapter

The what, why & how explained simply (with examples).

By: Jenna Crossley (PhD) | Reviewed By: Dr. Eunice Rautenbach | September 2021 (Updated April 2023)

So, you’ve pinned down your research topic and undertaken a review of the literature – now it’s time to write up the methodology section of your dissertation, thesis or research paper . But what exactly is the methodology chapter all about – and how do you go about writing one? In this post, we’ll unpack the topic, step by step .

Overview: The Methodology Chapter

• The purpose  of the methodology chapter
• Why you need to craft this chapter (really) well
• How to write and structure the chapter
• Methodology chapter example
• Essential takeaways

What (exactly) is the methodology chapter?

The methodology chapter is where you outline the philosophical underpinnings of your research and outline the specific methodological choices you’ve made. The point of the methodology chapter is to tell the reader exactly how you designed your study and, just as importantly, why you did it this way.

Importantly, this chapter should comprehensively describe and justify all the methodological choices you made in your study. For example, the approach you took to your research (i.e., qualitative, quantitative or mixed), who  you collected data from (i.e., your sampling strategy), how you collected your data and, of course, how you analysed it. If that sounds a little intimidating, don’t worry – we’ll explain all these methodological choices in this post .

Why is the methodology chapter important?

The methodology chapter plays two important roles in your dissertation or thesis:

Firstly, it demonstrates your understanding of research theory, which is what earns you marks. A flawed research design or methodology would mean flawed results. So, this chapter is vital as it allows you to show the marker that you know what you’re doing and that your results are credible .

Secondly, the methodology chapter is what helps to make your study replicable. In other words, it allows other researchers to undertake your study using the same methodological approach, and compare their findings to yours. This is very important within academic research, as each study builds on previous studies.

The methodology chapter is also important in that it allows you to identify and discuss any methodological issues or problems you encountered (i.e., research limitations ), and to explain how you mitigated the impacts of these. Every research project has its limitations , so it’s important to acknowledge these openly and highlight your study’s value despite its limitations . Doing so demonstrates your understanding of research design, which will earn you marks. We’ll discuss limitations in a bit more detail later in this post, so stay tuned!

Need a helping hand?

How to write up the methodology chapter

First off, it’s worth noting that the exact structure and contents of the methodology chapter will vary depending on the field of research (e.g., humanities, chemistry or engineering) as well as the university . So, be sure to always check the guidelines provided by your institution for clarity and, if possible, review past dissertations from your university. Here we’re going to discuss a generic structure for a methodology chapter typically found in the sciences.

Before you start writing, it’s always a good idea to draw up a rough outline to guide your writing. Don’t just start writing without knowing what you’ll discuss where. If you do, you’ll likely end up with a disjointed, ill-flowing narrative . You’ll then waste a lot of time rewriting in an attempt to try to stitch all the pieces together. Do yourself a favour and start with the end in mind .

Section 1 – Introduction

As with all chapters in your dissertation or thesis, the methodology chapter should have a brief introduction. In this section, you should remind your readers what the focus of your study is, especially the research aims . As we’ve discussed many times on the blog, your methodology needs to align with your research aims, objectives and research questions. Therefore, it’s useful to frontload this component to remind the reader (and yourself!) what you’re trying to achieve.

In this section, you can also briefly mention how you’ll structure the chapter. This will help orient the reader and provide a bit of a roadmap so that they know what to expect. You don’t need a lot of detail here – just a brief outline will do.

Section 2 – The Methodology

The next section of your chapter is where you’ll present the actual methodology. In this section, you need to detail and justify the key methodological choices you’ve made in a logical, intuitive fashion. Importantly, this is the heart of your methodology chapter, so you need to get specific – don’t hold back on the details here. This is not one of those “less is more” situations.

Let’s take a look at the most common components you’ll likely need to cover. 

Methodological Choice #1 – Research Philosophy

Research philosophy refers to the underlying beliefs (i.e., the worldview) regarding how data about a phenomenon should be gathered , analysed and used . The research philosophy will serve as the core of your study and underpin all of the other research design choices, so it’s critically important that you understand which philosophy you’ll adopt and why you made that choice. If you’re not clear on this, take the time to get clarity before you make any further methodological choices.

While several research philosophies exist, two commonly adopted ones are positivism and interpretivism . These two sit roughly on opposite sides of the research philosophy spectrum.

Positivism states that the researcher can observe reality objectively and that there is only one reality, which exists independently of the observer. As a consequence, it is quite commonly the underlying research philosophy in quantitative studies and is oftentimes the assumed philosophy in the physical sciences.

Contrasted with this, interpretivism , which is often the underlying research philosophy in qualitative studies, assumes that the researcher performs a role in observing the world around them and that reality is unique to each observer . In other words, reality is observed subjectively .

These are just two philosophies (there are many more), but they demonstrate significantly different approaches to research and have a significant impact on all the methodological choices. Therefore, it’s vital that you clearly outline and justify your research philosophy at the beginning of your methodology chapter, as it sets the scene for everything that follows.

Methodological Choice #2 – Research Type

The next thing you would typically discuss in your methodology section is the research type. The starting point for this is to indicate whether the research you conducted is inductive or deductive .

Inductive research takes a bottom-up approach , where the researcher begins with specific observations or data and then draws general conclusions or theories from those observations. Therefore these studies tend to be exploratory in terms of approach.

Conversely , d eductive research takes a top-down approach , where the researcher starts with a theory or hypothesis and then tests it using specific observations or data. Therefore these studies tend to be confirmatory in approach.

Related to this, you’ll need to indicate whether your study adopts a qualitative, quantitative or mixed  approach. As we’ve mentioned, there’s a strong link between this choice and your research philosophy, so make sure that your choices are tightly aligned . When you write this section up, remember to clearly justify your choices, as they form the foundation of your study.

Methodological Choice #3 – Research Strategy

Next, you’ll need to discuss your research strategy (also referred to as a research design ). This methodological choice refers to the broader strategy in terms of how you’ll conduct your research, based on the aims of your study.

Several research strategies exist, including experimental , case studies , ethnography , grounded theory, action research , and phenomenology . Let’s take a look at two of these, experimental and ethnographic, to see how they contrast.

Experimental research makes use of the scientific method , where one group is the control group (in which no variables are manipulated ) and another is the experimental group (in which a specific variable is manipulated). This type of research is undertaken under strict conditions in a controlled, artificial environment (e.g., a laboratory). By having firm control over the environment, experimental research typically allows the researcher to establish causation between variables. Therefore, it can be a good choice if you have research aims that involve identifying causal relationships.

Ethnographic research , on the other hand, involves observing and capturing the experiences and perceptions of participants in their natural environment (for example, at home or in the office). In other words, in an uncontrolled environment.  Naturally, this means that this research strategy would be far less suitable if your research aims involve identifying causation, but it would be very valuable if you’re looking to explore and examine a group culture, for example.

As you can see, the right research strategy will depend largely on your research aims and research questions – in other words, what you’re trying to figure out. Therefore, as with every other methodological choice, it’s essential to justify why you chose the research strategy you did.

Methodological Choice #4 – Time Horizon

The next thing you’ll need to detail in your methodology chapter is the time horizon. There are two options here: cross-sectional and longitudinal . In other words, whether the data for your study were all collected at one point in time (cross-sectional) or at multiple points in time (longitudinal).

The choice you make here depends again on your research aims, objectives and research questions. If, for example, you aim to assess how a specific group of people’s perspectives regarding a topic change over time , you’d likely adopt a longitudinal time horizon.

Another important factor to consider is simply whether you have the time necessary to adopt a longitudinal approach (which could involve collecting data over multiple months or even years). Oftentimes, the time pressures of your degree program will force your hand into adopting a cross-sectional time horizon, so keep this in mind.

Methodological Choice #5 – Sampling Strategy

Next, you’ll need to discuss your sampling strategy . There are two main categories of sampling, probability and non-probability sampling.

Probability sampling involves a random (and therefore representative) selection of participants from a population, whereas non-probability sampling entails selecting participants in a non-random  (and therefore non-representative) manner. For example, selecting participants based on ease of access (this is called a convenience sample).

The right sampling approach depends largely on what you’re trying to achieve in your study. Specifically, whether you trying to develop findings that are generalisable to a population or not. Practicalities and resource constraints also play a large role here, as it can oftentimes be challenging to gain access to a truly random sample. In the video below, we explore some of the most common sampling strategies.

Methodological Choice #6 – Data Collection Method

Next up, you’ll need to explain how you’ll go about collecting the necessary data for your study. Your data collection method (or methods) will depend on the type of data that you plan to collect – in other words, qualitative or quantitative data.

Typically, quantitative research relies on surveys , data generated by lab equipment, analytics software or existing datasets. Qualitative research, on the other hand, often makes use of collection methods such as interviews , focus groups , participant observations, and ethnography.

So, as you can see, there is a tight link between this section and the design choices you outlined in earlier sections. Strong alignment between these sections, as well as your research aims and questions is therefore very important.

Methodological Choice #7 – Data Analysis Methods/Techniques

The final major methodological choice that you need to address is that of analysis techniques . In other words, how you’ll go about analysing your date once you’ve collected it. Here it’s important to be very specific about your analysis methods and/or techniques – don’t leave any room for interpretation. Also, as with all choices in this chapter, you need to justify each choice you make.

What exactly you discuss here will depend largely on the type of study you’re conducting (i.e., qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods). For qualitative studies, common analysis methods include content analysis , thematic analysis and discourse analysis . In the video below, we explain each of these in plain language.

For quantitative studies, you’ll almost always make use of descriptive statistics , and in many cases, you’ll also use inferential statistical techniques (e.g., correlation and regression analysis). In the video below, we unpack some of the core concepts involved in descriptive and inferential statistics.

In this section of your methodology chapter, it’s also important to discuss how you prepared your data for analysis, and what software you used (if any). For example, quantitative data will often require some initial preparation such as removing duplicates or incomplete responses . Similarly, qualitative data will often require transcription and perhaps even translation. As always, remember to state both what you did and why you did it.

Section 3 – The Methodological Limitations

With the key methodological choices outlined and justified, the next step is to discuss the limitations of your design. No research methodology is perfect – there will always be trade-offs between the “ideal” methodology and what’s practical and viable, given your constraints. Therefore, this section of your methodology chapter is where you’ll discuss the trade-offs you had to make, and why these were justified given the context.

Methodological limitations can vary greatly from study to study, ranging from common issues such as time and budget constraints to issues of sample or selection bias . For example, you may find that you didn’t manage to draw in enough respondents to achieve the desired sample size (and therefore, statistically significant results), or your sample may be skewed heavily towards a certain demographic, thereby negatively impacting representativeness .

In this section, it’s important to be critical of the shortcomings of your study. There’s no use trying to hide them (your marker will be aware of them regardless). By being critical, you’ll demonstrate to your marker that you have a strong understanding of research theory, so don’t be shy here. At the same time, don’t beat your study to death . State the limitations, why these were justified, how you mitigated their impacts to the best degree possible, and how your study still provides value despite these limitations .

Section 4 – Concluding Summary

Finally, it’s time to wrap up the methodology chapter with a brief concluding summary. In this section, you’ll want to concisely summarise what you’ve presented in the chapter. Here, it can be a good idea to use a figure to summarise the key decisions, especially if your university recommends using a specific model (for example, Saunders’ Research Onion ).

Importantly, this section needs to be brief – a paragraph or two maximum (it’s a summary, after all). Also, make sure that when you write up your concluding summary, you include only what you’ve already discussed in your chapter; don’t add any new information.

Methodology Chapter Example

In the video below, we walk you through an example of a high-quality research methodology chapter from a dissertation. We also unpack our free methodology chapter template so that you can see how best to structure your chapter.

Wrapping Up

And there you have it – the methodology chapter in a nutshell. As we’ve mentioned, the exact contents and structure of this chapter can vary between universities , so be sure to check in with your institution before you start writing. If possible, try to find dissertations or theses from former students of your specific degree program – this will give you a strong indication of the expectations and norms when it comes to the methodology chapter (and all the other chapters!).

Also, remember the golden rule of the methodology chapter – justify every choice ! Make sure that you clearly explain the “why” for every “what”, and reference credible methodology textbooks or academic sources to back up your justifications.

If you need a helping hand with your research methodology (or any other component of your research), be sure to check out our private coaching service , where we hold your hand through every step of the research journey. Until next time, good luck!

Psst… there’s more (for free)

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

You Might Also Like:

50 Comments

highly appreciated.

This was very helpful!

This was helpful

Thanks ,it is a very useful idea.

Thanks ,it is very useful idea.

Thank you so much, this information is very useful.

Thank you very much. I must say the information presented was succinct, coherent and invaluable. It is well put together and easy to comprehend. I have a great guide to create the research methodology for my dissertation.

Highly clear and useful.

I understand a bit on the explanation above. I want to have some coach but I’m still student and don’t have any budget to hire one. A lot of question I want to ask.

Thank you so much. This concluded my day plan. Thank you so much.

Thanks it was helpful

Great information. It would be great though if you could show us practical examples.

Thanks so much for this information. God bless and be with you

Thank you so so much. Indeed it was helpful

This is EXCELLENT!

I was totally confused by other explanations. Thank you so much!.

justdoing my research now , thanks for the guidance.

Thank uuuu! These contents are really valued for me!

This is powerful …I really like it

Highly useful and clear, thank you so much.

Highly appreciated. Good guide

That was helpful. Thanks

This is very useful.Thank you

Very helpful information. Thank you

This is exactly what I was looking for. The explanation is so detailed and easy to comprehend. Well done and thank you.

Great job. You just summarised everything in the easiest and most comprehensible way possible. Thanks a lot.

Thank you very much for the ideas you have given this will really help me a lot. Thank you and God Bless.

Such great effort …….very grateful thank you

Please accept my sincere gratitude. I have to say that the information that was delivered was congruent, concise, and quite helpful. It is clear and straightforward, making it simple to understand. I am in possession of an excellent manual that will assist me in developing the research methods for my dissertation.

Thank you for your great explanation. It really helped me construct my methodology paper.

thank you for simplifieng the methodoly, It was realy helpful

Very helpful!

Thank you for your great explanation.

The explanation I have been looking for. So clear Thank you

Thank you very much .this was more enlightening.

helped me create the in depth and thorough methodology for my dissertation

Thank you for the great explaination.please construct one methodology for me

I appreciate you for the explanation of methodology. Please construct one methodology on the topic: The effects influencing students dropout among schools for my thesis

This helped me complete my methods section of my dissertation with ease. I have managed to write a thorough and concise methodology!

its so good in deed

wow …what an easy to follow presentation. very invaluable content shared. utmost important.

Peace be upon you, I am Dr. Ahmed Khedr, a former part-time professor at Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt. I am currently teaching research methods, and I have been dealing with your esteemed site for several years, and I found that despite my long experience with research methods sites, it is one of the smoothest sites for evaluating the material for students, For this reason, I relied on it a lot in teaching and translated most of what was written into Arabic and published it on my own page on Facebook. Thank you all… Everything I posted on my page is provided with the names of the writers of Grad coach, the title of the article, and the site. My best regards.

A remarkably simple and useful guide, thank you kindly.

I real appriciate your short and remarkable chapter summary

Bravo! Very helpful guide.

Only true experts could provide such helpful, fantastic, and inspiring knowledge about Methodology. Thank you very much! God be with you and us all!

highly appreciate your effort.

This is a very well thought out post. Very informative and a great read.

THANKS SO MUCH FOR SHARING YOUR NICE IDEA

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

Chapter 3 The Research Process

In Chapter 1, we saw that scientific research is the process of acquiring scientific knowledge using the scientific method. But how is such research conducted? This chapter delves into the process of scientific research, and the assumptions and outcomes of the research process.

Paradigms of Social Research

Our design and conduct of research is shaped by our mental models or frames of references that we use to organize our reasoning and observations. These mental models or frames (belief systems) are called paradigms. The word “paradigm” was popularized by

Thomas Kuhn (1962) in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, where he examined the history of the natural sciences to identify patterns of activities that shape the progress of science. Similar ideas are applicable to social sciences as well, where a social reality can be viewed by different people in different ways, which may constrain their thinking and reasoning about the observed phenomenon. For instance, conservatives and liberals tend to have very different perceptions of the role of government in people’s lives, and hence, have different opinions on how to solve social problems. Conservatives may believe that lowering taxes is the best way to stimulate a stagnant economy because it increases people’s disposable income and spending, which in turn expands business output and employment. In contrast, liberals may believe that governments should invest more directly in job creation programs such as public works and infrastructure projects, which will increase employment and people’s ability to consume and drive the economy. Likewise, Western societies place greater emphasis on individual rights, such as one’s right to privacy, right of free speech, and right to bear arms. In contrast, Asian societies tend to balance the rights of individuals against the rights of families, organizations, and the government, and therefore tend to be more communal and less individualistic in their policies. Such differences in perspective often lead Westerners to criticize Asian governments for being autocratic, while Asians criticize Western societies for being greedy, having high crime rates, and creating a “cult of the individual.” Our personal paradigms are like “colored glasses” that govern how we view the world and how we structure our thoughts about what we see in the world.

Paradigms are often hard to recognize, because they are implicit, assumed, and taken for granted. However, recognizing these paradigms is key to making sense of and reconciling differences in people’ perceptions of the same social phenomenon. For instance, why do liberals believe that the best way to improve secondary education is to hire more teachers, but conservatives believe that privatizing education (using such means as school vouchers) are more effective in achieving the same goal? Because conservatives place more faith in competitive markets (i.e., in free competition between schools competing for education dollars), while liberals believe more in labor (i.e., in having more teachers and schools). Likewise, in social science research, if one were to understand why a certain technology was successfully implemented in one organization but failed miserably in another, a researcher looking at the world through a “rational lens” will look for rational explanations of the problem such as inadequate technology or poor fit between technology and the task context where it is being utilized, while another research looking at the same problem through a “social lens” may seek out social deficiencies such as inadequate user training or lack of management support, while those seeing it through a “political lens” will look for instances of organizational politics that may subvert the technology implementation process. Hence, subconscious paradigms often constrain the concepts that researchers attempt to measure, their observations, and their subsequent interpretations of a phenomenon. However, given the complex nature of social phenomenon, it is possible that all of the above paradigms are partially correct, and that a fuller understanding of the problem may require an understanding and application of multiple paradigms.

Two popular paradigms today among social science researchers are positivism and post-positivism. Positivism , based on the works of French philosopher Auguste Comte (1798-1857), was the dominant scientific paradigm until the mid-20 th century. It holds that science or knowledge creation should be restricted to what can be observed and measured. Positivism tends to rely exclusively on theories that can be directly tested. Though positivism was originally an attempt to separate scientific inquiry from religion (where the precepts could not be objectively observed), positivism led to empiricism or a blind faith in observed data and a rejection of any attempt to extend or reason beyond observable facts. Since human thoughts and emotions could not be directly measured, there were not considered to be legitimate topics for scientific research. Frustrations with the strictly empirical nature of positivist philosophy led to the development of post-positivism (or postmodernism) during the mid-late 20 th century. Post-positivism argues that one can make reasonable inferences about a phenomenon by combining empirical observations with logical reasoning. Post-positivists view science as not certain but probabilistic (i.e., based on many contingencies), and often seek to explore these contingencies to understand social reality better. The post -positivist camp has further fragmented into subjectivists , who view the world as a subjective construction of our subjective minds rather than as an objective reality, and critical realists , who believe that there is an external reality that is independent of a person’s thinking but we can never know such reality with any degree of certainty.

Burrell and Morgan (1979), in their seminal book Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis, suggested that the way social science researchers view and study social phenomena is shaped by two fundamental sets of philosophical assumptions: ontology and epistemology. Ontology refers to our assumptions about how we see the world, e.g., does the world consist mostly of social order or constant change. Epistemology refers to our assumptions about the best way to study the world, e.g., should we use an objective or subjective approach to study social reality. Using these two sets of assumptions, we can categorize social science research as belonging to one of four categories (see Figure 3.1).

If researchers view the world as consisting mostly of social order (ontology) and hence seek to study patterns of ordered events or behaviors, and believe that the best way to study such a world is using objective approach (epistemology) that is independent of the person conducting the observation or interpretation, such as by using standardized data collection tools like surveys, then they are adopting a paradigm of functionalism . However, if they believe that the best way to study social order is though the subjective interpretation of participants involved, such as by interviewing different participants and reconciling differences among their responses using their own subjective perspectives, then they are employing an interpretivism paradigm. If researchers believe that the world consists of radical change and seek to understand or enact change using an objectivist approach, then they are employing a radical structuralism paradigm. If they wish to understand social change using the subjective perspectives of the participants involved, then they are following a radical humanism paradigm.

Figure 3.1. Four paradigms of social science research (Source: Burrell and Morgan, 1979)

Figure 3.2. Functionalistic research process

The first phase of research is exploration . This phase includes exploring and selecting research questions for further investigation, examining the published literature in the area of inquiry to understand the current state of knowledge in that area, and identifying theories that may help answer the research questions of interest.

The first step in the exploration phase is identifying one or more research questions dealing with a specific behavior, event, or phenomena of interest. Research questions are specific questions about a behavior, event, or phenomena of interest that you wish to seek answers for in your research. Examples include what factors motivate consumers to purchase goods and services online without knowing the vendors of these goods or services, how can we make high school students more creative, and why do some people commit terrorist acts. Research questions can delve into issues of what, why, how, when, and so forth. More interesting research questions are those that appeal to a broader population (e.g., “how can firms innovate” is a more interesting research question than “how can Chinese firms innovate in the service-sector”), address real and complex problems (in contrast to hypothetical or “toy” problems), and where the answers are not obvious. Narrowly focused research questions (often with a binary yes/no answer) tend to be less useful and less interesting and less suited to capturing the subtle nuances of social phenomena. Uninteresting research questions generally lead to uninteresting and unpublishable research findings.

The next step is to conduct a literature review of the domain of interest. The purpose of a literature review is three-fold: (1) to survey the current state of knowledge in the area of inquiry, (2) to identify key authors, articles, theories, and findings in that area, and (3) to identify gaps in knowledge in that research area. Literature review is commonly done today using computerized keyword searches in online databases. Keywords can be combined using “and” and “or” operations to narrow down or expand the search results. Once a shortlist of relevant articles is generated from the keyword search, the researcher must then manually browse through each article, or at least its abstract section, to determine the suitability of that article for a detailed review. Literature reviews should be reasonably complete, and not restricted to a few journals, a few years, or a specific methodology. Reviewed articles may be summarized in the form of tables, and can be further structured using organizing frameworks such as a concept matrix. A well-conducted literature review should indicate whether the initial research questions have already been addressed in the literature (which would obviate the need to study them again), whether there are newer or more interesting research questions available, and whether the original research questions should be modified or changed in light of findings of the literature review. The review can also provide some intuitions or potential answers to the questions of interest and/or help identify theories that have previously been used to address similar questions.

Since functionalist (deductive) research involves theory-testing, the third step is to identify one or more theories can help address the desired research questions. While the literature review may uncover a wide range of concepts or constructs potentially related to the phenomenon of interest, a theory will help identify which of these constructs is logically relevant to the target phenomenon and how. Forgoing theories may result in measuring a wide range of less relevant, marginally relevant, or irrelevant constructs, while also minimizing the chances of obtaining results that are meaningful and not by pure chance. In functionalist research, theories can be used as the logical basis for postulating hypotheses for empirical testing. Obviously, not all theories are well-suited for studying all social phenomena. Theories must be carefully selected based on their fit with the target problem and the extent to which their assumptions are consistent with that of the target problem. We will examine theories and the process of theorizing in detail in the next chapter.

The next phase in the research process is research design . This process is concerned with creating a blueprint of the activities to take in order to satisfactorily answer the research questions identified in the exploration phase. This includes selecting a research method, operationalizing constructs of interest, and devising an appropriate sampling strategy.

Operationalization is the process of designing precise measures for abstract theoretical constructs. This is a major problem in social science research, given that many of the constructs, such as prejudice, alienation, and liberalism are hard to define, let alone measure accurately. Operationalization starts with specifying an “operational definition” (or “conceptualization”) of the constructs of interest. Next, the researcher can search the literature to see if there are existing prevalidated measures matching their operational definition that can be used directly or modified to measure their constructs of interest. If such measures are not available or if existing measures are poor or reflect a different conceptualization than that intended by the researcher, new instruments may have to be designed for measuring those constructs. This means specifying exactly how exactly the desired construct will be measured (e.g., how many items, what items, and so forth). This can easily be a long and laborious process, with multiple rounds of pretests and modifications before the newly designed instrument can be accepted as “scientifically valid.” We will discuss operationalization of constructs in a future chapter on measurement.

Simultaneously with operationalization, the researcher must also decide what research method they wish to employ for collecting data to address their research questions of interest. Such methods may include quantitative methods such as experiments or survey research or qualitative methods such as case research or action research, or possibly a combination of both. If an experiment is desired, then what is the experimental design? If survey, do you plan a mail survey, telephone survey, web survey, or a combination? For complex, uncertain, and multi-faceted social phenomena, multi-method approaches may be more suitable, which may help leverage the unique strengths of each research method and generate insights that may not be obtained using a single method.

Researchers must also carefully choose the target population from which they wish to collect data, and a sampling strategy to select a sample from that population. For instance, should they survey individuals or firms or workgroups within firms? What types of individuals or firms they wish to target? Sampling strategy is closely related to the unit of analysis in a research problem. While selecting a sample, reasonable care should be taken to avoid a biased sample (e.g., sample based on convenience) that may generate biased observations. Sampling is covered in depth in a later chapter.

At this stage, it is often a good idea to write a research proposal detailing all of the decisions made in the preceding stages of the research process and the rationale behind each decision. This multi-part proposal should address what research questions you wish to study and why, the prior state of knowledge in this area, theories you wish to employ along with hypotheses to be tested, how to measure constructs, what research method to be employed and why, and desired sampling strategy. Funding agencies typically require such a proposal in order to select the best proposals for funding. Even if funding is not sought for a research project, a proposal may serve as a useful vehicle for seeking feedback from other researchers and identifying potential problems with the research project (e.g., whether some important constructs were missing from the study) before starting data collection. This initial feedback is invaluable because it is often too late to correct critical problems after data is collected in a research study.

Having decided who to study (subjects), what to measure (concepts), and how to collect data (research method), the researcher is now ready to proceed to the research execution phase. This includes pilot testing the measurement instruments, data collection, and data analysis.

Pilot testing is an often overlooked but extremely important part of the research process. It helps detect potential problems in your research design and/or instrumentation (e.g., whether the questions asked is intelligible to the targeted sample), and to ensure that the measurement instruments used in the study are reliable and valid measures of the constructs of interest. The pilot sample is usually a small subset of the target population. After a successful pilot testing, the researcher may then proceed with data collection using the sampled population. The data collected may be quantitative or qualitative, depending on the research method employed.

Following data collection, the data is analyzed and interpreted for the purpose of drawing conclusions regarding the research questions of interest. Depending on the type of data collected (quantitative or qualitative), data analysis may be quantitative (e.g., employ statistical techniques such as regression or structural equation modeling) or qualitative (e.g., coding or content analysis).

The final phase of research involves preparing the final research report documenting the entire research process and its findings in the form of a research paper, dissertation, or monograph. This report should outline in detail all the choices made during the research process (e.g., theory used, constructs selected, measures used, research methods, sampling, etc.) and why, as well as the outcomes of each phase of the research process. The research process must be described in sufficient detail so as to allow other researchers to replicate your study, test the findings, or assess whether the inferences derived are scientifically acceptable. Of course, having a ready research proposal will greatly simplify and quicken the process of writing the finished report. Note that research is of no value unless the research process and outcomes are documented for future generations; such documentation is essential for the incremental progress of science.

Common Mistakes in Research

The research process is fraught with problems and pitfalls, and novice researchers often find, after investing substantial amounts of time and effort into a research project, that their research questions were not sufficiently answered, or that the findings were not interesting enough, or that the research was not of “acceptable” scientific quality. Such problems typically result in research papers being rejected by journals. Some of the more frequent mistakes are described below.

Insufficiently motivated research questions. Often times, we choose our “pet” problems that are interesting to us but not to the scientific community at large, i.e., it does not generate new knowledge or insight about the phenomenon being investigated. Because the research process involves a significant investment of time and effort on the researcher’s part, the researcher must be certain (and be able to convince others) that the research questions they seek to answer in fact deal with real problems (and not hypothetical problems) that affect a substantial portion of a population and has not been adequately addressed in prior research.

Pursuing research fads. Another common mistake is pursuing “popular” topics with limited shelf life. A typical example is studying technologies or practices that are popular today. Because research takes several years to complete and publish, it is possible that popular interest in these fads may die down by the time the research is completed and submitted for publication. A better strategy may be to study “timeless” topics that have always persisted through the years.

Unresearchable problems. Some research problems may not be answered adequately based on observed evidence alone, or using currently accepted methods and procedures. Such problems are best avoided. However, some unresearchable, ambiguously defined problems may be modified or fine tuned into well-defined and useful researchable problems.

Favored research methods. Many researchers have a tendency to recast a research problem so that it is amenable to their favorite research method (e.g., survey research). This is an unfortunate trend. Research methods should be chosen to best fit a research problem, and not the other way around.

Blind data mining. Some researchers have the tendency to collect data first (using instruments that are already available), and then figure out what to do with it. Note that data collection is only one step in a long and elaborate process of planning, designing, and executing research. In fact, a series of other activities are needed in a research process prior to data collection. If researchers jump into data collection without such elaborate planning, the data collected will likely be irrelevant, imperfect, or useless, and their data collection efforts may be entirely wasted. An abundance of data cannot make up for deficits in research planning and design, and particularly, for the lack of interesting research questions.

• Social Science Research: Principles, Methods, and Practices. Authored by : Anol Bhattacherjee. Provided by : University of South Florida. Located at : http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/oa_textbooks/3/ . License : CC BY-NC-SA: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike

• Welcome to Chapter 3

Chapter 3 Webinars

• Student Experience Feedback Buttons
• Developing the Quantitative Research Design
• Qualitative Descriptive Design
• Qualitative Narrative Inquiry Research
• SAGE Research Methods
• Alignment of Dissertation Components for DIS-9902ABC
• IRB Resources This link opens in a new window
• Research Examples (SAGE) This link opens in a new window
• Dataset Examples (SAGE) This link opens in a new window

Jump to DSE Guide

Need help ask us.

Was this resource helpful?

• Next: Developing the Quantitative Research Design >>
• Last Updated: Nov 2, 2023 10:17 AM
• URL: https://resources.nu.edu/c.php?g=1007179

No internet connection.

All search filters on the page have been cleared., your search has been saved..

• All content
• Dictionaries
• Encyclopedias
• Expert Insights
• Foundations
• How-to Guides
• Journal Articles
• Little Blue Books
• Little Green Books
• Project Planner
• Tools Directory
• Sign in to my profile My Profile

• Sign in Signed in
• My profile My Profile

Completing Your Qualitative Dissertation: A Roadmap from Beginning to End

• By: Linda Dale Bloomberg & Marie Volpe
• Publisher: SAGE Publications, Inc.
• Publication year: 2008
• Online pub date: January 01, 2012
• Discipline: Anthropology
• Methods: Dissertation , Data visualization , Literature review
• DOI: https:// doi. org/10.4135/9781452226613
• Keywords: attitudes , inquiry , knowledge , proposals , students , tradition Show all Show less
• Print ISBN: 9781412956512
• Online ISBN: 9781452226613
• Buy the book icon link

Subject index

Fills an important gap in qualitative research literature by specifically addressing the fast-growing practice of qualitative master's studies and doctoral dissertations in colleges and universities throughout the world. Many students struggle with turning qualitative research projects into a master's thesis or doctoral dissertation because the research itself is inherently messy. To address this challenge, authors Linda Dale Bloomberg and Marie Volpe have distilled decades of experience into a first-of-its-kind, highly practical reference for graduate students.

Front Matter

• List of Tables
• List of Figures
• List of Appendices
• Acknowledgments
• About the Authors
• Part I | Taking Charge of Yourself and Your Work
• Chapter 1 | Introduction to Your Study
• Chapter 2 | Developing and Presenting the Literature Review
• Chapter 3 | Presenting Methodology and Research Approach
• Chapter 4 | Analyzing Data and Reporting Findings
• Chapter 5 | Analyzing and Interpreting Findings
• Chapter 6 | Drawing Sound Conclusions and Presenting Actionable Recommendations
• Part III | Nearing Completion: Some Final Considerations

Back Matter

• Author Index
• Early Praise for Completing Your Qualitative Dissertation

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day free trial, more like this, sage recommends.

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Have you created a personal profile? Login or create a profile so that you can save clips, playlists and searches

• Sign in/register

Navigating away from this page will delete your results

Please save your results to "My Self-Assessments" in your profile before navigating away from this page.

Sign in to my profile

Sign up for a free trial and experience all Sage Learning Resources have to offer.

You must have a valid academic email address to sign up.

Get off-campus access

• View or download all content my institution has access to.

Sign up for a free trial and experience all Sage Research Methods has to offer.

• view my profile
• view my lists

Industrial Cyber-Physical Systems pp 201–212 Cite as

Reflections and Conclusion: Integration and Advancements of this Research

• Sascha Julian Oks 5  
• First Online: 15 March 2024

Part of the book series: Markt- und Unternehmensentwicklung Markets and Organisations ((MAU))

This final chapter concludes the research journey of this dissertation toward a more comprehensive and in-depth understanding of the concept of industrial CPS. In this sense, the artifacts designed in the DSR parts are integrated in the overarching method framework of the Industry 4.0 Suite in Section 7.1 before the general outcomes of this research work are summarized—as well in integrated form—in Section 7.2.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Unable to display preview.  Download preview PDF.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Nürnberg, Germany

Sascha Julian Oks

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sascha Julian Oks .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Oks, S.J. (2024). Reflections and Conclusion: Integration and Advancements of this Research. In: Industrial Cyber-Physical Systems. Markt- und Unternehmensentwicklung Markets and Organisations. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-44417-4_7

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-44417-4_7

Published : 15 March 2024

Publisher Name : Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden

Print ISBN : 978-3-658-44416-7

Online ISBN : 978-3-658-44417-4

eBook Packages : Business and Economics (German Language)

Share this chapter

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

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

An official website of the United States government Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Biden-Harris Administration Announces History-Making $3.3 Billion for Locally-Led Projects That Reconnect Communities as Part of President Biden’s Investing in America Agenda

More than 130 communities in 41 states and Washington, DC will benefit from Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act funding to stitch back communities by capping highways, adding new transit routes, adding sidewalks, bridges, bike lanes and more 

WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg announced $3.33 billion in grant awards for 132 projects through the Reconnecting Communities Pilot and Neighborhood Access and Equity discretionary grant programs as part of President Biden’s Investing in America Agenda. The funding is aimed at reconnecting communities that were cut off by transportation infrastructure decades ago, leaving entire neighborhoods without direct access to opportunity, like schools, jobs, medical offices, and places of worship. 

The Biden-Harris Administration is taking historic action to deliver for communities that have been left behind for too long. Thanks to additional funding from the Inflation Reduction Act, this investment is 18 times larger than the investments from the previous year’s standalone Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program.  Both programs are part of the President’s Justice40 Initiative . 

“While the purpose of transportation is to connect, in too many communities past infrastructure decisions have served instead to divide. Now the Biden-Harris administration is acting to fix that,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg . “Today we are proud to announce an unprecedented $3.3 billion to help 132 communities deliver better infrastructure that reconnects residents to jobs, health care, and other essentials.”

The Department has created a virtual story that spotlights communities’ stories, the historic context for the program, and the future it seeks through funding the reconnection of communities here .

In this round of funding for the Reconnecting Communities Pilot and Neighborhood Access and Equity program, the Department is awarding 72 Planning Grants, 52 Capital Construction grants and 8 Regional Planning Grants. Awarded projects include:

• The second Atlanta grant is for The Stitch Phase 1 Implementation , a cap of Interstates 75/85, known locally as the “Downtown Connector,” will seamlessly reconnect the torn urban fabric of Downtown with a new major park, extensive transportation improvements, sustainable infrastructure, and increased affordable housing. The Downtown Connector was intentionally planned to run through established low-income Black communities as a racially charged method of ridding Downtown of “blighted” areas in favor of new commercially focused development centered around the automobile. The Stitch will provide multi-modal connections over the interstate via multi-use paths, an improved surface transportation network, and enhanced transit amenities.
• The Reconnecting 4th Ave N: A Two-Way Vision for Reviving Legacy and Inspiring Progress project in Birmingham, Alabama was awarded a grant for a 15-block Complete Streets redesign of Birmingham’s Black Main Street. The redesign will include converting the road from one-way to two-way and will help reconnect downtown neighborhoods and businesses divided by the construction of Interstate 65 in the 1960s. The project encompasses the Historic 4th Avenue Business District, a once thriving hub of black businesses and community in Birmingham. This multimodal project will help to revive the access and connectivity that helped the community thrive prior to its conversion into a one-way street during the 1970s.   
• The second Portland grant, I-5 Rose Quarter Improvement Project will be used for the project’s design and constructing the project’s main reconnecting feature—a highway cover that will support new community space and future development, while reconnecting [Lower Albina to] local streets over Interstate 5 (I-5) and providing better access to the central city and the waterfront in Portland, Oregon. Building the highway cover is an essential first step to actualizing the community’s vision and improving the transportation network in partnership with the City of Portland.
• The Reconciliation, Regeneration, and Reconnecting the Selma to Montgomery Trail through Equitable Transportation Infrastructure in Montgomery, Alabama will reconnect the West Montgomery residents located on the Selma-to-Montgomery Trail to opportunities, access, and connectivity by addressing poor social determinants of health that exist because of segregation, redlining, and construction of Interstates 65 and 85. The project identifies many disenfranchised local communities that will benefit by enhancements to the trail. These enhancements will allow the City of Montgomery to reinvest in foundational transportation solutions in Historic West Montgomery to facilitate the renaissance of the Selma-to-Montgomery Trail community.  
• The Reconnecting Rexburg: Planning & Designing Connections Across US Hwy 20 project in Rexburg, Idaho will address the impacts of the construction of US Highway 20, which had a profound impact on Rexburg residents when what was once a convenient and well-connected community suddenly found itself faced with a significant barrier, disrupting daily routines, and altering the dynamics of everyday life. The City of Rexburg intends to have a professional company research, assess, design, and plan the best options for reconnecting the disadvantaged communities that lie on the west side of Highway 20 with the town amenities that are necessary and important for daily living.   
• The Chinatown Stitch project in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania will complete the first phase of design and construction work for a highway cap to reconnect Chinatown, a community that is disproportionately impacted by the Vine Street Expressway (I-676). Since its inception in the 1960s, the Vine Street Expressway has represented a threat to the Chinatown community and upon completion in the 1990s, the highway effectively separated the neighborhood into the commercial core of Chinatown to the south and a more industrial area to the North. The proposed project aims to address historic inequities caused by transportation infrastructure, restore community connectivity, and improve quality of life. 

The full list of Reconnecting Communities Pilot and Neighborhood Access and Equity awards can be viewed here .

These programs are part of President Biden’s Justice40 Initiative , which set the goal that 40 percent of the overall benefits of certain Federal investments flow to disadvantaged communities that are marginalized by underinvestment and overburdened by pollution. The Department prioritized applications from disadvantaged communities that demonstrated strong community engagement and stewardship to advance equity and environmental justice, and would catalyze shared prosperity project development and job creation.

Last year, in the inaugural round of the Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program, the Biden-Harris administration awarded grants for transformative, community-led solutions, including capping interstates with parks, filling in sunken highways to reclaim the land for housing, and converting inhospitable transportation facilities to tree-lined Complete Streets. These projects will help revitalize communities, provide access to jobs and opportunity, and reduce pollution. 

The Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program (RCP) in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law has been combined with the newly-established Neighborhood Access and Equity discretionary grant program in the Inflation Reduction Act.

This joint application makes it more efficient and accessible than ever for project sponsors to apply for the historic levels of infrastructure funding made available by the Biden-Harris administration’s Investing in America agenda. While Reconnecting Communities and Neighborhoods grants can come from either program, they share important key characteristics including prioritizing disadvantaged communities — including rural, Tribal and urban communities — and improving access to daily needs and basic services.

The Reconnecting Communities and Neighborhoods program is an important component of the Department’s commitment to equity and the Biden-Harris administration’s commitment to supporting communities marginalized by underinvestment and overburdened by pollution and strengthening equitable development. Restoring communities like those awarded grants today helps give everyone an equal chance to get ahead and opportunity to accessing jobs and essential services such as healthcare services, grocery stores, and places of worship. To find out more about what the Department is doing to support equity, see the recently update Equity Action Plan, which can be viewed here .

For more information on the Reconnecting Communities and Neighborhoods, the Reconnecting Communities Pilot and the Neighborhood Access and Equity programs, including additional resources and information for interested applicants and stakeholders, click here .

Biden signs executive order on advancing study of women’s health while chiding GOP ideas he calls ‘backward’

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden signed an executive order Monday aimed at advancing the study of women’s health by strengthening data collection and providing better funding opportunities for biomedical research while chiding Republicans for having “no clue about the power of women” but saying they’re “about to find out” come November’s election.

Women’s health has long been underfunded and understudied. It wasn’t until the 1990s that the federal government mandated women be included in federally funded medical research; for most of medical history, though, scientific study was based almost entirely on men.

“We still know too little about how to effectively prevent, diagnose and treat a wide array of health conditions in women,” said Dr. Carolyn Mazure, the head of the White House initiative on women’s health.

Today, research often fails to properly track differences between women and men, and does not represent women equally particularly for illnesses more common to them — which Biden suggested his order would help change.

“To state the obvious, women are half the population and underrepresented across the board. But not in my administration,” the president said, drawing raucous applause at a White House reception marking Women’s History Month.

Biden said he’s long been a believer in the “power of research” to help save lives and get high-quality health care to the people who need it. But the executive order also checks off a political box during an election year when women will be crucial to his reelection efforts. First lady Jill Biden is leading both the effort to organize and mobilize female voters and the  White House Initiative on Women’s Health Research .

The announcement comes as the ripple effects spread from the Supreme Court’s decision that overturned federal abortion rights, touching on medical issues for women who never intended to end their pregnancies. In  Alabama, for example, the future of IVF was thrown into question statewide  after a judge’s ruling.

In his comments at the reception, Biden didn’t mention by name former President Donald Trump, who is now running to reclaim the White House. Instead, he referred to “my predecessor” who had been “bragging about overturning” the Roe v. Wade decision that had guaranteed the constitutional right to abortion.

The president suggested that would hurt Trump and the GOP during this fall’s election, saying, “You can’t lead America with old ideas and take us backward.”

Further leaning into politics, Biden said his administration has “turned around the economy because we focused on women,” noting that female unemployment had fallen and the number of women-owned small businesses had increased.

He said his administration has ensured that “women can access jobs in sectors where they’ve been historically underrepresented” and said he’d told leaders from some of the nation’s top labor unions that he wants to see more women and minorities in their ranks.

Women were a critical part of the coalition that elected Biden in 2020, giving him 55% of their vote, according to AP VoteCast. Black women and suburban women were pillars of Biden’s coalition while Trump had a modest advantage among white women and a much wider share of white women without college degrees, according to the AP survey of more than 110,000 voters in that year’s election.

Vice President Kamala Harris, women’s health advocate Maria Shriver and the first lady also addressed the reception.

“Finally women will get the health care we deserve,” Jill Biden said, saying the order signed Monday was “without precedent.”

Harris drew strong applause for noting that she “stood before you as the first woman vice president of the United States” and talked about  visiting an abortion clinic  in Minnesota last week.

“There are those who are intent on dragging us backward,” the vice president said of Republican states that have limited access to abortion.

“We all face a question: What kind of country do we want to live in?” Harris said. “A country of liberty, freedom and rule of law? Or a country of disorder, fear and hate?”

Shriver joked that this is probably the first time a president has signed an executive order that mentions menopause and said the action could only be taken “by a president who respects women.”

The National Institutes of Health is also launching a new effort around menopause and the treatment of menopausal symptoms that will identify research gaps and work to close them, said White House adviser Jennifer Klein. NIH funds a huge amount of biomedical research, imperative for the understanding of how medications affect the human body and for deciding eventually how to dose medicine.

Some conditions have different symptoms for women and men, such as heart disease. Others are more common in women, like Alzheimer’s disease, and some are unique to women — such as endometriosis, uterine cancers and fibroids found in the uterus. It’s all ripe for study, Mazure said.

And uneven research can have profound effects; a 2020 study by researchers at the University of Chicago and University of California, Berkeley, found that women were being overmedicated and suffering side effects from common medications because most of the dosage trials were done only on men.

The first lady announced $100 million  in funding last month for women’s health.

Associated Press writer Gary Fields contributed to this report.

Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Arizona cities bracing for release of migrants onto the streets

Northern Arizona highways all reopen after snow closures

Weather changes coming to Arizona with spring storm system

7 suspects arrested for Preston Lord’s murder plead not guilty

Scottsdale Police arrest 3 members of a South American crime group linked to dinner-time burglaries

Latest news.

Trump’s lawyers say it is impossible for him to post bond covering $454 million civil fraud judgment

Nashville officer exchanged greetings with Riley Strain on night of disappearance, video shows

Supreme Court seems favorable to Biden administration over efforts to combat social media posts

Tips to tame uncontrollable debt

Phoenix City Councilwoman Yassamin Ansari steps down to pursue Gallego’s seat in Congress

‘Loved his family’: Obituary infuriated Michigan teen shot in face by stepdad

Jan. 8, 2018, Grand Rapids, Michigan

Two days after a shotgun slug pulverized her face, in a critical care unit at Spectrum Butterworth Hospital in Grand Rapids, Amedy Dewey was alert but couldn’t see out of either eye . She had already been through several surgeries, as doctors tried to piece her face together like a puzzle, inserting screws to hold the shattered bones in place.

Thankfully, she could think clearly. The shotgun slug missed her brain but damaged her upper palate, both eyes, jaw and half her face. A trach tube prevented her from speaking but she could hear voices.

She moved her hands, trying to communicate through sign language, a course she had taken in high school but nobody could figure out what she was doing.

Finally, somebody handed her a paper and pen.

“And I'm like, 'thank you,' ” she said. “Because it was like playing charades and I'm blind.”

She wrote on the piece of paper: “Will I ever again see again?”

“The doctor kind of essentially said, ‘No, you'll never regain it,’ ” she remembered.

She laughed.

“Watch me,” she wrote.

Amedy transferred out of the critical care unit and stood up briefly on Jan. 11. The next day, she passed a swallow test and ate ice chips.

On Jan. 13, Amedy walked down the hallway and back to her room, another sign of progress. A few close friends and family were allowed to visit her. Two days later, Amedy figured out how to speak with the trach. Completely blind, she got some audiobooks from the library because she was frustrated, trying to listen to a movie without watching it.

By Jan. 17, the attempts to save her left eye were failing and the pain was excruciating.

“It was literally just dangling there like a dried-up fisheye,” Amedy said.

After doctors presented her with different options, Amedy decided to have the eye removed. Almost instantly, the vision in her right eye improved. Doctors formed a theory that her brain was working so hard to see out of both eyes, at the same time, that after the left was removed some vision returned in her right.

“I was starting to see again, things started getting fuzzy, and then I remember the first color I saw was red,” she said.

Recalling her story

Detective Hesche and his partner, Detective Jon Ruswinckel, interviewed Amedy at Spectrum Butterworth Hospital on Jan. 18. She was in bed, conscious and alert, with tubes sticking out of her head to relieve swelling. Her face was yellow, blue and puffed up. Gauze covered one eye, the other was swelled shut.

Hesche didn’t plan to stay long. The evidence at the scene was overwhelming to him that David Somers was the main suspect in the two shooting deaths and Amedy's injuries, and he was dead. There would be no trial. Hesche just needed to verify basic facts.

“No,” Amedy said. “We're going to talk about this, and you can ask anything you want.”

“She painted the whole picture,” Hesche said. “And not only just what happened that night, but we got into all the reasons this happened to begin with.”

Amedy was in pain and had trouble speaking clearly but she described everything that had happened at the Orlando airport, how she and her mother had discovered David’s infidelity on a social media app and the fight in the car.

Why were they going that direction?

They were cutting across the state because David was supposed to drop Amedy off in Midland to stay with Becki Hoon — her legal guardian.

The officers found Amedy remarkable, in part, because she didn’t minimize her involvement. She admitted confronting David in the vehicle, screaming at him, stoking his anger.

Her version of the story aligned perfectly with the autopsy report, the evidence at the scene, the timeline the police had put together and what 911 callers had reported, according to Hesche. She also cleared up the mystery of the bloody smears on the outside of the vehicle after telling Hesche she had gotten out of the vehicle two times, leaving behind bloody tracks.

As Amedy told the story of how she got out of the vehicle and felt her way around it, trying to get help, fighting to live, Hesche looked at this 18-year-old high school senior and was amazed.

“She wasn't giving her life up for him,” he said. “She wasn't going to do it. There was no way she was dying alongside that (expletive) freeway.”

Amedy also cleared up something else: Why didn’t David go on the cruise with them?

Amedy, her mother and stepfather planned to drive from Michigan to Florida to go on a cruise, Amedy told police. She was sleeping during the drive and knew that they had stopped in Kentucky. David had had some type of “massive meltdown,” Hesche wrote in a report.

David decided to drive back to Michigan and Amedy was relieved.

“I was ecstatic because I don't like him,” she said. “I haven't liked him, ever.”

Her mother rented a car and drove the rest of the way. As they finished the drive to Florida, her mother said something that would haunt Amedy for years.

“She said, ‘Amedy, if you weren't here with me, I would have gone back Up North with him,’ ” Amedy said.

That left Amedy with a question she couldn't shake: If that would have happened, would her mother still be alive?

The Carnival Cruise left Cape Canaveral, Florida, on Dec. 30, 2017. Lisa and Amedy took day trips to Jamaica and the Cayman Islands.

Amedy only wanted one thing for her birthday: to touch the ocean for the first time in her life.

“So, we went to the beach,” she said. “I remember walking into the water and it was like bath water. It was so clear I could see the bottom. My mom walked in with me, and we held hands, just kind of stood there and enjoyed the view. I remember looking at the water and looking at the sky and the colors were so beautiful. It was so tranquil.”

Midway through the trip, Lisa talked with David on the phone, and he informed her that he was having surgery to get a brain tumor removed through his nose. Amedy did not believe that her mother knew about it before that point because she had never brought it up.

“She was extremely worried for him,” Amedy said.

Two days later, David sent Lisa a photo. “I remember him sending a photo to my mother and his entire nose was bandaged up and everything,” Amedy said.

As Amedy finished the story, describing the shooting, she even cracked a joke to the officers.

“Well, he (expletive) up this birthday,” she said to the officers. “But next year is gonna be a blowout. You guys are invited if you want to go.”

Hesche was stunned.

“You gotta understand, from my point of view, I was picking up pieces of her face and her teeth off the freeway in the middle of the night, just 10 days prior, just literally pieces,” he said. “That girl is the toughest human being I've ever met in my entire life.”

The interview lasted about an hour.

"I remember walking out of there with my partner at the time, and we just looked at each other,” Hesche said. “Have you ever seen anything like that?”

At the most basic level, Hesche was stunned that Amedy was alive after getting shot in the face. A 12-gauge shotgun slug has enough power and mass to blow hinges off a door.

“That'll drop an angry bull,” Hesche said. “It's just an immense amount of energy and for her to survive that? It just doesn't happen.”

He felt like he was talking to a Marvel character, some kind of superhero with magical powers.

"She’s a real-life Deadpool,” he said, of a character in the movies who never dies, even after getting shot.

 It was the most remarkable interview of his career.

“Without a doubt in my mind,” Hesche said, “I've never met someone with a stronger will to survive.”

Feeling attacked by media

Three weeks after the shooting, Amedy started to review news reports about the shooting.

Some recordings of 911 calls were posted online and Amedy listened to them several times, thankful for everyone who called. “Saved my life,” she thought and planned on finding the callers on Facebook to thank them personally.

She got her boyfriend to read her the news reports about the shooting, and several stories were so twisted and wrong, in her opinion, that it infuriated her.

The first stories didn’t mention David’s affair with the teenager.

She read David’s online obituary and it enraged her: There was no mention of how he killed her mother or how he shot her in the face. It just glossed over what happened, almost like it didn't happen.

“In Kaleva, he helped organize the softball leagues and was also in charge of the Kaleva softball fields,” the online obituary read. “David enjoyed baseball, softball, hunting, snowmobiling, camping, and off-roading. Earlier on in his life, he enjoyed little league, the Fifth Reformed Cadet Program, horseback riding, rodeo, and bull riding. Most of all, David loved his family.”

Loved his family? Amedy couldn’t take it.

“David was preceded in death by his wife, Lisa,” the obituary read.

Yeah, because he killed her, Amedy thought.

The obituary read like a typical, boilerplate version with no sinister, harmful intention. But in Amedy’s perception, sitting in a hospital room, after a surgeon removed her eye, recovering from a shotgun blast to the face while grieving for her mother, she felt like she was being attacked again. Like he was getting away with it in a twisted way, as if everyone was glossing over it, and if you didn't mention it, it didn't happen, and couldn't be true.

“I am so sorry for your loss,” someone posted to David’s family on the obituary page. “I went to school with Dave and graduated with him. I am in shock as I know you all are.”

Hesche has seen this play out different ways several times. It’s complicated when friends and family try to come to grips with the idea that someone they loved, someone they cherished, committed an evil act. To some, it might be so out of character. To others, like Amedy, there were warning signs.

Amedy felt like she was stuck in the middle of that struggle. She wasn’t looking for pity — she hates pity. But she felt what he did — how he killed her mother — was being glossed over and forgotten.

She saw posts about David describing Lisa as his soulmate — Lisa and David had met playing adult softball in west Michigan; and they married and moved to Kaleva, a small town in northern Michigan between Ludington and Traverse City.

But a soulmate?

This guy who had killed her?

Some stories mentioned how David was “kind” and this was “completely out of character.”

This man who had just blown off half her face?

Other news reports mentioned that David had a brain tumor, and it enraged her.

Amedy went on social media and felt that her mother was under attack.

Some questioned the timeline: Why did Lisa go on a vacation when her husband was having surgery on a brain tumor?

“I heard just a whole bunch of hate,” Amedy said. “They ridiculed my mother. And I just wanted to scream: She didn't know! He told us that Wednesday. And he faked it anyway.”

To Amedy, they were bashing Lisa, blaming her for being uncaring, turning her into the villain.

Amedy came to realize the tumor story was a fabrication. She said she never found any shred of evidence that he had surgery — no paperwork, no test results, no medical records, not even the name of a doctor.

“There was absolutely no tumor,” Amedy said. “He did not have one at all. He faked all of it. All of it.”

That assertion was backed up by police, Hesche said recently.

Amedy believes David’s motive for faking the tumor and not going on the cruise was obvious: “He wanted to play house with his mistress,” she said.

What that gunshot stole from Amedy

There are 43 muscles in the human face . Some are involved in basic functions like chewing or blinking. But other muscles form the center of communication — the ability to show happiness, sadness, fear, anger, surprise and disgust.

For most, the face is a window into how someone feels. How someone communicates in the most subtle ways.

But that shotgun blast stole the subtle nuance of communication from Amedy.

“High velocity weapons do tremendous devastation to the delicate features of the face, which are skin, muscle, nerves and bone,” said Dr. Christian Vercler, a plastic surgeon at the University of Michigan . “We can mimic the appearance of the face but it's such a unique thing. It's the center of human communication. And it's permanently altered after a gunshot in a devastating way that can never fully be restored.”

For two months, Amedy stayed at the hospital in Grand Rapids and went through at least 15 facial surgeries.

Surgeons inserted nasal trumpets into her nostrils to open her airway to help her breathe.

“Misery,” Amedy said. “They were in there so that the muscle wouldn't collapse. They were like a soft plastic but they would get hard if there was any moisture.”

Every week, she went through a surgery, either a wound cleaning or a major reconstruction.

After two months in Grand Rapids, she spent a week in Ann Arbor for yet another major surgery. The side of her face was like a sink hole because she was missing so much bone and tissue, and doctors at U-M wanted to refill it.

Plastic surgeons decided to take a thick muscle from her back and move it to her face. But it wasn't a perfect fix. The muscle looked huge on her face. “They told me that they can always extract some out, they can never put more in,” she said.

Over time, that muscle sagged and eventually, Vercler performed another operation to lift it.

That became a recurring theme for Amedy since the shooting: One operation blended into the next. There was never an ending, just another tweak in the future.

In another surgery, doctors took 2 inches of her rib and put it under her eye, like laying a foundation on which to place a house, to prepare the socket for a prosthetic eye. But doctors feared she had too much scar tissue.

“The scarring would just push it right back out,” Amedy said.

The shotgun blast destroyed so many teeth that she got dentures.

“My upper jaw was no longer there, so my teeth were actually eating themselves,” she said. “It felt like coral.”

Her face was covered with heavy scarring, which created another series of challenges. Scars can change over time, twisting or warping, changing the appearance of the face. So Vercler used lasers to soften the appearance of the heavy scarring.   

Over the years, doctors performed an endless cycle of tweaking and cleaning and moving and lifting, and then tweaking some more.

“There's always problems that kind of creep up later, when you have that kind of devastating injury,” Vercler said.

Some of the scars were visible.

And some were not.

But they came out in her dreams.

This is the third chapter of a five-part series in which Detroit Free Press columnist Jeff Seidel shares the story of a Michigan survivor of gun violence.  C ontact Jeff Seidel:  [email protected]  or follow him  @seideljeff .

Chapter 4 of Amedy's Story: Visits from a killer

Read our research on: TikTok | Podcasts | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

3. christianity’s place in politics, and ‘christian nationalism’.

Most Americans express support for the principle of separation of church and state. And few say they think the federal government should declare Christianity to be the official religion of the United States.

But many Americans do think that even though the U.S. shouldn’t officially be declared a Christian country, the federal government should promote Christian moral values. And half of U.S. adults say they think the Bible should have at least some influence in U.S. laws, including 28% who say that if the Bible conflicts with the will of the people, the Bible should have more sway.

Fewer than half of U.S. adults say they have ever heard or read anything about Christian nationalism, including 5% who say they have a favorable view of it and 25% who say they have an unfavorable view.

How much influence should the Bible have on U.S. laws?

U.S. adults are divided over the amount of influence the Bible should have on the country’s laws. About half of adults (49%) say the Bible should have “a great deal” (23%) or “some” influence (26%), while 51% say it should have “not much” or “none at all.”

This is the third time we’ve asked this question in the last four years, and responses have remained fairly steady over that time .

White evangelical Protestants are more likely than adults in most other groups to say the Bible should have at least some influence on U.S. laws (86%) – including 55% who say the Bible should have “a great deal” of influence. A majority of Hispanic Protestants (78%) and Black Protestants (74%) also think the Bible should hold at least some influence on the country’s laws.

By contrast, 80% of religiously unaffiliated adults, 79% of Jews and 57% of Muslims say the Bible should not have influence on the laws of the United States. This includes 84% of atheists and 78% of agnostics who say the Bible should have no influence at all.

There also are large political divides on this topic. While 67% of Republicans and Republican leaners say the Bible should influence U.S. laws at least some, only 32% of Democrats and Democratic leaners share this opinion.

Younger adults and college graduates are less likely than other adults to say that the Bible should have at least some influence on U.S. laws.

What should happen when the Bible and the will of the people conflict?

Respondents who said the Bible should have at least some influence on U.S. laws were asked a follow-up question: When the Bible and the will of the people conflict with each other, which should have more influence?

Overall, 28% of U.S. adults say the Bible should have influence over U.S. laws and that it should take priority over the will of the people if the two conflict, while 19% say the Bible should have influence but that the will of the people should take precedence.

White evangelical Protestants and Hispanic Protestants are more likely than those in other religious groups to say the Bible should carry more weight in U.S. laws than the will of the people – 64% and 61%, respectively, say the Bible should have more influence on laws when the Bible and the will of the people conflict. And 49% of Black Protestants voice this opinion.

Among Catholics, 24% say the Bible should have more influence than the will of the people if the two conflict, 23% say the will of the people should take precedence over the Bible, and 50% say the Bible should have little or no influence on U.S. laws.

Republicans are much more likely than Democrats to say the Bible should have more influence than the will of the people when the two conflict (42% vs. 16%).

How much influence does the Bible have on U.S. laws today?

Distinct from their preferences on how much influence the Bible should have on U.S. laws, a majority of adults (57%) say they think the Bible currently does have at least some influence on this country’s laws.

Atheists (86%) and agnostics (83%) are far more likely than people in other religious groups to say the Bible has influence on U.S. laws.

And 73% of Jewish respondents say the Bible has a great deal of or some influence over today’s laws.

Black Protestants are the only group in which a clear majority says the Bible does not currently have much influence on the country’s laws.

Democrats are significantly more likely than Republicans to think the Bible has at least some influence on today’s laws (67% vs. 48%).

Should the government stop enforcing church-state separation?

Just over half of Americans say the federal government should enforce the separation of church and state (55%) – virtually unchanged from when we asked this question three years ago .

Meanwhile, 16% of U.S. adults say the government should stop enforcing church-state separation. And 28% of Americans say they have no opinion on this question or that neither option represents their views.

Almost all atheists (95%) say church-state separation should continue to be enforced by the federal government. Agnostics (89%) and Jews (84%) also are widely in favor of continued enforcement.

On the other hand, White evangelical Protestants are almost equally divided on this question: 35% say they favor federal enforcement of church-state separation, 31% say the government should stop enforcing this separation, and 32% choose neither of these options.

White evangelical Protestants are more likely than any of the other religious groups in this analysis to say the government should stop enforcing church-state separation.

Republicans are about twice as likely as Democrats to say the federal government should stop enforcing church-state separation (23% vs. 10%). But Republicans express more support for separation of church and state than opposition to it (43% vs. 23%).

Meanwhile, a clear majority of Democrats support the government enforcing the separation of church and state (68%).

Americans with a college degree are significantly more likely than other adults to say the federal government should enforce the separation of church and state.

Should the federal government declare Christianity the country’s official religion?

Survey respondents were asked to pick which of three statements best aligns with their views:

• The federal government should declare Christianity the official religion of the United States.
• The federal government should not declare Christianity the official religion of the United States, but it should promote Christian moral values.
• The federal government should not declare Christianity the official religion of the United States, and it should not promote Christian moral values.

An overwhelming majority of Americans – 83% – say the government should not declare Christianity the official religion of the country. Only 13% of Americans support declaring Christianity as the national religion.  (In our 2021 survey, a different question found a similar result on this topic.)

Another 44% of U.S. adults say the government should not declare the U.S. a Christian nation but should promote Christian values.

The remaining 39% do not want the government to promote Christian values or to declare a Christian nation.

A slim majority of Christians say they want the government to promote Christian values without declaring an official religion. In other religious groups, respondents most commonly say the government should neither declare a Christian nation nor promote Christian values. Atheists (90%) are particularly likely to fall in this camp.

While relatively few people say the federal government should declare Christianity the official religion of the U.S., this view is somewhat more common among White evangelical Protestants, Black Protestants and Hispanic Protestants. About a quarter in each group expresses this opinion.

Most Republicans (57%) say the federal government should promote Christian moral values but not declare the U.S. a Christian nation, while most Democrats (58%) say the government should not promote Christian values or declare the U.S a Christian nation.

Republicans also are more likely than Democrats to say Christianity should be declared the official national religion (21% vs. 7%).

Young adults are more likely than older adults to say that the government should neither declare Christianity the country’s official religion nor promote Christian moral values.

Do Americans know about ‘Christian nationalism’?

A slim majority of U.S. adults (54%) say they have heard or read “nothing at all” about “Christian nationalism” – the same share who said this when we asked this question two years ago .

Among the 45% who have heard anything about Christian nationalism, relatively few say they’ve heard “a great deal” (6%) or “quite a bit” (9%). More Americans say they’ve heard or read “some” (16%) or “a little” (14%) about Christian nationalism.

Most atheists, agnostics and Jews have heard at least a little about Christian nationalism. By contrast, 60% of Christians say they have heard or read nothing at all about it.

Views of Christian nationalism

Respondents who had heard or read anything about Christian nationalism were then asked a follow-up question: All in all, do you have a favorable or unfavorable view of Christian nationalism?

Overall, 25% of U.S. adults say they have heard of Christian nationalism and have an unfavorable view of it. Far fewer adults say they have a favorable view of Christian nationalism (5%).

There are no religious groups in which more people have a favorable than unfavorable view of Christian nationalism.

And some religious groups are particularly likely to hold an unfavorable view. For instance, 49% of Jewish respondents have an unfavorable view of Christian nationalism, while 1% say they have a favorable view.

Democrats are far more likely than Republicans to have heard about Christian nationalism and to have an unfavorable view of it. Most Republicans say they have never heard of Christian nationalism.

Sign up for our Religion newsletter

Sent weekly on Wednesday

Report Materials

Table of contents, 5 facts about religion and americans’ views of donald trump, u.s. christians more likely than ‘nones’ to say situation at the border is a crisis, from businesses and banks to colleges and churches: americans’ views of u.s. institutions, most u.s. parents pass along their religion and politics to their children, growing share of americans see the supreme court as ‘friendly’ toward religion, most popular.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .