Have a language expert improve your writing

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

  • Knowledge Base

Methodology

  • Descriptive Research | Definition, Types, Methods & Examples

Descriptive Research | Definition, Types, Methods & Examples

Published on May 15, 2019 by Shona McCombes . Revised on June 22, 2023.

Descriptive research aims to accurately and systematically describe a population, situation or phenomenon. It can answer what , where , when and how   questions , but not why questions.

A descriptive research design can use a wide variety of research methods  to investigate one or more variables . Unlike in experimental research , the researcher does not control or manipulate any of the variables, but only observes and measures them.

Table of contents

When to use a descriptive research design, descriptive research methods, other interesting articles.

Descriptive research is an appropriate choice when the research aim is to identify characteristics, frequencies, trends, and categories.

It is useful when not much is known yet about the topic or problem. Before you can research why something happens, you need to understand how, when and where it happens.

Descriptive research question examples

  • How has the Amsterdam housing market changed over the past 20 years?
  • Do customers of company X prefer product X or product Y?
  • What are the main genetic, behavioural and morphological differences between European wildcats and domestic cats?
  • What are the most popular online news sources among under-18s?
  • How prevalent is disease A in population B?

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

  • Academic style
  • Vague sentences
  • Style consistency

See an example

descriptive research vs

Descriptive research is usually defined as a type of quantitative research , though qualitative research can also be used for descriptive purposes. The research design should be carefully developed to ensure that the results are valid and reliable .

Survey research allows you to gather large volumes of data that can be analyzed for frequencies, averages and patterns. Common uses of surveys include:

  • Describing the demographics of a country or region
  • Gauging public opinion on political and social topics
  • Evaluating satisfaction with a company’s products or an organization’s services

Observations

Observations allow you to gather data on behaviours and phenomena without having to rely on the honesty and accuracy of respondents. This method is often used by psychological, social and market researchers to understand how people act in real-life situations.

Observation of physical entities and phenomena is also an important part of research in the natural sciences. Before you can develop testable hypotheses , models or theories, it’s necessary to observe and systematically describe the subject under investigation.

Case studies

A case study can be used to describe the characteristics of a specific subject (such as a person, group, event or organization). Instead of gathering a large volume of data to identify patterns across time or location, case studies gather detailed data to identify the characteristics of a narrowly defined subject.

Rather than aiming to describe generalizable facts, case studies often focus on unusual or interesting cases that challenge assumptions, add complexity, or reveal something new about a research problem .

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

  • Normal distribution
  • Degrees of freedom
  • Null hypothesis
  • Discourse analysis
  • Control groups
  • Mixed methods research
  • Non-probability sampling
  • Quantitative research
  • Ecological validity

Research bias

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

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2023, June 22). Descriptive Research | Definition, Types, Methods & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved March 26, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/descriptive-research/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is quantitative research | definition, uses & methods, correlational research | when & how to use, descriptive statistics | definitions, types, examples, what is your plagiarism score.

Join thousands of product people at Insight Out Conf on April 11. Register free.

Insights hub solutions

Analyze data

Uncover deep customer insights with fast, powerful features, store insights, curate and manage insights in one searchable platform, scale research, unlock the potential of customer insights at enterprise scale.

Featured reads

Create a quick summary to identify key takeaways and keep your team in the loop.

Tips and tricks

Make magic with your customer data in Dovetail

descriptive research vs

Four ways Dovetail helps Product Managers master continuous product discovery

descriptive research vs

Product updates

Dovetail retro: our biggest releases from the past year

Events and videos

© Dovetail Research Pty. Ltd.

  • What is descriptive research?

Last updated

5 February 2023

Reviewed by

Cathy Heath

Descriptive research is a common investigatory model used by researchers in various fields, including social sciences, linguistics, and academia.

Read on to understand the characteristics of descriptive research and explore its underlying techniques, processes, and procedures.

Analyze your descriptive research

Dovetail streamlines analysis to help you uncover and share actionable insights

Descriptive research is an exploratory research method. It enables researchers to precisely and methodically describe a population, circumstance, or phenomenon.

As the name suggests, descriptive research describes the characteristics of the group, situation, or phenomenon being studied without manipulating variables or testing hypotheses . This can be reported using surveys , observational studies, and case studies. You can use both quantitative and qualitative methods to compile the data.

Besides making observations and then comparing and analyzing them, descriptive studies often develop knowledge concepts and provide solutions to critical issues. It always aims to answer how the event occurred, when it occurred, where it occurred, and what the problem or phenomenon is.

  • Characteristics of descriptive research

The following are some of the characteristics of descriptive research:

Quantitativeness

Descriptive research can be quantitative as it gathers quantifiable data to statistically analyze a population sample. These numbers can show patterns, connections, and trends over time and can be discovered using surveys, polls, and experiments.

Qualitativeness

Descriptive research can also be qualitative. It gives meaning and context to the numbers supplied by quantitative descriptive research .

Researchers can use tools like interviews, focus groups, and ethnographic studies to illustrate why things are what they are and help characterize the research problem. This is because it’s more explanatory than exploratory or experimental research.

Uncontrolled variables

Descriptive research differs from experimental research in that researchers cannot manipulate the variables. They are recognized, scrutinized, and quantified instead. This is one of its most prominent features.

Cross-sectional studies

Descriptive research is a cross-sectional study because it examines several areas of the same group. It involves obtaining data on multiple variables at the personal level during a certain period. It’s helpful when trying to understand a larger community’s habits or preferences.

Carried out in a natural environment

Descriptive studies are usually carried out in the participants’ everyday environment, which allows researchers to avoid influencing responders by collecting data in a natural setting. You can use online surveys or survey questions to collect data or observe.

Basis for further research

You can further dissect descriptive research’s outcomes and use them for different types of investigation. The outcomes also serve as a foundation for subsequent investigations and can guide future studies. For example, you can use the data obtained in descriptive research to help determine future research designs.

  • Descriptive research methods

There are three basic approaches for gathering data in descriptive research: observational, case study, and survey.

You can use surveys to gather data in descriptive research. This involves gathering information from many people using a questionnaire and interview .

Surveys remain the dominant research tool for descriptive research design. Researchers can conduct various investigations and collect multiple types of data (quantitative and qualitative) using surveys with diverse designs.

You can conduct surveys over the phone, online, or in person. Your survey might be a brief interview or conversation with a set of prepared questions intended to obtain quick information from the primary source.

Observation

This descriptive research method involves observing and gathering data on a population or phenomena without manipulating variables. It is employed in psychology, market research , and other social science studies to track and understand human behavior.

Observation is an essential component of descriptive research. It entails gathering data and analyzing it to see whether there is a relationship between the two variables in the study. This strategy usually allows for both qualitative and quantitative data analysis.

Case studies

A case study can outline a specific topic’s traits. The topic might be a person, group, event, or organization.

It involves using a subset of a larger group as a sample to characterize the features of that larger group.

You can generalize knowledge gained from studying a case study to benefit a broader audience.

This approach entails carefully examining a particular group, person, or event over time. You can learn something new about the study topic by using a small group to better understand the dynamics of the entire group.

  • Types of descriptive research

There are several types of descriptive study. The most well-known include cross-sectional studies, census surveys, sample surveys, case reports, and comparison studies.

Case reports and case series

In the healthcare and medical fields, a case report is used to explain a patient’s circumstances when suffering from an uncommon illness or displaying certain symptoms. Case reports and case series are both collections of related cases. They have aided the advancement of medical knowledge on countless occasions.

The normative component is an addition to the descriptive survey. In the descriptive–normative survey, you compare the study’s results to the norm.

Descriptive survey

This descriptive type of research employs surveys to collect information on various topics. This data aims to determine the degree to which certain conditions may be attained.

You can extrapolate or generalize the information you obtain from sample surveys to the larger group being researched.

Correlative survey

Correlative surveys help establish if there is a positive, negative, or neutral connection between two variables.

Performing census surveys involves gathering relevant data on several aspects of a given population. These units include individuals, families, organizations, objects, characteristics, and properties.

During descriptive research, you gather different degrees of interest over time from a specific population. Cross-sectional studies provide a glimpse of a phenomenon’s prevalence and features in a population. There are no ethical challenges with them and they are quite simple and inexpensive to carry out.

Comparative studies

These surveys compare the two subjects’ conditions or characteristics. The subjects may include research variables, organizations, plans, and people.

Comparison points, assumption of similarities, and criteria of comparison are three important variables that affect how well and accurately comparative studies are conducted.

For instance, descriptive research can help determine how many CEOs hold a bachelor’s degree and what proportion of low-income households receive government help.

  • Pros and cons

The primary advantage of descriptive research designs is that researchers can create a reliable and beneficial database for additional study. To conduct any inquiry, you need access to reliable information sources that can give you a firm understanding of a situation.

Quantitative studies are time- and resource-intensive, so knowing the hypotheses viable for testing is crucial. The basic overview of descriptive research provides helpful hints as to which variables are worth quantitatively examining. This is why it’s employed as a precursor to quantitative research designs.

Some experts view this research as untrustworthy and unscientific. However, there is no way to assess the findings because you don’t manipulate any variables statistically.

Cause-and-effect correlations also can’t be established through descriptive investigations. Additionally, observational study findings cannot be replicated, which prevents a review of the findings and their replication.

The absence of statistical and in-depth analysis and the rather superficial character of the investigative procedure are drawbacks of this research approach.

  • Descriptive research examples and applications

Several descriptive research examples are emphasized based on their types, purposes, and applications. Research questions often begin with “What is …” These studies help find solutions to practical issues in social science, physical science, and education.

Here are some examples and applications of descriptive research:

Determining consumer perception and behavior

Organizations use descriptive research designs to determine how various demographic groups react to a certain product or service.

For example, a business looking to sell to its target market should research the market’s behavior first. When researching human behavior in response to a cause or event, the researcher pays attention to the traits, actions, and responses before drawing a conclusion.

Scientific classification

Scientific descriptive research enables the classification of organisms and their traits and constituents.

Measuring data trends

A descriptive study design’s statistical capabilities allow researchers to track data trends over time. It’s frequently used to determine the study target’s current circumstances and underlying patterns.

Conduct comparison

Organizations can use a descriptive research approach to learn how various demographics react to a certain product or service. For example, you can study how the target market responds to a competitor’s product and use that information to infer their behavior.

  • Bottom line

A descriptive research design is suitable for exploring certain topics and serving as a prelude to larger quantitative investigations. It provides a comprehensive understanding of the “what” of the group or thing you’re investigating.

This research type acts as the cornerstone of other research methodologies . It is distinctive because it can use quantitative and qualitative research approaches at the same time.

What is descriptive research design?

Descriptive research design aims to systematically obtain information to describe a phenomenon, situation, or population. More specifically, it helps answer the what, when, where, and how questions regarding the research problem rather than the why.

How does descriptive research compare to qualitative research?

Despite certain parallels, descriptive research concentrates on describing phenomena, while qualitative research aims to understand people better.

How do you analyze descriptive research data?

Data analysis involves using various methodologies, enabling the researcher to evaluate and provide results regarding validity and reliability.

Get started today

Go from raw data to valuable insights with a flexible research platform

Editor’s picks

Last updated: 21 December 2023

Last updated: 16 December 2023

Last updated: 17 February 2024

Last updated: 19 November 2023

Last updated: 5 March 2024

Last updated: 15 February 2024

Last updated: 11 March 2024

Last updated: 12 December 2023

Last updated: 6 March 2024

Last updated: 10 April 2023

Last updated: 20 December 2023

Latest articles

Related topics, log in or sign up.

Get started for free

  • Descriptive Research Designs: Types, Examples & Methods

busayo.longe

One of the components of research is getting enough information about the research problem—the what, how, when and where answers, which is why descriptive research is an important type of research. It is very useful when conducting research whose aim is to identify characteristics, frequencies, trends, correlations, and categories.

This research method takes a problem with little to no relevant information and gives it a befitting description using qualitative and quantitative research method s. Descriptive research aims to accurately describe a research problem.

In the subsequent sections, we will be explaining what descriptive research means, its types, examples, and data collection methods.

What is Descriptive Research?

Descriptive research is a type of research that describes a population, situation, or phenomenon that is being studied. It focuses on answering the how, what, when, and where questions If a research problem, rather than the why.

This is mainly because it is important to have a proper understanding of what a research problem is about before investigating why it exists in the first place. 

For example, an investor considering an investment in the ever-changing Amsterdam housing market needs to understand what the current state of the market is, how it changes (increasing or decreasing), and when it changes (time of the year) before asking for the why. This is where descriptive research comes in.

What Are The Types of Descriptive Research?

Descriptive research is classified into different types according to the kind of approach that is used in conducting descriptive research. The different types of descriptive research are highlighted below:

  • Descriptive-survey

Descriptive survey research uses surveys to gather data about varying subjects. This data aims to know the extent to which different conditions can be obtained among these subjects.

For example, a researcher wants to determine the qualification of employed professionals in Maryland. He uses a survey as his research instrument , and each item on the survey related to qualifications is subjected to a Yes/No answer. 

This way, the researcher can describe the qualifications possessed by the employed demographics of this community. 

  • Descriptive-normative survey

This is an extension of the descriptive survey, with the addition being the normative element. In the descriptive-normative survey, the results of the study should be compared with the norm.

For example, an organization that wishes to test the skills of its employees by a team may have them take a skills test. The skills tests are the evaluation tool in this case, and the result of this test is compared with the norm of each role.

If the score of the team is one standard deviation above the mean, it is very satisfactory, if within the mean, satisfactory, and one standard deviation below the mean is unsatisfactory.

  • Descriptive-status

This is a quantitative description technique that seeks to answer questions about real-life situations. For example, a researcher researching the income of the employees in a company, and the relationship with their performance.

A survey will be carried out to gather enough data about the income of the employees, then their performance will be evaluated and compared to their income. This will help determine whether a higher income means better performance and low income means lower performance or vice versa.

  • Descriptive-analysis

The descriptive-analysis method of research describes a subject by further analyzing it, which in this case involves dividing it into 2 parts. For example, the HR personnel of a company that wishes to analyze the job role of each employee of the company may divide the employees into the people that work at the Headquarters in the US and those that work from Oslo, Norway office.

A questionnaire is devised to analyze the job role of employees with similar salaries and who work in similar positions.

  • Descriptive classification

This method is employed in biological sciences for the classification of plants and animals. A researcher who wishes to classify the sea animals into different species will collect samples from various search stations, then classify them accordingly.

  • Descriptive-comparative

In descriptive-comparative research, the researcher considers 2 variables that are not manipulated, and establish a formal procedure to conclude that one is better than the other. For example, an examination body wants to determine the better method of conducting tests between paper-based and computer-based tests.

A random sample of potential participants of the test may be asked to use the 2 different methods, and factors like failure rates, time factors, and others will be evaluated to arrive at the best method.

  • Correlative Survey

Correlative surveys are used to determine whether the relationship between 2 variables is positive, negative, or neutral. That is, if 2 variables say X and Y are directly proportional, inversely proportional or are not related to each other.

Examples of Descriptive Research

There are different examples of descriptive research, that may be highlighted from its types, uses, and applications. However, we will be restricting ourselves to only 3 distinct examples in this article.

  • Comparing Student Performance:

An academic institution may wish 2 compare the performance of its junior high school students in English language and Mathematics. This may be used to classify students based on 2 major groups, with one group going ahead to study while courses, while the other study courses in the Arts & Humanities field.

Students who are more proficient in mathematics will be encouraged to go into STEM and vice versa. Institutions may also use this data to identify students’ weak points and work on ways to assist them.

  • Scientific Classification

During the major scientific classification of plants, animals, and periodic table elements, the characteristics and components of each subject are evaluated and used to determine how they are classified.

For example, living things may be classified into kingdom Plantae or kingdom animal is depending on their nature. Further classification may group animals into mammals, pieces, vertebrae, invertebrae, etc. 

All these classifications are made a result of descriptive research which describes what they are.

  • Human Behavior

When studying human behaviour based on a factor or event, the researcher observes the characteristics, behaviour, and reaction, then use it to conclude. A company willing to sell to its target market needs to first study the behaviour of the market.

This may be done by observing how its target reacts to a competitor’s product, then use it to determine their behaviour.

What are the Characteristics of Descriptive Research?  

The characteristics of descriptive research can be highlighted from its definition, applications, data collection methods, and examples. Some characteristics of descriptive research are:

  • Quantitativeness

Descriptive research uses a quantitative research method by collecting quantifiable information to be used for statistical analysis of the population sample. This is very common when dealing with research in the physical sciences.

  • Qualitativeness

It can also be carried out using the qualitative research method, to properly describe the research problem. This is because descriptive research is more explanatory than exploratory or experimental.

  • Uncontrolled variables

In descriptive research, researchers cannot control the variables like they do in experimental research.

  • The basis for further research

The results of descriptive research can be further analyzed and used in other research methods. It can also inform the next line of research, including the research method that should be used.

This is because it provides basic information about the research problem, which may give birth to other questions like why a particular thing is the way it is.

Why Use Descriptive Research Design?  

Descriptive research can be used to investigate the background of a research problem and get the required information needed to carry out further research. It is used in multiple ways by different organizations, and especially when getting the required information about their target audience.

  • Define subject characteristics :

It is used to determine the characteristics of the subjects, including their traits, behaviour, opinion, etc. This information may be gathered with the use of surveys, which are shared with the respondents who in this case, are the research subjects.

For example, a survey evaluating the number of hours millennials in a community spends on the internet weekly, will help a service provider make informed business decisions regarding the market potential of the community.

  • Measure Data Trends

It helps to measure the changes in data over some time through statistical methods. Consider the case of individuals who want to invest in stock markets, so they evaluate the changes in prices of the available stocks to make a decision investment decision.

Brokerage companies are however the ones who carry out the descriptive research process, while individuals can view the data trends and make decisions.

Descriptive research is also used to compare how different demographics respond to certain variables. For example, an organization may study how people with different income levels react to the launch of a new Apple phone.

This kind of research may take a survey that will help determine which group of individuals are purchasing the new Apple phone. Do the low-income earners also purchase the phone, or only the high-income earners do?

Further research using another technique will explain why low-income earners are purchasing the phone even though they can barely afford it. This will help inform strategies that will lure other low-income earners and increase company sales.

  • Validate existing conditions

When you are not sure about the validity of an existing condition, you can use descriptive research to ascertain the underlying patterns of the research object. This is because descriptive research methods make an in-depth analysis of each variable before making conclusions.

  • Conducted Overtime

Descriptive research is conducted over some time to ascertain the changes observed at each point in time. The higher the number of times it is conducted, the more authentic the conclusion will be.

What are the Disadvantages of Descriptive Research?  

  • Response and Non-response Bias

Respondents may either decide not to respond to questions or give incorrect responses if they feel the questions are too confidential. When researchers use observational methods, respondents may also decide to behave in a particular manner because they feel they are being watched.

  • The researcher may decide to influence the result of the research due to personal opinion or bias towards a particular subject. For example, a stockbroker who also has a business of his own may try to lure investors into investing in his own company by manipulating results.
  • A case-study or sample taken from a large population is not representative of the whole population.
  • Limited scope:The scope of descriptive research is limited to the what of research, with no information on why thereby limiting the scope of the research.

What are the Data Collection Methods in Descriptive Research?  

There are 3 main data collection methods in descriptive research, namely; observational method, case study method, and survey research.

1. Observational Method

The observational method allows researchers to collect data based on their view of the behaviour and characteristics of the respondent, with the respondents themselves not directly having an input. It is often used in market research, psychology, and some other social science research to understand human behaviour.

It is also an important aspect of physical scientific research, with it being one of the most effective methods of conducting descriptive research . This process can be said to be either quantitative or qualitative.

Quantitative observation involved the objective collection of numerical data , whose results can be analyzed using numerical and statistical methods. 

Qualitative observation, on the other hand, involves the monitoring of characteristics and not the measurement of numbers. The researcher makes his observation from a distance, records it, and is used to inform conclusions.

2. Case Study Method

A case study is a sample group (an individual, a group of people, organizations, events, etc.) whose characteristics are used to describe the characteristics of a larger group in which the case study is a subgroup. The information gathered from investigating a case study may be generalized to serve the larger group.

This generalization, may, however, be risky because case studies are not sufficient to make accurate predictions about larger groups. Case studies are a poor case of generalization.

3. Survey Research

This is a very popular data collection method in research designs. In survey research, researchers create a survey or questionnaire and distribute it to respondents who give answers.

Generally, it is used to obtain quick information directly from the primary source and also conducting rigorous quantitative and qualitative research. In some cases, survey research uses a blend of both qualitative and quantitative strategies.

Survey research can be carried out both online and offline using the following methods

  • Online Surveys: This is a cheap method of carrying out surveys and getting enough responses. It can be carried out using Formplus, an online survey builder. Formplus has amazing tools and features that will help increase response rates.
  • Offline Surveys: This includes paper forms, mobile offline forms , and SMS-based forms.

What Are The Differences Between Descriptive and Correlational Research?  

Before going into the differences between descriptive and correlation research, we need to have a proper understanding of what correlation research is about. Therefore, we will be giving a summary of the correlation research below.

Correlational research is a type of descriptive research, which is used to measure the relationship between 2 variables, with the researcher having no control over them. It aims to find whether there is; positive correlation (both variables change in the same direction), negative correlation (the variables change in the opposite direction), or zero correlation (there is no relationship between the variables).

Correlational research may be used in 2 situations;

(i) when trying to find out if there is a relationship between two variables, and

(ii) when a causal relationship is suspected between two variables, but it is impractical or unethical to conduct experimental research that manipulates one of the variables. 

Below are some of the differences between correlational and descriptive research:

  • Definitions :

Descriptive research aims is a type of research that provides an in-depth understanding of the study population, while correlational research is the type of research that measures the relationship between 2 variables. 

  • Characteristics :

Descriptive research provides descriptive data explaining what the research subject is about, while correlation research explores the relationship between data and not their description.

  • Predictions :

 Predictions cannot be made in descriptive research while correlation research accommodates the possibility of making predictions.

Descriptive Research vs. Causal Research

Descriptive research and causal research are both research methodologies, however, one focuses on a subject’s behaviors while the latter focuses on a relationship’s cause-and-effect. To buttress the above point, descriptive research aims to describe and document the characteristics, behaviors, or phenomena of a particular or specific population or situation. 

It focuses on providing an accurate and detailed account of an already existing state of affairs between variables. Descriptive research answers the questions of “what,” “where,” “when,” and “how” without attempting to establish any causal relationships or explain any underlying factors that might have caused the behavior.

Causal research, on the other hand, seeks to determine cause-and-effect relationships between variables. It aims to point out the factors that influence or cause a particular result or behavior. Causal research involves manipulating variables, controlling conditions or a subgroup, and observing the resulting effects. The primary objective of causal research is to establish a cause-effect relationship and provide insights into why certain phenomena happen the way they do.

Descriptive Research vs. Analytical Research

Descriptive research provides a detailed and comprehensive account of a specific situation or phenomenon. It focuses on describing and summarizing data without making inferences or attempting to explain underlying factors or the cause of the factor. 

It is primarily concerned with providing an accurate and objective representation of the subject of research. While analytical research goes beyond the description of the phenomena and seeks to analyze and interpret data to discover if there are patterns, relationships, or any underlying factors. 

It examines the data critically, applies statistical techniques or other analytical methods, and draws conclusions based on the discovery. Analytical research also aims to explore the relationships between variables and understand the underlying mechanisms or processes involved.

Descriptive Research vs. Exploratory Research

Descriptive research is a research method that focuses on providing a detailed and accurate account of a specific situation, group, or phenomenon. This type of research describes the characteristics, behaviors, or relationships within the given context without looking for an underlying cause. 

Descriptive research typically involves collecting and analyzing quantitative or qualitative data to generate descriptive statistics or narratives. Exploratory research differs from descriptive research because it aims to explore and gain firsthand insights or knowledge into a relatively unexplored or poorly understood topic. 

It focuses on generating ideas, hypotheses, or theories rather than providing definitive answers. Exploratory research is often conducted at the early stages of a research project to gather preliminary information and identify key variables or factors for further investigation. It involves open-ended interviews, observations, or small-scale surveys to gather qualitative data.

Read More – Exploratory Research: What are its Method & Examples?

Descriptive Research vs. Experimental Research

Descriptive research aims to describe and document the characteristics, behaviors, or phenomena of a particular population or situation. It focuses on providing an accurate and detailed account of the existing state of affairs. 

Descriptive research typically involves collecting data through surveys, observations, or existing records and analyzing the data to generate descriptive statistics or narratives. It does not involve manipulating variables or establishing cause-and-effect relationships.

Experimental research, on the other hand, involves manipulating variables and controlling conditions to investigate cause-and-effect relationships. It aims to establish causal relationships by introducing an intervention or treatment and observing the resulting effects. 

Experimental research typically involves randomly assigning participants to different groups, such as control and experimental groups, and measuring the outcomes. It allows researchers to control for confounding variables and draw causal conclusions.

Related – Experimental vs Non-Experimental Research: 15 Key Differences

Descriptive Research vs. Explanatory Research

Descriptive research focuses on providing a detailed and accurate account of a specific situation, group, or phenomenon. It aims to describe the characteristics, behaviors, or relationships within the given context. 

Descriptive research is primarily concerned with providing an objective representation of the subject of study without explaining underlying causes or mechanisms. Explanatory research seeks to explain the relationships between variables and uncover the underlying causes or mechanisms. 

It goes beyond description and aims to understand the reasons or factors that influence a particular outcome or behavior. Explanatory research involves analyzing data, conducting statistical analyses, and developing theories or models to explain the observed relationships.

Descriptive Research vs. Inferential Research

Descriptive research focuses on describing and summarizing data without making inferences or generalizations beyond the specific sample or population being studied. It aims to provide an accurate and objective representation of the subject of study. 

Descriptive research typically involves analyzing data to generate descriptive statistics, such as means, frequencies, or percentages, to describe the characteristics or behaviors observed.

Inferential research, however, involves making inferences or generalizations about a larger population based on a smaller sample. 

It aims to draw conclusions about the population characteristics or relationships by analyzing the sample data. Inferential research uses statistical techniques to estimate population parameters, test hypotheses, and determine the level of confidence or significance in the findings.

Related – Inferential Statistics: Definition, Types + Examples

Conclusion  

The uniqueness of descriptive research partly lies in its ability to explore both quantitative and qualitative research methods. Therefore, when conducting descriptive research, researchers have the opportunity to use a wide variety of techniques that aids the research process.

Descriptive research explores research problems in-depth, beyond the surface level thereby giving a detailed description of the research subject. That way, it can aid further research in the field, including other research methods .

It is also very useful in solving real-life problems in various fields of social science, physical science, and education.

Logo

Connect to Formplus, Get Started Now - It's Free!

  • descriptive research
  • descriptive research method
  • example of descriptive research
  • types of descriptive research
  • busayo.longe

Formplus

You may also like:

Extrapolation in Statistical Research: Definition, Examples, Types, Applications

In this article we’ll look at the different types and characteristics of extrapolation, plus how it contrasts to interpolation.

descriptive research vs

Type I vs Type II Errors: Causes, Examples & Prevention

This article will discuss the two different types of errors in hypothesis testing and how you can prevent them from occurring in your research

Cross-Sectional Studies: Types, Pros, Cons & Uses

In this article, we’ll look at what cross-sectional studies are, how it applies to your research and how to use Formplus to collect...

Acceptance Sampling: Meaning, Examples, When to Use

In this post, we will discuss extensively what acceptance sampling is and when it is applied.

Formplus - For Seamless Data Collection

Collect data the right way with a versatile data collection tool. try formplus and transform your work productivity today..

Root out friction in every digital experience, super-charge conversion rates, and optimize digital self-service

Uncover insights from any interaction, deliver AI-powered agent coaching, and reduce cost to serve

Increase revenue and loyalty with real-time insights and recommendations delivered to teams on the ground

Know how your people feel and empower managers to improve employee engagement, productivity, and retention

Take action in the moments that matter most along the employee journey and drive bottom line growth

Whatever they’re are saying, wherever they’re saying it, know exactly what’s going on with your people

Get faster, richer insights with qual and quant tools that make powerful market research available to everyone

Run concept tests, pricing studies, prototyping + more with fast, powerful studies designed by UX research experts

Track your brand performance 24/7 and act quickly to respond to opportunities and challenges in your market

Explore the platform powering Experience Management

  • Free Account
  • For Digital
  • For Customer Care
  • For Human Resources
  • For Researchers
  • Financial Services
  • All Industries

Popular Use Cases

  • Customer Experience
  • Employee Experience
  • Employee Exit Interviews
  • Net Promoter Score
  • Voice of Customer
  • Customer Success Hub
  • Product Documentation
  • Training & Certification
  • XM Institute
  • Popular Resources
  • Customer Stories

Market Research

  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Partnerships
  • Marketplace

The annual gathering of the experience leaders at the world’s iconic brands building breakthrough business results, live in Salt Lake City.

  • English/AU & NZ
  • Español/Europa
  • Español/América Latina
  • Português Brasileiro
  • REQUEST DEMO
  • Experience Management
  • Descriptive Research

Try Qualtrics for free

Descriptive research: what it is and how to use it.

8 min read Understanding the who, what and where of a situation or target group is an essential part of effective research and making informed business decisions.

For example you might want to understand what percentage of CEOs have a bachelor’s degree or higher. Or you might want to understand what percentage of low income families receive government support – or what kind of support they receive.

Descriptive research is what will be used in these types of studies.

In this guide we’ll look through the main issues relating to descriptive research to give you a better understanding of what it is, and how and why you can use it.

Free eBook: 2024 global market research trends report

What is descriptive research?

Descriptive research is a research method used to try and determine the characteristics of a population or particular phenomenon.

Using descriptive research you can identify patterns in the characteristics of a group to essentially establish everything you need to understand apart from why something has happened.

Market researchers use descriptive research for a range of commercial purposes to guide key decisions.

For example you could use descriptive research to understand fashion trends in a given city when planning your clothing collection for the year. Using descriptive research you can conduct in depth analysis on the demographic makeup of your target area and use the data analysis to establish buying patterns.

Conducting descriptive research wouldn’t, however, tell you why shoppers are buying a particular type of fashion item.

Descriptive research design

Descriptive research design uses a range of both qualitative research and quantitative data (although quantitative research is the primary research method) to gather information to make accurate predictions about a particular problem or hypothesis.

As a survey method, descriptive research designs will help researchers identify characteristics in their target market or particular population.

These characteristics in the population sample can be identified, observed and measured to guide decisions.

Descriptive research characteristics

While there are a number of descriptive research methods you can deploy for data collection, descriptive research does have a number of predictable characteristics.

Here are a few of the things to consider:

Measure data trends with statistical outcomes

Descriptive research is often popular for survey research because it generates answers in a statistical form, which makes it easy for researchers to carry out a simple statistical analysis to interpret what the data is saying.

Descriptive research design is ideal for further research

Because the data collection for descriptive research produces statistical outcomes, it can also be used as secondary data for another research study.

Plus, the data collected from descriptive research can be subjected to other types of data analysis .

Uncontrolled variables

A key component of the descriptive research method is that it uses random variables that are not controlled by the researchers. This is because descriptive research aims to understand the natural behavior of the research subject.

It’s carried out in a natural environment

Descriptive research is often carried out in a natural environment. This is because researchers aim to gather data in a natural setting to avoid swaying respondents.

Data can be gathered using survey questions or online surveys.

For example, if you want to understand the fashion trends we mentioned earlier, you would set up a study in which a researcher observes people in the respondent’s natural environment to understand their habits and preferences.

Descriptive research allows for cross sectional study

Because of the nature of descriptive research design and the randomness of the sample group being observed, descriptive research is ideal for cross sectional studies – essentially the demographics of the group can vary widely and your aim is to gain insights from within the group.

This can be highly beneficial when you’re looking to understand the behaviors or preferences of a wider population.

Descriptive research advantages

There are many advantages to using descriptive research, some of them include:

Cost effectiveness

Because the elements needed for descriptive research design are not specific or highly targeted (and occur within the respondent’s natural environment) this type of study is relatively cheap to carry out.

Multiple types of data can be collected

A big advantage of this research type, is that you can use it to collect both quantitative and qualitative data. This means you can use the stats gathered to easily identify underlying patterns in your respondents’ behavior.

Descriptive research disadvantages

Potential reliability issues.

When conducting descriptive research it’s important that the initial survey questions are properly formulated.

If not, it could make the answers unreliable and risk the credibility of your study.

Potential limitations

As we’ve mentioned, descriptive research design is ideal for understanding the what, who or where of a situation or phenomenon.

However, it can’t help you understand the cause or effect of the behavior. This means you’ll need to conduct further research to get a more complete picture of a situation.

Descriptive research methods

Because descriptive research methods include a range of quantitative and qualitative research, there are several research methods you can use.

Use case studies

Case studies in descriptive research involve conducting in-depth and detailed studies in which researchers get a specific person or case to answer questions.

Case studies shouldn’t be used to generate results, rather it should be used to build or establish hypothesis that you can expand into further market research .

For example you could gather detailed data about a specific business phenomenon, and then use this deeper understanding of that specific case.

Use observational methods

This type of study uses qualitative observations to understand human behavior within a particular group.

By understanding how the different demographics respond within your sample you can identify patterns and trends.

As an observational method, descriptive research will not tell you the cause of any particular behaviors, but that could be established with further research.

Use survey research

Surveys are one of the most cost effective ways to gather descriptive data.

An online survey or questionnaire can be used in descriptive studies to gather quantitative information about a particular problem.

Survey research is ideal if you’re using descriptive research as your primary research.

Descriptive research examples

Descriptive research is used for a number of commercial purposes or when organizations need to understand the behaviors or opinions of a population.

One of the biggest examples of descriptive research that is used in every democratic country, is during elections.

Using descriptive research, researchers will use surveys to understand who voters are more likely to choose out of the parties or candidates available.

Using the data provided, researchers can analyze the data to understand what the election result will be.

In a commercial setting, retailers often use descriptive research to figure out trends in shopping and buying decisions.

By gathering information on the habits of shoppers, retailers can get a better understanding of the purchases being made.

Another example that is widely used around the world, is the national census that takes place to understand the population.

The research will provide a more accurate picture of a population’s demographic makeup and help to understand changes over time in areas like population age, health and education level.

Where Qualtrics helps with descriptive research

Whatever type of research you want to carry out, there’s a survey type that will work.

Qualtrics can help you determine the appropriate method and ensure you design a study that will deliver the insights you need.

Our experts can help you with your market research needs , ensuring you get the most out of Qualtrics market research software to design, launch and analyze your data to guide better, more accurate decisions for your organization.

Related resources

Market intelligence 10 min read, marketing insights 11 min read, ethnographic research 11 min read, qualitative vs quantitative research 13 min read, qualitative research questions 11 min read, qualitative research design 12 min read, primary vs secondary research 14 min read, request demo.

Ready to learn more about Qualtrics?

Book cover

Introduction to Nutrition and Health Research pp 219–248 Cite as

Descriptive Research and Qualitative Research

  • Eunsook T. Koh 2 &
  • Willis L. Owen 2  

877 Accesses

18 Citations

Descriptive research is a study of status and is widely used in education, nutrition, epidemiology, and the behavioral sciences. Its value is based on the premise that problems can be solved and practices improved through observation, analysis, and description. The most common descriptive research method is the survey, which includes questionnaires, personal interviews, phone surveys, and normative surveys. Developmental research is also descriptive. Through cross-sectional and longitudinal studies, researchers investigate the interaction of diet (e.g., fat and its sources, fiber and its sources, etc.) and life styles (e.g., smoking, alcohol drinking, etc.) and of disease (e.g., cancer, coronary heart disease) development. Observational research and correlational studies constitute other forms of descriptive research. Correlational studies determine and analyze relationships between variables as well as generate predictions. Descriptive research generates data, both qualitative and quantitative, that define the state of nature at a point in time. This chapter discusses some characteristics and basic procedures of the various types of descriptive research.

  • Qualitative Research
  • Personal Interview
  • Food Record
  • Nutrition Survey

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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

Buying options

  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
  • Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Unable to display preview.  Download preview PDF.

Achterberg C. Qualitative methods in nutritional education evaluation research. J Nutr Educ 1988; 20: 244

Article   Google Scholar  

Agar, M.H. The Professional Stranger: an Informal Introduction to Ethnography. Academic Press, New York: Academic Press 1980.

Google Scholar  

Amstrong B., Doll R. Environmental factors and cancer incidence and mortality in different countries, with special reference to dietary practices. Int J Cancer, 1975; 15:617–631

Bang H.O., Dyerberg J., Hjorne, N. The composition of food consumed by Greenland Eskimos. Acta Med Scand 1976; 200: 69–75

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Bailey, K.D. Methods of Social Research. New York: Free Press, Macmillan Publishing Co, Inc, 1978.

Beal V.A. The nutritional history in longitudinal research. J Am Dietet A 1967; 51: 526–531

Berdie D.R. Questionnaire length and response rate. J Appl Psychol 1973; 58:278–280

Berdie, D.R., Anderson J.F., Niebuhr, M.A. Questionnaires: Design and Use. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarescrow Press, 1986.

Buell P. Changing incidence of breast cancer in Japanese-American women. JNCI 1973; 51:1479–1483

CAS   Google Scholar  

Dyberg J., Bang H.O., Hjorne N. Fatty acid composition of the plasma lipids in Greenland Eskimos. Am J Clin Nutr 1975; 28: 958–961

Frank G. Life history model of adaptation to disability: the case of a congenital amputee. Soc Sci Med 1984; 19: 639–645

Fetterman, D.L. “A Walk Through the Wilderness: Learning to Find Your Way.” In Experiencing Fieldwork: An Inside View of Qualitative Research. Shaffir, W., Stebbins, R. eds. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1991.

Fieldhouse, P. Food & Nutrition: Customs & Culture. New York: Croom Helm, 1986

Fielding, N.G., Fielding, J.L. Linking Data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1986.

Firestone W.A. Meaning in method: The rhetoric of quantitative and qualitative research. Educational Researcher 1987; 16:16–21

Geertz, C. The interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books, 1973.

Glaser B.G., Strauss, A.L. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York: Aldine Publishing Co, 1967.

Goldberger, J.E. Goldberger on Pellagra. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 1964.

Greer J.G. What do open-ended questions measure? Public Opinion Quart 1988; 52:365–371

Gordis, L. Epidemiology. Philadelphia PA: Saunders, 1996.

Hammersley, M., Atkinson, P. Ethnography: Principles in Practice. London: Tavistock, 1983.

Headland, T.N., Pike, K.L., Harris, M. Emics and Etics: The Insider/Outsider Debate. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1990.

Hodge, R., Kress, G. Social Semiotics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1988.

Holbrook J.T., Patterson K.Y., Bodner J.E., Douglas L.W., Veillon C., Kelsey J.L. Mertz W, Smith J.C. Sodium and potassium intake and balance in adults consuming self selected diets. Am J Clin Nutr 1984; 40: 786–793

Human Nutrition Information Service, US Department of Agriculture, Food Consumption: Households in the United States, Spring 1977, Washington, D.E.: Government Printing Office, Publication H-1, 1982.

ICNND (International Committee on Nutrition for National Defense) Manual for Nutrition Surveys. Second edition. Superintendent of Documents. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963

Jacob E. Qualitative research traditions: A review. Rev Educ Res 1987; 57: 1–4

Jelliffe, D.B. The Assessment of the Nutritional Status of the Community. WHO Monograph 53. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1966.

Keys, A. Seven Countries: A Multivariate Analysis of Death and Corornary Heart Disease. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1980.

Kittler, P.G., Sucher, K. Food and Culture in America. New York: Reinhold, 1989.

Kirk, J., Miller, M.L. Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1986.

Koh E.T., Caples V. Nutrient intake of low-income, black families in Southwest Mississippi. J Am Dietet A 1979; 75:665–670

Kolonel, L.N., Hinds, M.W., Hankin, J.H. “Cancer Patterns Among Migrant and Native-Born Japanese in Hawaii in Relation to Smoking, Drinking, and Dietary Habits.” In Genetic and Environmental Factors in Experimental and Human Cancer. Gelboin, H.V. et al. eds. Tokyo, Japan: Science Press, 1980.

Kromann N., Green A. Epidemiological studies in the Upernavik district, Greenland: Incidence of some chronic disease 1950–1974. Acta Med Scand 1980; 401–405

Krueger, R. Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Rese arch. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1988.

Langness, L.L. Frank, G. Lives: An Anthropological Approach to Biography. Novato, CA: Chandler & Sharp, 1981.

Lind, J. (1753) A Treatise on the Scurvy. Reprinted Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1953.

Lock, L.F. “The Question of Quality in Qualitative Research.” In Proceedings of the 5th Measurement and Evaluation Symposium. Nelson, J.K. ed. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 1987.

Lofland, J., Lofland, L. Analyzing Social Settings: A Guide to Qualitative Research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1984.

Marshall, C; Rossman, G.B. Designing Qualitative Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1989.

Mauser, J.S., Kramer, S. Epidemiology — An Introductory Text. Philadelphia PA: Saunders, 1985.

McClendon M.J., O’Brien D.J. Question-order effects on the determinants of subjective well-being. Public Opinion Quart 1988; 52:351–364

McCraken, G. The Long Interview. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1988.

McMichael A.J., McCall M.G., Hartshorne J.M., Woodings T.L. Patterns of gastro-intestinal cancer in European migrants to Australia: The role of dietary changes. In J Cancer 1980; 25:431–437

Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M. Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods. (2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994.

Montgomery A.C., Crittenden K.S. Improving coding reliability for open-ended questions. Public Opinion Quart 1977; 41: 235–243

National Center for Health Statistics: Plan and Operation of the HANES. Vital and Health Statistics, Series 1, Nos 10a and 10b, DHEW Pub No (HSM) 73–130. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1973.

O’Brien T., Dugdale V. Questionnaire administration by computer. J Market Res Soc, 1978; 20:228–237

Okolo, E.N. Health Research Design and Methodology. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press 1990.

Parkin, D.M., Muir, C.S., Whelan, S.L., Gao, Y.T., Ferlay, J., Powell, J. Cancer Incidence in Five Continents VI IARC Sci Publ 120, Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 1992.

Peterkin B.B., Rizek R.L., Tippett K.S. Nationwide food consumption survey, 1987. Nutr Today 1988; 23:18–24

Poe G.S., Seeman I., McLaughlin J., Mehl E., Dietz M. Don’t know boxes in factual questions in a mail questionnaire: Effects on level and quality of response. Public Opinion Quart 1988; 52: 212–222

Poikolainen K., Karkkainen P. Nature of questionnaire options affects estimates of alcohol intake. J Stud Alcohol 1985; 46: 219–222

Potter, J.D. Food, Nutrition and the Prevention of Cancer: A Global Perspective. Washington, D.C.: American Institute for Cancer Research, 1997.

Rose, G.A., Blackburn, H. Cardiovascular Survey Methods. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization 1968.

Runcie, J.F. Experiencing Social Sresearch. Homewood, IL.: Dorsey Press, 1976.

Sandelowski, M. The Problem of Rigor in Qualitative Research. Adv Nurs Sci April 27–37, 1986.

Schutz R.W. Qualitative research: comments and controversies. Research Quarterly Exercise Sport, 1989; 60:30–35

Sheatsley, P.B. “Questionnaire Construction and Item Writing.” In Handbook of Survey Research. Rossi, P.H., Wright, J.D., Anderson, A.B. eds. Orlando, FL: Academic Press, 1983.

Sherry, B. “Epidemiologic Analytical Research.” In Research. Monsen, E.R. Chicago, IL: American Dietetic Association, 1992

Spradley, J. The Ethnographic Interview. Chicago, IL: Holtz, Rinehart & Winston, 1979.

Spradley, J.P. Participant Observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1980.

Sudman, S., Bradburn, N.M. Asking Questions: A Practical Guide to Questionnaire Design. (2nd ed.) Washington, D.C.: Jossey-Bass Publisher, 1983.

Taylor, S.J., Bogdan, R. Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods. (2nd ed.) New York: Wiley, 1984.

Thomas, J.R. Nelson, J.K. Research Methods in Physical Activity. (3rd ed.), Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1996.

Van Maanen, J. ed. Qualitative Methodology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1983.

Willett, W. Nutritional Epidemiology. (2nd ed.) New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Book   Google Scholar  

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, USA

Eunsook T. Koh & Willis L. Owen

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Koh, E.T., Owen, W.L. (2000). Descriptive Research and Qualitative Research. In: Introduction to Nutrition and Health Research. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1401-5_12

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1401-5_12

Publisher Name : Springer, Boston, MA

Print ISBN : 978-1-4613-5535-9

Online ISBN : 978-1-4615-1401-5

eBook Packages : Springer Book Archive

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

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

  • Knowledge Base
  • Methodology
  • Descriptive Research Design | Definition, Methods & Examples

Descriptive Research Design | Definition, Methods & Examples

Published on 5 May 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 10 October 2022.

Descriptive research aims to accurately and systematically describe a population, situation or phenomenon. It can answer what , where , when , and how   questions , but not why questions.

A descriptive research design can use a wide variety of research methods  to investigate one or more variables . Unlike in experimental research , the researcher does not control or manipulate any of the variables, but only observes and measures them.

Table of contents

When to use a descriptive research design, descriptive research methods.

Descriptive research is an appropriate choice when the research aim is to identify characteristics, frequencies, trends, and categories.

It is useful when not much is known yet about the topic or problem. Before you can research why something happens, you need to understand how, when, and where it happens.

  • How has the London housing market changed over the past 20 years?
  • Do customers of company X prefer product Y or product Z?
  • What are the main genetic, behavioural, and morphological differences between European wildcats and domestic cats?
  • What are the most popular online news sources among under-18s?
  • How prevalent is disease A in population B?

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Descriptive research is usually defined as a type of quantitative research , though qualitative research can also be used for descriptive purposes. The research design should be carefully developed to ensure that the results are valid and reliable .

Survey research allows you to gather large volumes of data that can be analysed for frequencies, averages, and patterns. Common uses of surveys include:

  • Describing the demographics of a country or region
  • Gauging public opinion on political and social topics
  • Evaluating satisfaction with a company’s products or an organisation’s services

Observations

Observations allow you to gather data on behaviours and phenomena without having to rely on the honesty and accuracy of respondents. This method is often used by psychological, social, and market researchers to understand how people act in real-life situations.

Observation of physical entities and phenomena is also an important part of research in the natural sciences. Before you can develop testable hypotheses , models, or theories, it’s necessary to observe and systematically describe the subject under investigation.

Case studies

A case study can be used to describe the characteristics of a specific subject (such as a person, group, event, or organisation). Instead of gathering a large volume of data to identify patterns across time or location, case studies gather detailed data to identify the characteristics of a narrowly defined subject.

Rather than aiming to describe generalisable facts, case studies often focus on unusual or interesting cases that challenge assumptions, add complexity, or reveal something new about a research problem .

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2022, October 10). Descriptive Research Design | Definition, Methods & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 25 March 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/descriptive-research-design/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, a quick guide to experimental design | 5 steps & examples, correlational research | guide, design & examples, qualitative vs quantitative research | examples & methods.

Child Care and Early Education Research Connections

Descriptive research studies.

Descriptive research is a type of research that is used to describe the characteristics of a population. It collects data that are used to answer a wide range of what, when, and how questions pertaining to a particular population or group. For example, descriptive studies might be used to answer questions such as: What percentage of Head Start teachers have a bachelor's degree or higher? What is the average reading ability of 5-year-olds when they first enter kindergarten? What kinds of math activities are used in early childhood programs? When do children first receive regular child care from someone other than their parents? When are children with developmental disabilities first diagnosed and when do they first receive services? What factors do programs consider when making decisions about the type of assessments that will be used to assess the skills of the children in their programs? How do the types of services children receive from their early childhood program change as children age?

Descriptive research does not answer questions about why a certain phenomenon occurs or what the causes are. Answers to such questions are best obtained from  randomized and quasi-experimental studies . However, data from descriptive studies can be used to examine the relationships (correlations) among variables. While the findings from correlational analyses are not evidence of causality, they can help to distinguish variables that may be important in explaining a phenomenon from those that are not. Thus, descriptive research is often used to generate hypotheses that should be tested using more rigorous designs.

A variety of data collection methods may be used alone or in combination to answer the types of questions guiding descriptive research. Some of the more common methods include surveys, interviews, observations, case studies, and portfolios. The data collected through these methods can be either quantitative or qualitative. Quantitative data are typically analyzed and presenting using  descriptive statistics . Using quantitative data, researchers may describe the characteristics of a sample or population in terms of percentages (e.g., percentage of population that belong to different racial/ethnic groups, percentage of low-income families that receive different government services) or averages (e.g., average household income, average scores of reading, mathematics and language assessments). Quantitative data, such as narrative data collected as part of a case study, may be used to organize, classify, and used to identify patterns of behaviors, attitudes, and other characteristics of groups.

Descriptive studies have an important role in early care and education research. Studies such as the  National Survey of Early Care and Education  and the  National Household Education Surveys Program  have greatly increased our knowledge of the supply of and demand for child care in the U.S. The  Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey  and the  Early Childhood Longitudinal Study Program  have provided researchers, policy makers and practitioners with rich information about school readiness skills of children in the U.S.

Each of the methods used to collect descriptive data have their own strengths and limitations. The following are some of the strengths and limitations of descriptive research studies in general.

Study participants are questioned or observed in a natural setting (e.g., their homes, child care or educational settings).

Study data can be used to identify the prevalence of particular problems and the need for new or additional services to address these problems.

Descriptive research may identify areas in need of additional research and relationships between variables that require future study. Descriptive research is often referred to as "hypothesis generating research."

Depending on the data collection method used, descriptive studies can generate rich datasets on large and diverse samples.

Limitations:

Descriptive studies cannot be used to establish cause and effect relationships.

Respondents may not be truthful when answering survey questions or may give socially desirable responses.

The choice and wording of questions on a questionnaire may influence the descriptive findings.

Depending on the type and size of sample, the findings may not be generalizable or produce an accurate description of the population of interest.

  • Privacy Policy

Buy Me a Coffee

Research Method

Home » Descriptive vs Experimental Research

Descriptive vs Experimental Research

Table of Contents

Descriptive vs Experimental Research

Descriptive research and experimental research are two different research approaches used in various fields, such as social sciences, psychology, and marketing. Their differences are as follows:

Descriptive Research

Descriptive Research is a research approach that involves collecting data to describe a phenomenon or group. The goal of descriptive research is to provide an accurate and detailed picture of a particular population, event, or situation. Descriptive research can be conducted using various methods, such as surveys, observations, and case studies.

Experimental Research

Experimental Research , on the other hand, is a research approach that involves manipulating one or more variables to observe the effect on another variable. The goal of experimental research is to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between the variables. Experimental research is typically conducted in a controlled environment and involves random assignment of participants to different groups to ensure that the groups are equivalent. The data is collected through measurements and observations, and statistical analysis is used to test the hypotheses.

Here’s a comparison table that highlights the differences between descriptive research and experimental research:

Also see Research Methods

About the author

' src=

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Inductive Vs Deductive Research

Inductive Vs Deductive Research

Exploratory Vs Explanatory Research

Exploratory Vs Explanatory Research

Basic Vs Applied Research

Basic Vs Applied Research

Generative Vs Evaluative Research

Generative Vs Evaluative Research

Reliability Vs Validity

Reliability Vs Validity

Longitudinal Vs Cross-Sectional Research

Longitudinal Vs Cross-Sectional Research

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

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

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

  • Publications
  • Account settings

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

  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • v.25(5); 2020 Aug

Logo of jrn

An overview of the qualitative descriptive design within nursing research

Louise doyle.

Associate Professor in Mental Health Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland

Catherine McCabe

Associate Professor in General Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland

Brian Keogh

Assistant Professor in Mental Health Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland

Annemarie Brady

Chair of Nursing and Chronic Illness, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland

Qualitative descriptive designs are common in nursing and healthcare research due to their inherent simplicity, flexibility and utility in diverse healthcare contexts. However, the application of descriptive research is sometimes critiqued in terms of scientific rigor. Inconsistency in decision making within the research process coupled with a lack of transparency has created issues of credibility for this type of approach. It can be difficult to clearly differentiate what constitutes a descriptive research design from the range of other methodologies at the disposal of qualitative researchers.

This paper provides an overview of qualitative descriptive research, orientates to the underlying philosophical perspectives and key characteristics that define this approach and identifies the implications for healthcare practice and policy.

Methods and results

Using real-world examples from healthcare research, the paper provides insight to the practical application of descriptive research at all stages of the design process and identifies the critical elements that should be explicit when applying this approach.

Conclusions

By adding to the existing knowledge base, this paper enhances the information available to researchers who wish to use the qualitative descriptive approach, influencing the standard of how this approach is employed in healthcare research.

Introduction

Qualitative descriptive approaches to nursing and healthcare research provide a broad insight into particular phenomena and can be used in a variety of ways including as a standalone research design, as a precursor to larger qualitative studies and commonly as the qualitative component in mixed-methods studies. Despite the widespread use of descriptive approaches within nursing research, there is limited methodological guidance about this type of design in research texts or papers. The lack of adequate representation in research texts has at times resulted in novice researchers using other more complex qualitative designs including grounded theory or phenomenology without meeting the requirements of these approaches ( Lambert and Lambert, 2012 ), or having an appropriate rationale for use of these approaches. This suggests there is a need to have more discussion about how and why descriptive approaches to qualitative research are used. This serves to not only provide information and guidance for researchers, but to ensure acceptable standards in how this approach is applied in healthcare research.

Rationale for qualitative descriptive research

The selection of an appropriate approach to answer research questions is one of the most important stages of the research process; consequently, there is a requirement that researchers can clearly articulate and defend their selection. Those who wish to undertake qualitative research have a range of approaches available to them including grounded theory, phenomenology and ethnography. However, these designs may not be the most suitable for studies that do not require a deeply theoretical context and aim to stay close to and describe participants’ experiences. The most frequently proposed rationale for the use of a descriptive approach to is to provide straightforward descriptions of experiences and perceptions ( Sandelowski, 2010 ), particularly in areas where little is known about the topic under investigation. A qualitative descriptive design may be deemed most appropriate as it recognises the subjective nature of the problem, the different experiences participants have and will present the findings in a way that directly reflects or closely resembles the terminology used in the initial research question ( Bradshaw et al., 2017 ). This is particularly relevant in nursing and healthcare research, which is commonly concerned with how patients experience illness and associated healthcare interventions. The utilisation of a qualitative descriptive approach is often encouraged in Master’s level nurse education programmes as it enables novice clinical nurse researchers explore important healthcare questions that have direct implications and impact for their specific healthcare setting (Colorafi and Evans, 2016). As a Master’s level project is often the first piece of primary research undertaken by nurses, the use of a qualitative descriptive design provides an excellent method to address important clinical issues where the focus is not on increasing theoretical or conceptual understanding, but rather contributing to change and quality improvement in the practice setting ( Chafe, 2017 ).

This design is also frequently used within mixed-methods studies where qualitative data can explain quantitative findings in explanatory studies, be used for questionnaire development in exploratory studies and validate and corroborate findings in convergent studies ( Doyle et al., 2016 ). There has also been an increase in the use of qualitative descriptive research embedded in large-scale healthcare intervention studies, which can serve a number of purposes including identifying participants’ perceptions of why an intervention worked or, just as importantly, did not work and how the intervention might be improved ( Doyle et al., 2016 ). Using qualitative descriptive research in this manner can help to make the findings of intervention studies more clinically meaningful.

Philosophical and theoretical influences

Qualitative descriptive research generates data that describe the ‘who, what, and where of events or experiences’ from a subjective perspective ( Kim et al., 2017 , p. 23). From a philosophical perspective, this approach to research is best aligned with constructionism and critical theories that use interpretative and naturalistic methods ( Lincoln et al., 2017 ). These philosophical perspectives represent the view that reality exists within various contexts that are dynamic and perceived differently depending on the subject, therefore, reality is multiple and subjective ( Lincoln et al., 2017 ). In qualitative descriptive research, this translates into researchers being concerned with understanding the individual human experience in its unique context. This type of inquiry requires flexible research processes that are inductive and dynamic but do not transform the data beyond recognition from the phenomenon being studied ( Ormston et al., 2014 ; Sandelwoski 2010). Descriptive qualitative research has also been aligned with pragmatism ( Neergaard et al., 2009 ) where decisions are made about how the research should be conducted based on the aims or objectives and context of the study ( Ormston et al., 2014 ). The pragmatist researcher is not aligned to one particular view of knowledge generation or one particular methodology. Instead they look to the concepts or phenomena being studied to guide decision making in the research process, facilitating the selection of the most appropriate methods to answer the research question ( Bishop, 2015 ).

Perhaps linked to the practical application of pragmatism to research, that is, applying the best methods to answer the research question, is the classification of qualitative descriptive research by Sandelowski ( 2010 , p. 82) into a ‘distributed residual category’. This recognises and incorporates uncertainty about the phenomena being studied and the research methods used to study them. For researchers, it permits the use of one or more different types of inquiry, which is essential when acknowledging and exploring different realities and subjective experiences in relation to phenomena ( Long et al., 2018 ). Clarity, in terms of the rationale for the phenomenon being studied and the methods used by the researcher, emerges from the qualitative descriptive approach because the data gathered continue to remain close to the phenomenon throughout the study ( Sandelowski, 2010 ). For this to happen a flexible approach is required and this is evident in the practice of ‘borrowing’ elements of other qualitative methodologies such as grounded theory, phenomenology and ethnography ( Vaismoradi et al., 2013 ).

Regarded as a positive aspect by many researchers who are interested in studying human nature and phenomenon, others believe this flexibility leads to inconsistency across studies and in some cases complacency by researchers. This can result in vague or unexplained decision making around the research process and subsequent lack of credibility. Accordingly, nurse researchers need to be reflexive, that is, clear about their role and position in terms of the phenomena being studied, the context, the theoretical framework and all decision-making processes used in a qualitative descriptive study. This adds credibility to both the study and qualitative descriptive research.

Methods in qualitative descriptive research

As with any research study, the application of descriptive methods will emerge in response to the aims and objectives, which will influence the sampling, data collection and analysis phases of the study.

Most qualitative research aligns itself with non-probability sampling and descriptive research is no different. Descriptive research generally uses purposive sampling and a range of purposive sampling techniques have been described ( Palinkas et al., 2015 ). Many researchers use a combination of approaches such as convenience, opportunistic or snowball sampling as part of the sampling framework, which is determined by the desired sample and the phenomena being studied.

Purposive sampling refers to selecting research participants that can speak to the research aims and who have knowledge and experience of the phenomenon under scrutiny ( Ritchie et al., 2014 ). When purposive sampling is used in a study it delimits and narrows the study population; however, researchers need to remember that other characteristics of the sample will also affect the population, such as the location of the researcher and their flexibility to recruit participants from beyond their base. In addition, the heterogeneity of the population will need to be considered and how this might influence sampling and subsequent data collection and analysis ( Palinkas et al ., 2015 ). Take, for example, conducting research on the experience of caring for people with Alzheimer’s disease (AD). For the most part AD is a condition that affects older people and experiences of participants caring for older people will ultimately dominate the sample. However, AD also affects younger people and how this will impact on sampling needs to be considered before recruitment as both groups will have very different experiences, although there will be overlap. Teddlie and Fu (2007) suggest that although some purposive sampling techniques generate representative cases, most result in describing contrasting cases, which they argue are at the heart of qualitative analysis. To achieve this, Sandelowski (2010) suggests that maximum variation sampling is particularly useful in qualitative descriptive research, which may acknowledge the range of experiences that exist especially in healthcare research. Palinkas et al . (2015) describe maximum variation sampling as identifying shared patterns that emerge from heterogeneity. In other words, researchers attempt to include a wide range of participants and experiences when collecting data. This may be more difficult to achieve in areas where little is known about the substantive area and may depend on the researcher’s knowledge and immersion within the subject area.

Sample size will also need to be considered and although small sample sizes are common in qualitative descriptive research, researchers need to be careful they have enough data collected to meet the study aims ( Ritchie et al., 2014 ). Pre-determining the sample size prior to data collection may stifle the analytic process, resulting in too much or too little data. Traditionally, the gold standard for sample size in qualitative research is data saturation, which differs depending on the research design and the size of the population ( Fusch and Ness, 2015 ). Data saturation is reached ‘when there is enough information to replicate the study, when the ability to obtain additional new information has been attained, and when further coding is no longer feasible’ ( Fusch and Ness, 2015 , p. 1408). However, some argue that although saturation is often reported, it is rarely demonstrated in qualitative descriptive research reports ( Caelli et al., 2003 ; Malterud et al., 2016 ). If data saturation is used to determine sample size, it is suggested that greater emphasis be placed on demonstrating how saturation was reached and at what level to provide more credibility to sample sizes ( Caelli et al., 2003 ). Sample size calculation should be an estimate until saturation has been achieved through the concurrent processes of data collection and analysis. Where saturation has not been achieved, or where sample size has been predetermined for resource reasons, this should be clearly acknowledged. However, there is also a movement away from the reliance on data saturation as a measure of sample size in qualitative research ( Malterud et al., 2016 ). O’Reilly and Parker (2012) question the appropriateness of the rigid application of saturation as a sample size measure arguing that outside of Grounded Theory, its use is inconsistent and at times questionable. Malterud et al. (2016) focus instead on the concept of ‘information power’ to determine sample size. Here, they suggest sample size is determined by the amount of information the sample holds relevant to the actual study rather than the number of participants ( Malterud et al., 2016 ). Some guidance on specific sample size depending on research design has been provided in the literature; however, these are sometimes conflicting and in some cases lack evidence to support their claims ( Guest et al., 2006 ). This is further complicated by the range of qualitative designs and data collection approaches available.

Data collection

Data collection methods in qualitative descriptive research are diverse and aim to discover the who, what and where of phenomena ( Sandelowski, 2000 ). Although semi-structured individual face-to-face interviews are the most commonly used data collection approaches ( Kim et al ., 2017 ), focus groups, telephone interviews and online approaches are also used.

Focus groups involve people with similar characteristics coming together in a relaxed and permissive environment to share their thoughts, experiences and insights ( Krueger and Casey, 2009 ). Participants share their own views and experiences, but also listen to and reflect on the experiences of other group members. It is this synergistic process of interacting with other group members that refines individuals’ viewpoints to a deeper and more considered level and produces data and insights that would not be accessible without the interaction found in a group (Finch et al., 2014). Telephone interviews and online approaches are gaining more traction as they offer greater flexibility and reduced costs for researchers and ease of access for participants. In addition, they may help to achieve maximum variation sampling or examine experiences from a national or international perspective. Face-to-face interviews are often perceived as more appropriate than telephone interviews; however, this assumption has been challenged as evidence to support the use of telephone interviews emerges ( Ward et al., 2015 ). Online data collection also offers the opportunity to collect synchronous and asynchronous data using instant messaging and other online media ( Hooley et al., 2011 ). Online interviews or focus groups conducted via Skype or other media may overcome some of the limitations of telephone interviews, although observation of non-verbal communication may be more difficult to achieve ( Janghorban et al., 2014 ). Open-ended free-text responses in surveys have also been identified as useful data sources in qualitative descriptive studies ( Kim et al . , 2017 ) and in particular the use of online open-ended questions, which can have a large geographical reach ( Seixas et al., 2018 ). Observation is also cited as an approach to data collection in qualitative descriptive research ( Sandelowski, 2000 ; Lambert and Lambert, 2012 ); however, in a systematic review examining the characteristics of qualitative research studies, observation was cited as an additional source of data and was not used as a primary source of data collection ( Kim et al. , 2017 ).

Data analysis and interpretation

According to Lambert and Lambert (2012) , data analysis in qualitative descriptive research is data driven and does not use an approach that has emerged from a pre-existing philosophical or epistemological perspective. Within qualitative descriptive research, it is important analysis is kept at a level at which those to whom the research pertains are easily able to understand and so can use the findings in healthcare practice ( Chafe, 2017 ). The approach to analysis is dictated by the aims of the research and as qualitative descriptive research is generally explorative, inductive approaches will commonly need to be applied although deductive approaches can also be used ( Kim et al . , 2017 ).

Content and thematic analyses are the most commonly used data analysis techniques in qualitative descriptive research. Vaismoradi et al . (2013) argue that content and thematic analysis, although poorly understood and unevenly applied, offer legitimate ways of a lower level of interpretation that is often required in qualitative descriptive research. Sandelowski (2000) indicated that qualitative content analysis is the approach of choice in descriptive research; however, confusion exists between content and thematic analysis, which sometimes means researchers use a combination of the two. Vaismoradi et al. (2013) argue there are differences between the two and that content analysis allows the researchers to analyse the data qualitatively as well as being able to quantify the data whereas thematic analysis provides a purely qualitative account of the data that is richer and more detailed. Decisions to use one over the other will depend on the aims of the study, which will dictate the depth of analysis required. Although there is a range of analysis guidelines available, they share some characteristics and an overview of these, derived from some key texts ( Sandleowski, 2010 ; Braun and Clark, 2006 ; Newell and Burnard, 2006), is presented in Table 1 . Central to these guidelines is an attempt by the researcher to immerse themselves in the data and the ability to demonstrate a consistent and systematic approach to the analysis.

Common characteristics of descriptive qualitative analysis.

Coding in qualitative descriptive research can be inductive and emerge from the data, or a priori where they are based on a pre-determined template as in template analysis. Inductive codes can be ‘in vivo’ where the researcher uses the words or concepts as stated by the participants ( Howitt, 2019 ), or can be named by the researcher and grouped together to form emerging themes or categories through an iterative systematic process until the final themes emerge. Template analysis involves designing a coding template, which is designed inductively from a subset of the data and then applied to all the data and refined as appropriate ( King, 2012 ). It offers a standardised approach that may be useful when several researchers are involved in the analysis process.

Within qualitative research studies generally, the analysis of data and subsequent presentation of research findings can range from studies with a relatively minimal amount of interpretation to those with high levels of interpretation ( Sandelowski and Barroso, 2003 ). The degree of interpretation required in qualitative descriptive research is contentious. Sandelowski (2010) argues that although descriptive research produces findings that are ‘data-near’, they are nevertheless interpretative. Sandelowski (2010) reports that a common misconception in qualitative descriptive designs is that researchers do not need to include any level of analysis and interpretation and can rely solely on indiscriminately selecting direct quotations from participants to answer the research question(s). Although it is important to ensure those familiar with the topic under investigation can recognise their experiences in the description of it ( Kim et al . , 2017 ), this is not to say that there should be no transformation of data. Researchers using a qualitative descriptive design need to, through data analysis, move from un-interpreted participant quotations to interpreted research findings, which can still remain ‘data-near’ ( Sandeklwoski, 2010 ). Willis et al. (2016) suggest that researchers using the qualitative descriptive method might report a comprehensive thematic summary as findings, which moves beyond individual participant reports by developing an interpretation of a common theme. The extent of description and/or interpretation in a qualitative descriptive study is ultimately determined by the focus of the study (Neergard et al ., 2009).

As with any research design, ensuring the rigor or trustworthiness of findings from a qualitative descriptive study is crucial. For a more detailed consideration of the quality criteria in qualitative studies, readers are referred to the seminal work of Lincoln and Guba (1985) in which the four key criteria of credibility, dependability, confirmability and transferability are discussed. At the very least, researchers need to be clear about the methodological decisions taken during the study so readers can judge the trustworthiness of the study and ultimately the findings ( Hallberg, 2013 ). Being aware of personal assumptions and the role they play in the research process is also an important quality criterion (Colorafi and Evans, 2016) and these assumptions can be made explicit through the use of researcher reflexivity in the study ( Bradshaw et al., 2017 ).

Challenges in using a qualitative descriptive design

One of the challenges of utilising a qualitative descriptive design is responding to the charge that many qualitative designs have historically encountered, which is that qualitative designs lack the scientific rigor associated with quantitative approaches ( Vaismoradi et al . , 2013 ). The descriptive design faces further critique in this regard as, unlike other qualitative approaches such as phenomenology or grounded theory, it is not theory driven or oriented ( Neergaard et al ., 2009 ). However, it is suggested that this perceived limitation of qualitative descriptive research only holds true if it is used for the wrong purposes and not primarily for describing the phenomenon ( Neergaard et al ., 2009 ). Kahlke (2014) argues that rather than being atheoretical, qualitative descriptive approaches require researchers to consider to what extent theory will inform the study and are sufficiently flexible to leave space for researchers to utilise theoretical frameworks that are relevant and inform individual research studies. Kim et al. (2017) reported that most descriptive studies reviewed did not identify a theoretical or philosophical framework, but those that did used it to inform the development of either the interview guide or the data analysis framework, thereby identifying the potential use of theory in descriptive designs.

Another challenge around the use of qualitative descriptive research is that it can erroneously be seen as a ‘quick fix’ for researchers who want to employ qualitative methods, but perhaps lack the expertise or familiarity with qualitative research ( Sandelowski, 2010 ). Kim et al. (2017) report how in their review fewer than half of qualitative descriptive papers explicitly identified a rationale for choosing this design, suggesting that in some cases the rationale behind its use was ill considered. Providing a justification for choosing a particular research design is an important part of the research process and, in the case of qualitative descriptive research, a clear justification can offset concerns that a descriptive design was an expedient rather than a measured choice. For studies exploring participants’ experiences, which could be addressed using other qualitative designs, it also helps to clearly make a distinction as to why a descriptive design was the best choice for the research study ( Kim et al ., 2017 ). Similarly, there is a perception that the data analysis techniques most commonly associated with descriptive research – thematic and content analysis are the ‘easiest’ approaches to qualitative analysis; however, as Vaismoradi et al . (2013) suggest, this does not mean they produce low-quality research findings.

As previously identified, a further challenge with the use of qualitative descriptive methods is that as a research design it has limited visibility in research texts and methodological papers ( Kim et al ., 2017 ). This means that novice qualitative researchers have little guidance on how to design and implement a descriptive study as there is a lack of a ‘methodological rulebook’ to guide researchers ( Kahlke, 2014 ). It is also suggested that this lack of strict boundaries and rules around qualitative descriptive research also offers researchers flexibility to design a study using a variety of data collection and analysis approaches that best answer the research question ( Kahlke, 2014 ; Kim et al . , 2017 ). However, should researchers choose to integrate methods ‘borrowed’ from other qualitative designs such as phenomenology or grounded theory, they should do so with the caveat that they do not claim they are using designs they are not actually using ( Neergaard et al . , 2009 ).

Examples of the use of qualitative descriptive research in healthcare

Findings from qualitative descriptive studies within healthcare have the potential to describe the experiences of patients, families and health providers, inform the development of health interventions and policy and promote health and quality of life ( Neergaard et al ., 2009 ; Willis et al ., 2016 ). The examples provided here demonstrate different ways qualitative descriptive methods can be used in a range of healthcare settings.

Simon et al. (2015) used a qualitative descriptive design to identify the perspectives of seriously ill, older patients and their families on the barriers and facilitators to advance care planning. The authors provided a rationale for using a descriptive design, which was to gain a deeper understanding of the phenomenon under investigation. Data were gathered through nine open-ended questions on a researcher-administered questionnaire. Responses to all questions were recorded verbatim and transcribed. Using descriptive, interpretative and explanatory coding that transformed raw data recorded from 278 patients and 225 family members to more abstract ideas and concepts ( Simon et al. , 2015 ), a deeper understanding of the barriers and facilitators to advance care planning was developed. Three categories were developed that identified personal beliefs, access to doctors and interaction with doctors as the central barriers and facilitators to advance care planning. The use of a qualitative descriptive design facilitated the development of a schematic based on these three themes, which provides a framework for use by clinicians to guide improvement in advance care planning.

Focus group interviews are a common data collection method in qualitative descriptive studies and were the method of choice in a study by Pelentsov et al. (2015), which sought to identify the supportive care needs of parents whose child has a rare disease. The rationale provided for using a qualitative descriptive design was to obtain a ‘straight description of the phenomena’ and to provide analysis and interpretation of the findings that remained data-near and representative of the responses of participants. In this study, four semi-structured focus group interviews were conducted with 23 parents. The data from these focus groups were then subjected to a form of thematic analysis during which emerging theories and inferences were identified and organised into a series of thematic networks and ultimately into three global themes. These themes identified that a number of factors including social isolation and lack of knowledge on behalf of healthcare professionals significantly affected how supported parents felt. Identifying key areas of the supportive needs of parents using qualitative description provides direction to health professionals on how best to respond to and support parents of children with a rare disease.

The potential for findings from a qualitative descriptive study to impact on policy was identified in a study by Syme et al. (2016) , who noted a lack of guidance and policies around sexual expression management of residents in long-term care settings. In this study, 20 directors of nursing from long-term care settings were interviewed with a view to identifying challenges in addressing sexual expression in these settings and elicit their recommendations for addressing these challenges in practice and policy. Following thematic analysis, findings relating to what directors of nursing believed to be important components of policy to address sexual expression were identified. These included providing educational resources, having a person-centred care delivery model when responding to sexual expression and providing guidance when working with families. Findings from this qualitative descriptive study provide recommendations that can then feed in to a broader policy on sexual expression in long-term care settings.

The final example of the use of a qualitative descriptive study comes from a mixed-methods study comprising a randomised control trial and a qualitative process evaluation. He et al. (2015) sought to determine the effects of a play intervention for children on parental perioperative anxiety and to explore parents’ perceptions of the intervention. Parents who had children going for surgery were assigned to a control group or an intervention group. The intervention group took part in a 1-hour play therapy session with their child whereas the control group received usual care. Quantitative findings identified there was no difference in parents’ anxiety levels between the intervention and control group. However, qualitative findings identified that parents found the intervention helpful in preparing both themselves and their child for surgery and perceived a reduction in their anxiety about the procedure thereby capturing findings that were not captured by the quantitative measures. In addition, in the qualitative interviews, parents made suggestions about how the play group could be improved, which provides important data for the further development of the intervention.

These examples across a range of healthcare settings provide evidence of the way findings from qualitative descriptive research can be directly used to more fully understand the experiences and perspectives of patients, their families and healthcare providers in addition to guiding future healthcare practice and informing further research.

Qualitative research designs have made significant contributions to the development of nursing and healthcare practices and policy. The utilisation of qualitative descriptive research is common within nursing research and is gaining popularity with other healthcare professions. This paper has identified that the utilisation of this design can be particularly relevant to nursing and healthcare professionals undertaking a primary piece of research and provides an excellent method to address issues that are of real clinical significance to them and their practice setting. However, the conundrum facing researchers who wish to use this approach is its lack of visibility and transparency within methodological papers and texts, resulting in a deficit of available information to researchers when designing such studies. By adding to the existing knowledge base, this paper enhances the information available to researchers who wish to use the qualitative descriptive approach, thus influencing the standard in how this approach is employed in healthcare research. We highlight the need for researchers using this research approach to clearly outline the context, theoretical framework and concepts underpinning it and the decision-making process that informed the design of their qualitative descriptive study including chosen research methods, and how these contribute to the achievement of the study’s aims and objectives. Failure to describe these issues may have a negative impact on study credibility. As seen in our paper, qualitative descriptive studies have a role in healthcare research providing insight into service users and providers’ perceptions and experiences of a particular phenomenon, which can inform healthcare service provision.

Key points for policy, practice and/or research

  • Despite its widespread use, there is little methodological guidance to orientate novice nurse researchers when using the qualitative descriptive design. This paper provides this guidance and champions the qualitative descriptive design as appropriate to explore research questions that require accessible and understandable findings directly relevant to healthcare practice and policy.
  • This paper identifies how the use of a qualitative descriptive design gives direct voice to participants including patients and healthcare staff, allowing exploration of issues of real and immediate importance in the practice area.
  • This paper reports how within qualitative descriptive research, the analysis of data and presentation of findings in a way that is easily understood and recognised is important to contribute to the utilisation of research findings in nursing practice.
  • As this design is often overlooked in research texts despite its suitability to exploring many healthcare questions, this paper adds to the limited methodological guidance and has utility for researchers who wish to defend their rationale for the use of the qualitative descriptive design in nursing and healthcare research.

Louise Doyle (PhD, MSc, BNS, RNT, RPN) is an Associate Professor in Mental Health Nursing at the School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin. Her research interests are in the area of self-harm and suicide and she has a particular interest and expertise in mixed-methods and qualitative research designs.

Catherine McCabe (PhD, MSc, BNS, RNT, RGN) is an Associate Professor in General Nursing at the School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin. Her research interests and expertise are in the areas of digital health (chronic disease self-management and social/cultural wellbeing), cancer, dementia, arts and health and systematic reviews.

Brian Keogh (PhD, MSc, BNS, RNT, RPN) is an Assistant Professor in Mental Health Nursing at the School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin. His main area of research interest is mental health recovery and he specialises in qualitative research approaches with a particular emphasis on grounded theory.

Annemarie Brady (PhD, MSc, BNS, RNT, RPN) is Chair of Nursing and Chronic Illness and Head of School of Nursing and Midwifery at Trinity College Dublin. Her research work has focused on the development of healthcare systems and workforce solutions to respond to increased chronic illness demands within healthcare. She has conducted a range of mixed-method research studies in collaboration with health service providers to examine issues around patient-related outcomes measures, workload measurement, work conditions, practice development, patient safety and competency among healthcare workers.

Margaret McCann (PhD, MSc, BNS, RNT, RGN) is an Assistant Professor in General Nursing at the School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin. Research interests are focused on chronic illness management, the use of digital health and smart technology in supporting patient/client education, self-management and independence. Other research interests include conducting systematic reviews, infection prevention and control and exploring patient outcomes linked to chronic kidney disease.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Ethical approval was not required for this paper as it is a methodological paper and does not report on participant data.

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Louise Doyle https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0153-8326

Margaret McCann https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7925-6396

  • Bishop FL. (2015) Using mixed methods in health research: Benefits and challenges . British Journal of Health Psychology 20 : 1–4. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Bradshaw C, Atkinson S, Doody O. (2017) Employing a qualitative description approach in health care research . Global Qualitative Nursing Research 4 : 1–8. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Braun V, Clarke V. (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology . Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 : 77–101. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Caelli K, Ray L, Mill J. (2003) ‘Clear as mud’: Toward greater clarity in generic qualitative research . International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2 : 1–13. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Chafe R. (2017) The Value of Qualitative Description in Health Services and Policy Research . Healthcare Policy 12 : 12–18. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Doyle L, Brady AM, Byrne G. (2016) An overview of mixed methods research–revisited . Journal of Research in Nursing 21 : 623–635. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Finch H, Lewis J, Turley C. Ritchie J, Lewis J, McNaughton Nicholls C, Ormston R. Focus Groups . Qualitative Research Practice. A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers , London: Sage, pp. 211–242. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Fusch PI, Ness LR. (2015) Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative research . The Qualitative Report 20 : 1408–1416. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Guest G, Bunce A, Johnson L. (2006) How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability . Field Methods 18 : 59–82. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Hallberg L. (2013) Quality criteria and generalization of results from qualitative studies . International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Health and Well-being 8 : 1. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • He HG, Zhu LX, Chan WCS, et al. (2015) A mixed-method study of effects of a therapeutic play intervention for children on parental anxiety and parents’ perceptions of the intervention . Journal of Advanced Nursing 71 ( 7 ): 1539–1551. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Hooley T, Wellens J, Marriott J. (2011) What is Online research? Using the Internet for Social Science Research , London: Bloomsbury Academic. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Howitt D. (2019) Introduction to Qualitative Methods in Psychology: Putting Theory into Practice , (4th edition). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Janghorban R, Roudsari RL, Taghipour A. (2014) Skype interviewing: The new generation of online synchronous interview in qualitative research . International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Wellbeing 9 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Kahlke RM. (2014) Generic qualitative approaches: Pitfalls and benefits of methodological mixology . International Journal of Qualitative Methods 13 : 37–52. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Kim H, Sefcik JS, Bradway C. (2017) Characteristics of qualitative descriptive studies: A systematic review . Research in Nursing & Health 40 : 23–42. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • King N. (2012) Doing Template Analysis . In: Symon G, Cassell C. (eds) Qualitative Organizational Research: Core Methods and Current Challenges , Los Angeles, CA: Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Krueger RA, Casey MA. (2009) Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research , 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Lambert VA, Lambert CE. (2012) Qualitative descriptive research: An acceptable design . Pacific Rim International Journal of Nursing Research 16 : 255–256. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Lincoln YS, Guba EG. (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry , Newbury Park, CA: Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Lincoln YS, Lynham SA, Guba EG. (2017) Paradigmatic Controversies, Contradictions and Emerging Confluences . In: NK Denzin, YS Guba (ed) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research , (5th edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Long KM, McDermott F, Meadows GN. (2018) Being pragmatic about healthcare complexity: Our experiences applying complexity theory and pragmatism to health services research . BMC Medicine 16 : 94. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Malterud K, Siersma VD, Guassora AD. (2016) Sample size in qualitative interview studies: Guided by information power . Qualitative Health Research 26 ( 13 ): 1753–1760. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Neergaard MA, Olesen F, Andersen RS, et al. (2009) Qualitative description – the poor cousin of health research? BMC Medical Research Methodology 9 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Newell R, Burnard P. (2011) Research for Evidence Based Practice , Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. [ Google Scholar ]
  • O’Reilly M, Parker N. (2012) ‘Unsatisfactory Saturation’: A critical exploration of the notion of saturated sample sizes in qualitative research . Qualitative Research 13 ( 2 ): 190–197. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Ormston R, Spencer L, Barnard M, et al. (2014) The foundations of qualitative research . In: Ritchie J, Lewis J, McNaughton Nicholls C, Ormston R. (eds) Qualitative Research Practice. A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers , London: Sage, pp. 1–25. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Palinkas LA, Horwitz SM, Green CA, et al. (2015) Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research . Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research 42 : 533–544. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Pelentsov LL, Fielder AL, Esterman AJ. (2016) The supportive care needs of parents with a child with a rare disease: A qualitative descriptive study . Journal of Pediatric Nursing 31 ( 3 ): e207–e218. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Ritchie J, Lewis J, Elam G, et al. (2014) Designing and selecting samples . In: Ritchie J, Lewis J, McNaughton Nicholls C, Ormston R. (eds) Qualitative Research Practice. A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers , London: Sage, pp. 111–145. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Sandelowski M. (2000) Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing & Health 23 : 334–340. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Sandelowski M. (2010) What’s in a name? Qualitative description revisited . Research in Nursing & Health 33 : 77–84. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Sandelowski M, Barroso J. (2003) Classifying the findings in qualitative studies . Qualitative Health Research 13 : 905–923. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Seixas BV, Smith N, Mitton C. (2018) The qualitative descriptive approach in international comparative studies: Using online qualitative surveys . International Journal of Health Policy Management 7 ( 9 ): 778–781. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Simon J, Porterfield P, Bouchal SR, et al. (2015) ‘Not yet’ and ‘just ask’: Barriers and facilitators to advance care planning – a qualitative descriptive study of the perspectives of seriously ill, older patients and their families . BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care 5 : 54–62. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Syme ML, Lichtenberg P, Moye J. (2016) Recommendations for sexual expression management in long-term care: A qualitative needs assessment . Journal of Advanced Nursing 72 ( 10 ): 2457–2467. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Teddlie C, Yu F. (2007) Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples . Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1 : 77–100. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Vaismoradi M, Turunen H, Bondas T. (2013) Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study . Nursing & Health Sciences 15 : 398–405. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Ward K, Gott M, Hoare K. (2015) Participants’ views of telephone interviews within a grounded theory study . Journal of Advanced Nursing 71 : 2775–2785. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Willis DG, Sullivan-Bolyai S, Knafl K, et al. (2016) Distinguishing features and similarities between descriptive phenomenological and qualitative descriptive research . Western Journal of Nursing Research 38 : 1185–1204. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]

Module 2: Research and Ethics in Abnormal Psychology

Descriptive research and case studies, learning objectives.

  • Explain the importance and uses of descriptive research, especially case studies, in studying abnormal behavior

Types of Research Methods

There are many research methods available to psychologists in their efforts to understand, describe, and explain behavior and the cognitive and biological processes that underlie it. Some methods rely on observational techniques. Other approaches involve interactions between the researcher and the individuals who are being studied—ranging from a series of simple questions; to extensive, in-depth interviews; to well-controlled experiments.

The three main categories of psychological research are descriptive, correlational, and experimental research. Research studies that do not test specific relationships between variables are called descriptive, or qualitative, studies . These studies are used to describe general or specific behaviors and attributes that are observed and measured. In the early stages of research, it might be difficult to form a hypothesis, especially when there is not any existing literature in the area. In these situations designing an experiment would be premature, as the question of interest is not yet clearly defined as a hypothesis. Often a researcher will begin with a non-experimental approach, such as a descriptive study, to gather more information about the topic before designing an experiment or correlational study to address a specific hypothesis. Descriptive research is distinct from correlational research , in which psychologists formally test whether a relationship exists between two or more variables. Experimental research goes a step further beyond descriptive and correlational research and randomly assigns people to different conditions, using hypothesis testing to make inferences about how these conditions affect behavior. It aims to determine if one variable directly impacts and causes another. Correlational and experimental research both typically use hypothesis testing, whereas descriptive research does not.

Each of these research methods has unique strengths and weaknesses, and each method may only be appropriate for certain types of research questions. For example, studies that rely primarily on observation produce incredible amounts of information, but the ability to apply this information to the larger population is somewhat limited because of small sample sizes. Survey research, on the other hand, allows researchers to easily collect data from relatively large samples. While surveys allow results to be generalized to the larger population more easily, the information that can be collected on any given survey is somewhat limited and subject to problems associated with any type of self-reported data. Some researchers conduct archival research by using existing records. While existing records can be a fairly inexpensive way to collect data that can provide insight into a number of research questions, researchers using this approach have no control on how or what kind of data was collected.

Correlational research can find a relationship between two variables, but the only way a researcher can claim that the relationship between the variables is cause and effect is to perform an experiment. In experimental research, which will be discussed later, there is a tremendous amount of control over variables of interest. While performing an experiment is a powerful approach, experiments are often conducted in very artificial settings, which calls into question the validity of experimental findings with regard to how they would apply in real-world settings. In addition, many of the questions that psychologists would like to answer cannot be pursued through experimental research because of ethical concerns.

The three main types of descriptive studies are case studies, naturalistic observation, and surveys.

Clinical or Case Studies

Psychologists can use a detailed description of one person or a small group based on careful observation.  Case studies  are intensive studies of individuals and have commonly been seen as a fruitful way to come up with hypotheses and generate theories. Case studies add descriptive richness. Case studies are also useful for formulating concepts, which are an important aspect of theory construction. Through fine-grained knowledge and description, case studies can fully specify the causal mechanisms in a way that may be harder in a large study.

Sigmund Freud   developed  many theories from case studies (Anna O., Little Hans, Wolf Man, Dora, etc.). F or example, he conducted a case study of a man, nicknamed “Rat Man,”  in which he claimed that this patient had been cured by psychoanalysis.  T he nickname derives from the fact that among the patient’s many compulsions, he had an obsession with nightmarish fantasies about rats. 

Today, more commonly, case studies reflect an up-close, in-depth, and detailed examination of an individual’s course of treatment. Case studies typically include a complete history of the subject’s background and response to treatment. From the particular client’s experience in therapy, the therapist’s goal is to provide information that may help other therapists who treat similar clients.

Case studies are generally a single-case design, but can also be a multiple-case design, where replication instead of sampling is the criterion for inclusion. Like other research methodologies within psychology, the case study must produce valid and reliable results in order to be useful for the development of future research. Distinct advantages and disadvantages are associated with the case study in psychology.

A commonly described limit of case studies is that they do not lend themselves to generalizability . The other issue is that the case study is subject to the bias of the researcher in terms of how the case is written, and that cases are chosen because they are consistent with the researcher’s preconceived notions, resulting in biased research. Another common problem in case study research is that of reconciling conflicting interpretations of the same case history.

Despite these limitations, there are advantages to using case studies. One major advantage of the case study in psychology is the potential for the development of novel hypotheses of the  cause of abnormal behavior   for later testing. Second, the case study can provide detailed descriptions of specific and rare cases and help us study unusual conditions that occur too infrequently to study with large sample sizes. The major disadvantage is that case studies cannot be used to determine causation, as is the case in experimental research, where the factors or variables hypothesized to play a causal role are manipulated or controlled by the researcher. 

Single-Case Experimental Designs

The lack of control available in the traditional case study research strategy led researchers to develop more sophisticated methods, such as single-subject research, which provides the statistical framework for making inferences from quantitative case-study data.

Pills

Figure 1 . Antipsychotics are the treatment of choice in managing schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders. Several major trials have been conducted examining the clinical difference between typical antipsychotics and atypical antipsychotics and how the selection may affect the quality of life.

The single-case experimental design  (sometimes called  single-participant research designs ), is particularly useful for studies of treatment effectiveness.  In  single-case experimental designs ,  the same  research participant  serves as the subject in both the experimental and control conditions.  One of the most common forms of the single-case experimental design is the A-B-A-B design, or  reversal design ,  reflecting the alternation between conditions, or phases A and B. The  AB design is a two-part or phase design composed of a baseline (“A” phase) with no changes, and a treatment or intervention (“B”) phase.  If there is a change, then the treatment may be said to have had an effect. However, it is subject to many possible competing hypotheses, making strong conclusions difficult. The A-B-A-B design, or reversal design, is a variant on the AB design. It introduces ways to control for the competing hypotheses and allows for stronger conclusions. T he reversal design (ABAB) is the most powerful of the single-subject research designs because it shows a strong reversal from baseline (“A”) to treatment (“B”) and back again. In an ABAB design, researchers observe behaviors in the “A” phase, institute treatment in the “B” phase, and then repeat the process. If the variable returns to baseline measure without treatment and then resumes its effects when reapplied, the researcher can have greater confidence in the efficacy of that treatment. However, many interventions cannot be reversed for ethical reasons (e.g., involving self-injurious behavior like smoking).  It may be unethical to end an experiment on a baseline measure if the treatment is self-sustaining and highly beneficial and/or related to health. Control condition participants may also deserve the benefits of research once all data has been collected. It is a researcher’s ethical duty to maximize benefits and to ensure that all participants have access to those benefits when possible.

File:A-B-A-B Design.png

Figure 2. The investigator looks for evidence that the change in the observed behavior occurred coincident with treatment. If the problem behavior declines whenever treatment is introduced (during the first and second treatment phases) but returns (is “reversed”) to baseline levels during the reversal phase, the experimenter can be reasonably confident the treatment had the intended effect.

Link to Learning: Famous Case Studies

Some well-known case studies that related to abnormal psychology include the following:

  • Harlow— Phineas Gage
  • Breuer & Freud (1895)— Anna O.
  • Cleckley’s case studies: on psychopathy ( The Mask of Sanity ) (1941) and multiple personality disorder ( The Three Faces of Eve ) (1957)
  • Freud and  Little Hans
  • Freud and the  Rat Man
  • John Money and the  John/Joan case
  • Genie (feral child)
  • Piaget’s studies
  • Rosenthal’s book on the  murder of Kitty Genovese
  • Washoe (sign language)
  • Patient H.M.

Naturalistic Observation

If you want to understand how behavior occurs, one of the best ways to gain information is to simply observe the behavior in its natural context. However, people might change their behavior in unexpected ways if they know they are being observed. How do researchers obtain accurate information when people tend to hide their natural behavior? As an example, imagine that your professor asks everyone in your class to raise their hand if they always wash their hands after using the restroom. Chances are that almost everyone in the classroom will raise their hand, but do you think hand washing after every trip to the restroom is really that universal?

This is very similar to the phenomenon mentioned earlier in this module: many individuals do not feel comfortable answering a question honestly. But if we are committed to finding out the facts about handwashing, we have other options available to us.

Suppose we send a researcher to a school playground to observe how aggressive or socially anxious children interact with peers. Will our observer blend into the playground environment by wearing a white lab coat, sitting with a clipboard, and staring at the swings? We want our researcher to be inconspicuous and unobtrusively positioned—perhaps pretending to be a school monitor while secretly recording the relevant information. This type of observational study is called naturalistic observation : observing behavior in its natural setting. To better understand peer exclusion, Suzanne Fanger collaborated with colleagues at the University of Texas to observe the behavior of preschool children on a playground. How did the observers remain inconspicuous over the duration of the study? They equipped a few of the children with wireless microphones (which the children quickly forgot about) and observed while taking notes from a distance. Also, the children in that particular preschool (a “laboratory preschool”) were accustomed to having observers on the playground (Fanger, Frankel, & Hazen, 2012).

woman in black leather jacket sitting on concrete bench

Figure 3 . In naturalistic observation, psychologists take their research into the streets, homes, restaurants, schools, and other settings where behavior can be directly observed.

It is critical that the observer be as unobtrusive and as inconspicuous as possible: when people know they are being watched, they are less likely to behave naturally. For example, psychologists have spent weeks observing the behavior of homeless people on the streets, in train stations, and bus terminals. They try to ensure that their naturalistic observations are unobtrusive, so as to minimize interference with the behavior they observe. Nevertheless, the presence of the observer may distort the behavior that is observed, and this must be taken into consideration (Figure 1).

The greatest benefit of naturalistic observation is the validity, or accuracy, of information collected unobtrusively in a natural setting. Having individuals behave as they normally would in a given situation means that we have a higher degree of ecological validity, or realism, than we might achieve with other research approaches. Therefore, our ability to generalize the findings of the research to real-world situations is enhanced. If done correctly, we need not worry about people modifying their behavior simply because they are being observed. Sometimes, people may assume that reality programs give us a glimpse into authentic human behavior. However, the principle of inconspicuous observation is violated as reality stars are followed by camera crews and are interviewed on camera for personal confessionals. Given that environment, we must doubt how natural and realistic their behaviors are.

The major downside of naturalistic observation is that they are often difficult to set up and control. Although something as simple as observation may seem like it would be a part of all research methods, participant observation is a distinct methodology that involves the researcher embedding themselves into a group in order to study its dynamics. For example, Festinger, Riecken, and Shacter (1956) were very interested in the psychology of a particular cult. However, this cult was very secretive and wouldn’t grant interviews to outside members. So, in order to study these people, Festinger and his colleagues pretended to be cult members, allowing them access to the behavior and psychology of the cult. Despite this example, it should be noted that the people being observed in a participant observation study usually know that the researcher is there to study them. [1]

Another potential problem in observational research is observer bias . Generally, people who act as observers are closely involved in the research project and may unconsciously skew their observations to fit their research goals or expectations. To protect against this type of bias, researchers should have clear criteria established for the types of behaviors recorded and how those behaviors should be classified. In addition, researchers often compare observations of the same event by multiple observers, in order to test inter-rater reliability : a measure of reliability that assesses the consistency of observations by different observers.

Often, psychologists develop surveys as a means of gathering data. Surveys are lists of questions to be answered by research participants, and can be delivered as paper-and-pencil questionnaires, administered electronically, or conducted verbally (Figure 3). Generally, the survey itself can be completed in a short time, and the ease of administering a survey makes it easy to collect data from a large number of people.

Surveys allow researchers to gather data from larger samples than may be afforded by other research methods . A sample is a subset of individuals selected from a population , which is the overall group of individuals that the researchers are interested in. Researchers study the sample and seek to generalize their findings to the population.

A sample online survey reads, “Dear visitor, your opinion is important to us. We would like to invite you to participate in a short survey to gather your opinions and feedback on your news consumption habits. The survey will take approximately 10-15 minutes. Simply click the “Yes” button below to launch the survey. Would you like to participate?” Two buttons are labeled “yes” and “no.”

Figure 4 . Surveys can be administered in a number of ways, including electronically administered research, like the survey shown here. (credit: Robert Nyman)

There is both strength and weakness in surveys when compared to case studies. By using surveys, we can collect information from a larger sample of people. A larger sample is better able to reflect the actual diversity of the population, thus allowing better generalizability. Therefore, if our sample is sufficiently large and diverse, we can assume that the data we collect from the survey can be generalized to the larger population with more certainty than the information collected through a case study. However, given the greater number of people involved, we are not able to collect the same depth of information on each person that would be collected in a case study.

Another potential weakness of surveys is something we touched on earlier in this module: people do not always give accurate responses. They may lie, misremember, or answer questions in a way that they think makes them look good. For example, people may report drinking less alcohol than is actually the case.

Any number of research questions can be answered through the use of surveys. One real-world example is the research conducted by Jenkins, Ruppel, Kizer, Yehl, and Griffin (2012) about the backlash against the U.S. Arab-American community following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Jenkins and colleagues wanted to determine to what extent these negative attitudes toward Arab-Americans still existed nearly a decade after the attacks occurred. In one study, 140 research participants filled out a survey with 10 questions, including questions asking directly about the participant’s overt prejudicial attitudes toward people of various ethnicities. The survey also asked indirect questions about how likely the participant would be to interact with a person of a given ethnicity in a variety of settings (such as, “How likely do you think it is that you would introduce yourself to a person of Arab-American descent?”). The results of the research suggested that participants were unwilling to report prejudicial attitudes toward any ethnic group. However, there were significant differences between their pattern of responses to questions about social interaction with Arab-Americans compared to other ethnic groups: they indicated less willingness for social interaction with Arab-Americans compared to the other ethnic groups. This suggested that the participants harbored subtle forms of prejudice against Arab-Americans, despite their assertions that this was not the case (Jenkins et al., 2012).

Think iT Over

Research has shown that parental depressive symptoms are linked to a number of negative child outcomes. A classmate of yours is interested in  the associations between parental depressive symptoms and actual child behaviors in everyday life [2] because this associations remains largely unknown. After reading this section, what do you think is the best way to better understand such associations? Which method might result in the most valid data?

A-B-A-B design:  an experimental design in which the a person is given treatment, or experimental condition (B), to compare against the baseline (A), and this repeats in order to determine effectiveness

clinical or case study:  observational research study focusing on one or a few people

correlational research:  tests whether a relationship exists between two or more variables

descriptive research:  research studies that do not test specific relationships between variables; they are used to describe general or specific behaviors and attributes that are observed and measured

experimental research:  tests a hypothesis to determine cause-and-effect relationships

generalizability:  inferring that the results for a sample apply to the larger population

inter-rater reliability:  measure of agreement among observers on how they record and classify a particular event

naturalistic observation:  observation of behavior in its natural setting

observer bias:  when observations may be skewed to align with observer expectations

population:  overall group of individuals that the researchers are interested in

sample:  subset of individuals selected from the larger population

single-case experimental design:   when the same  research participant  serves as the subject in both the experimental and control conditions

survey:  list of questions to be answered by research participants—given as paper-and-pencil questionnaires, administered electronically, or conducted verbally—allowing researchers to collect data from a large number of people

  • Scollon, C. N. (2020). Research designs. In R. Biswas-Diener & E. Diener (Eds), Noba textbook series: Psychology. Champaign, IL: DEF publishers. Retrieved from http://noba.to/acxb2thy ↵
  • Slatcher, R. B., & Trentacosta, C. J. (2011). A naturalistic observation study of the links between parental depressive symptoms and preschoolers' behaviors in everyday life. Journal of family psychology : JFP : journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43), 25(3), 444–448. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023728 ↵
  • Modification and adaptation. Authored by : Sonja Ann Miller for Lumen Learning. Provided by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
  • Approaches to Research. Authored by : OpenStax College. Located at : http://cnx.org/contents/[email protected]:iMyFZJzg@5/Approaches-to-Research . License : CC BY: Attribution . License Terms : Download for free at http://cnx.org/contents/[email protected]
  • Descriptive Research. Provided by : Boundless. Located at : https://www.boundless.com/psychology/textbooks/boundless-psychology-textbook/researching-psychology-2/types-of-research-studies-27/descriptive-research-124-12659/ . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
  • Case Study. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_study . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
  • Rat man. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_Man#Legacy . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
  • Case study in psychology. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_study_in_psychology . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
  • Research Designs. Authored by : Christie Napa Scollon. Provided by : Singapore Management University. Located at : https://nobaproject.com/modules/research-designs#reference-6 . Project : The Noba Project. License : CC BY-NC-SA: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike
  • Single subject design. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-subject_design . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
  • Single subject research. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-subject_research#A-B-A-B . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright
  • Pills. Authored by : qimono. Provided by : Pixabay. Located at : https://pixabay.com/illustrations/pill-capsule-medicine-medical-1884775/ . License : CC0: No Rights Reserved
  • ABAB Design. Authored by : Doc. Yu. Provided by : Wikimedia. Located at : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:A-B-A-B_Design.png . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike

Footer Logo Lumen Waymaker

Pediaa.Com

Home » Education » Difference Between Descriptive and Experimental Research

Difference Between Descriptive and Experimental Research

The main difference between descriptive and experimental research is that the descriptive research describes the characteristics of the study group or a certain occurrence while the experimental research manipulates the variables to arrive at conclusions.

Descriptive research and experimental research are two types of research people use when doing varied research studies. Both these research types have their own methods that facilitate the researcher to gain maximum outcomes.

Key Areas Covered

1. What is Descriptive Research      – Definition, Aim, Methods 2. What is Experimental Research      – Definition, Aim, Methods 3. What is the Difference Between Descriptive and Experimental Research       – Comparison of Key Differences

Descriptive Research, Experimental Research, Research

Difference Between Descriptive and Experimental Research - Comparison Summary

What is Descriptive Research

Descriptive research is a type of research that studies the participants that take part in the research or a certain situation. Descriptive research does not limit to either of quantitative or qualitative research methodologies, but instead, it uses elements of both, often within the same study. Therefore, a descriptive researcher often uses three major ways to collect and analyse the data. They are observations, case studies and surveys.

Descriptive studies are aimed at finding out “what is,” therefore, observational and survey methods are frequently used to collect descriptive data (Borg & Gall, 1989). Thus, the main focus of descriptive research is to answer the question ‘what’ with concern to the study group. Moreover, descriptive research, primarily concerned with finding out “what is,” that might be applied to investigate the particular study group or the situation. Therefore,  descriptive research does not give answers to the cause and effect of the particular occurrence that is studied. 

Difference Between Descriptive and Experimental Research

Therefore, descriptive research assists to make specific conclusions regarding situations such as marketing products according to the needs of the customers, to estimate the percentages of units in a specified population according to a certain behaviour, etc. Some examples of descriptive researches include population census and product marketing surveys.

What is Experimental Research?

Experimental research is the research study where the scientist actively influences something to observe the consequences. Experimental research uses manipulation and controlled testing to understand causal processes. Therefore, in this type of research, the researcher manipulates one given variable and controls the others to come to a conclusion.

This type of research typically includes a hypothesis, a variable that can be manipulated, measured, calculated and compared. Eventually, the collected data and results will either support or reject the hypothesis of the researcher. Therefore, one could call this research type as a true experiment.

Main Difference - Descriptive vs Experimental Research

In this research type, the researcher manipulates the independent variables such as treatment method and teaching methodology, and measures the impact it has on the dependent variables such as cure and student comprehension in order to establish a cause-effect relationship between these two variables. Therefore, this research type can answer the questions of cause, effect and results, thus, making it possible to make hypothetical assumptions based on the gathered data. Therefore, unlike descriptive research which answers’ what is’, experimental research answers the question ‘what if’. Therefore, usually, this type of research uses quantitative data collection methodology.

Evidently, this type of research is mostly conducted in a controlled environment, usually a laboratory. Experimental research is mostly used in sciences such as sociology and psychology, physics, chemistry, biology, medicine, etc.

Descriptive research is the type of research where characteristics of the study group or a certain occurrence are described while experimental research is the research type that manipulates variables to come to a conclusion. This is the main difference between descriptive and experimental research.

Descriptive research is useful in gathering data on a certain population or a specific occurrence while experimental research is useful in finding out the cause-effect of a causal relationship, correlation etc

The aim of the descriptive research is to describe the characteristics of the study group, thus answering the question ‘what is’ while the aim of the experimental research is to manipulate the given variables so as to support or reject the assumed hypothesis. Hence it answers the question ‘what if’.

Type of Studies

Descriptive research typically includes sociological and psychological studies while experimental research typically includes forensic studies, biological and other laboratory studies, etc.

Data Collection

Descriptive research uses both qualitative and quantitative methodologies while experimental research primarily uses quantitative methodology.

Descriptive and experimental research are two significant types of research. Both these research types are helpful in analysing certain occurrences and study groups. The main difference between descriptive and experimental research is that descriptive research describes the characteristics of the research subject while the experimental research manipulates the research subject or the variables to come to a conclusion. Similarly, descriptive research answers the question ‘what is’ while experimental research answers the question ‘what if’.

1. “Descriptive Research.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 19 June 2018, Available here . 2. “WHAT IS DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH?”, The Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technologies, Available here . 3. ” Descriptive Research Design: Definition, Examples & Types” Study.com, Available here . 4. “Experimental Research – A Guide to Scientific Experiments.” Observation Bias, Available here . 5. Wattoo, Shafqat. “Experimental Research.” LinkedIn SlideShare, 3 Feb. 2012, Available here .

Image Courtesy:

1. “Survey” (Public Domain) via PublicDomainPictures.net 2. “Experiment Pasteur English” By Carmel830 – Own work (Public Domain) via Commons Wikimedia

' src=

About the Author: Upen

Upen, BA (Honours) in Languages and Linguistics, has academic experiences and knowledge on international relations and politics. Her academic interests are English language, European and Oriental Languages, Internal Affairs and International Politics, and Psychology.

​You May Also Like These

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Correlational Research vs. Descriptive Research

What's the difference.

Correlational research and descriptive research are both methods used in scientific inquiry, but they differ in their objectives and approaches. Correlational research aims to examine the relationship between two or more variables and determine the strength and direction of their association. It seeks to establish whether a relationship exists, but it does not imply causation. On the other hand, descriptive research focuses on describing and documenting the characteristics or behaviors of a particular group or phenomenon. It aims to provide a detailed and accurate account of the subject under study, without attempting to establish relationships or causality. While correlational research explores connections between variables, descriptive research provides a comprehensive snapshot of a specific situation or group.

Further Detail

Introduction.

Research plays a crucial role in expanding our knowledge and understanding of various phenomena. Two common types of research methods used in social sciences are correlational research and descriptive research. While both approaches aim to gather information and provide insights, they differ in their objectives, designs, and data analysis techniques. In this article, we will explore the attributes of correlational research and descriptive research, highlighting their similarities and differences.

Correlational Research

Correlational research is a quantitative research method that aims to examine the relationship between two or more variables. It seeks to determine whether a relationship exists, the strength of the relationship, and the direction of the relationship. This type of research does not involve manipulating variables or establishing causality. Instead, it focuses on measuring and analyzing the degree of association between variables.

In correlational research, data is collected through surveys, questionnaires, observations, or existing datasets. Researchers use statistical techniques, such as correlation coefficients, to analyze the data and determine the strength and direction of the relationship. The results of correlational research can be presented in the form of scatter plots, correlation matrices, or regression analyses.

One of the key advantages of correlational research is its ability to explore relationships between variables that cannot be manipulated or controlled. For example, researchers can examine the relationship between smoking and lung cancer by collecting data from individuals without intervening in their behavior. Correlational research also allows for the examination of complex relationships involving multiple variables, providing a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon under investigation.

However, correlational research has limitations. It cannot establish causality, meaning that it cannot determine whether changes in one variable directly cause changes in another. Additionally, correlational research relies heavily on the quality and accuracy of the data collected. If the data is flawed or incomplete, the results may be misleading or inaccurate. Despite these limitations, correlational research remains a valuable tool for exploring relationships and generating hypotheses for further investigation.

Descriptive Research

Descriptive research, as the name suggests, aims to describe and document the characteristics, behaviors, or conditions of a particular population or phenomenon. It focuses on providing an accurate and detailed account of the subject under study without attempting to establish relationships or causality. Descriptive research is often used in the early stages of a research project to gain a better understanding of the topic or to generate hypotheses for further investigation.

Data in descriptive research is collected through various methods, including surveys, interviews, observations, or existing records. Researchers aim to collect comprehensive and representative data to ensure the accuracy and reliability of their findings. The collected data is then analyzed using descriptive statistics, such as frequencies, percentages, means, or standard deviations, to summarize and present the information in a meaningful way.

One of the main advantages of descriptive research is its ability to provide a detailed and comprehensive account of a particular phenomenon or population. It allows researchers to gather information about various aspects, such as demographics, behaviors, attitudes, or opinions, which can be useful for decision-making or policy development. Descriptive research also provides a foundation for further research by identifying gaps in knowledge or areas that require further investigation.

However, descriptive research also has limitations. It does not involve manipulation of variables or testing of hypotheses, which limits its ability to establish causality or determine the underlying mechanisms of a phenomenon. Descriptive research is also susceptible to biases and errors, such as social desirability bias or sampling errors, which can affect the accuracy and generalizability of the findings. Despite these limitations, descriptive research remains an essential tool for providing a detailed and accurate description of various phenomena.

Comparing Correlational Research and Descriptive Research

While correlational research and descriptive research have distinct objectives and designs, they also share some similarities. Both approaches are quantitative in nature, relying on the collection and analysis of numerical data. They also involve the use of statistical techniques to analyze the data and draw conclusions. Additionally, both types of research can be conducted using various data collection methods, such as surveys, questionnaires, or observations.

However, the main difference between correlational research and descriptive research lies in their objectives and focus. Correlational research aims to examine the relationship between variables, while descriptive research focuses on providing a detailed description of a particular phenomenon or population. Correlational research seeks to determine the strength and direction of the relationship, whereas descriptive research aims to document and summarize the characteristics or behaviors of the subject under study.

Another difference between the two approaches is their data analysis techniques. Correlational research involves the use of correlation coefficients or regression analyses to determine the relationship between variables. On the other hand, descriptive research relies on descriptive statistics, such as frequencies or means, to summarize and present the collected data. While both approaches use statistical techniques, the specific methods employed differ based on the research objectives.

Furthermore, correlational research and descriptive research differ in their ability to establish causality. Correlational research cannot determine causality, as it does not involve manipulation of variables or control over extraneous factors. It can only identify associations between variables. In contrast, descriptive research does not aim to establish causality and focuses solely on describing the subject under study.

Despite their differences, both correlational research and descriptive research have their own strengths and limitations. Correlational research allows for the exploration of relationships between variables that cannot be manipulated, providing valuable insights and generating hypotheses for further investigation. Descriptive research, on the other hand, provides a detailed and accurate description of a particular phenomenon or population, serving as a foundation for decision-making or further research.

Correlational research and descriptive research are two common research methods used in social sciences. While correlational research aims to examine the relationship between variables, descriptive research focuses on providing a detailed description of a particular phenomenon or population. Both approaches have their own strengths and limitations, and the choice between them depends on the research objectives and the nature of the subject under study. By understanding the attributes of correlational research and descriptive research, researchers can make informed decisions about the most appropriate method to use in their studies, ultimately contributing to the advancement of knowledge in their respective fields.

Comparisons may contain inaccurate information about people, places, or facts. Please report any issues.

  • Exploratory vs. Descriptive Research: The Comparison Guide

Are you conducting research but struggling to differentiate between exploratory and descriptive methods? These two types of research may sound similar, but they have significant differences.

Exploratory research is a preliminary investigation that aims to gather information and explore a topic, while descriptive research aims to describe and analyze a phenomenon or population.

Exploratory vs. Descriptive Research

  • Survey vs. Experiment
  • Active vs Passive Listening
  • Biography vs. Autobiography

What is exploratory research?

Exploratory research is conducted when a researcher does not have a clear understanding of the problem or isn’t sure what to expect. This type of research is often used to generate hypotheses, identify key variables, and establish relationships.

Exploratory research is flexible and can be conducted using a variety of methods, including interviews, surveys, focus groups, and observations.

What is descriptive research?

Descriptive research is a type of quantitative research that is used to describe a population or phenomenon. This type of research is often used in the social sciences to study human behavior. In contrast to exploratory research, which is used to gather information about a topic, descriptive research is used to describe something that has already been observed. 

Descriptive research can be used to answer questions about who, what, when, where, and how. For example, if you wanted to know how many people in the United States owned a dog, you could use descriptive research to find out.

Descriptive research is also often used to understand relationships between variables. For example, if you wanted to know whether there was a relationship between income and happiness, you could use descriptive research to find out. 

Similarities between exploratory and descriptive research

  • Both exploratory and descriptive research involves collecting data and using that data to draw conclusions.
  • Both use surveys as a way to collect data. Surveys are a common method of data collection because they allow researchers to ask questions of a large group of people at once.
  • Both use secondary sources of data. Secondary sources are sources of data that have already been collected by someone else, such as government statistics or published studies.
  • Both exploratory and descriptive research typically involves some form of analysis or interpretation of the data collected. This step is important in order to draw conclusions from the data and to make recommendations based on those conclusions.

Common methods of exploration vs. description

Exploratory research is often used to generate hypotheses or to gather preliminary data. Common methods used in exploratory research include focus groups, interviews, and surveys. This type of research is often used to gain a better understanding of a problem or phenomenon.

Descriptive research is used to describe a population or phenomenon. Common methods used in descriptive research include surveys, observations, and experiments. This type of research is often used to collect data that can be used to answer questions about a specific population or phenomenon.

Examples of exploratory and descriptive research projects

One example of descriptive research would be a study that sought to understand how students feel about taking online classes. The researcher would collect data from a large number of students through surveys or interviews and then make inferences about the entire population of students.

An example of exploratory research would be a study that sought to understand why some students choose to take online classes and others do not. The researcher would likely use a smaller sample size and employ qualitative methods such as interviews to gather data.

Key differences between exploratory and descriptive research

  • Purpose: The main difference between exploratory and descriptive research lies in their purpose. Exploratory research aims to explore a topic or problem to generate ideas and hypotheses, while descriptive research aims to describe a phenomenon or population.
  • Data Collection: Exploratory research typically employs flexible and qualitative methods such as interviews, focus groups, and observation, while descriptive research typically uses structured and quantitative methods such as surveys and experiments.
  • Analysis: The analysis of data in exploratory research is qualitative and subjective, while in descriptive research it is quantitative and objective. Exploratory research generates ideas and hypotheses for future research, while descriptive research provides a detailed description and understanding of a phenomenon.
  • Difference between public and private sector banks
  • Difference between Visa and MasterCard
  • Difference between NYSE and NASDAQ

Although both types of research have distinct approaches and strengths, they can be used in tandem to gain an even deeper understanding of the topic at hand. With these techniques, researchers can unearth valuable insights into their areas of study that would otherwise be difficult to obtain. Armed with this knowledge, researchers can make more informed decisions when designing studies and interpreting data.

Introducing Asim, an experienced educator with over 3 years of teaching under his belt. Passionate about sharing knowledge, Asim has a special interest in educating others about the interesting world of political science, geography, and international relations. Whether it's exploring the intricacies of global diplomacy or diving deep into the nuances of geographic regions, Asim brings his expertise and enthusiasm to every article.

Extensive and Intensive Reading

As a student or researcher, you’ve probably heard the terms “citation” and “reference” thrown around quite often. While they may…

Survey vs. Experiment: Which Research Method is Right for You

Are you struggling to determine the best way to gather data for your research project? Do you find yourself debating…

Bar Graph vs. Histogram: A Comparative Overview

The difference between a bar graph and a histogram is the type of data they are used to represent. A…

Printed Books vs. eBooks: What’s the Difference?

In today’s digital age, almost everything can be accessed through a screen. From movies to music and even books, the…

Abstract vs. Introduction: The Power of First Impressions

Difference Wiki

Exploratory Research vs. Descriptive Research: What's the Difference?

descriptive research vs

Key Differences

Comparison chart, methodology, common techniques, level of understanding, exploratory research and descriptive research definitions, exploratory research, descriptive research, can "exploratory research" lead to hypotheses formation, what are common methods in "descriptive research", does "descriptive research" always require a predefined hypothesis, can "descriptive research" be used for trend analysis, what is the primary aim of "exploratory research", how does "descriptive research" detail a phenomenon, is "exploratory research" typically qualitative or quantitative, is "exploratory research" conclusive, how is "exploratory research" beneficial in product development, why is "exploratory research" flexible in approach, can "descriptive research" be both qualitative and quantitative, how is "exploratory research" useful in new markets, what is the outcome of "descriptive research", are large sample sizes essential for "descriptive research", does "descriptive research" always use structured tools, how do "exploratory research" and "descriptive research" contribute to decision-making, how do "exploratory research" and "descriptive research" differ in depth, can "exploratory research" be a standalone study, does "exploratory research" always precede "descriptive research", what is a common pitfall in "descriptive research".

descriptive research vs

Trending Comparisons

descriptive research vs

Popular Comparisons

descriptive research vs

New Comparisons

descriptive research vs

Read our research on: Abortion | Podcasts | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

What the data says about abortion in the u.s..

Pew Research Center has conducted many surveys about abortion over the years, providing a lens into Americans’ views on whether the procedure should be legal, among a host of other questions.

In a  Center survey  conducted nearly a year after the Supreme Court’s June 2022 decision that  ended the constitutional right to abortion , 62% of U.S. adults said the practice should be legal in all or most cases, while 36% said it should be illegal in all or most cases. Another survey conducted a few months before the decision showed that relatively few Americans take an absolutist view on the issue .

Find answers to common questions about abortion in America, based on data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Guttmacher Institute, which have tracked these patterns for several decades:

How many abortions are there in the U.S. each year?

How has the number of abortions in the u.s. changed over time, what is the abortion rate among women in the u.s. how has it changed over time, what are the most common types of abortion, how many abortion providers are there in the u.s., and how has that number changed, what percentage of abortions are for women who live in a different state from the abortion provider, what are the demographics of women who have had abortions, when during pregnancy do most abortions occur, how often are there medical complications from abortion.

This compilation of data on abortion in the United States draws mainly from two sources: the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Guttmacher Institute, both of which have regularly compiled national abortion data for approximately half a century, and which collect their data in different ways.

The CDC data that is highlighted in this post comes from the agency’s “abortion surveillance” reports, which have been published annually since 1974 (and which have included data from 1969). Its figures from 1973 through 1996 include data from all 50 states, the District of Columbia and New York City – 52 “reporting areas” in all. Since 1997, the CDC’s totals have lacked data from some states (most notably California) for the years that those states did not report data to the agency. The four reporting areas that did not submit data to the CDC in 2021 – California, Maryland, New Hampshire and New Jersey – accounted for approximately 25% of all legal induced abortions in the U.S. in 2020, according to Guttmacher’s data. Most states, though,  do  have data in the reports, and the figures for the vast majority of them came from each state’s central health agency, while for some states, the figures came from hospitals and other medical facilities.

Discussion of CDC abortion data involving women’s state of residence, marital status, race, ethnicity, age, abortion history and the number of previous live births excludes the low share of abortions where that information was not supplied. Read the methodology for the CDC’s latest abortion surveillance report , which includes data from 2021, for more details. Previous reports can be found at  stacks.cdc.gov  by entering “abortion surveillance” into the search box.

For the numbers of deaths caused by induced abortions in 1963 and 1965, this analysis looks at reports by the then-U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, a precursor to the Department of Health and Human Services. In computing those figures, we excluded abortions listed in the report under the categories “spontaneous or unspecified” or as “other.” (“Spontaneous abortion” is another way of referring to miscarriages.)

Guttmacher data in this post comes from national surveys of abortion providers that Guttmacher has conducted 19 times since 1973. Guttmacher compiles its figures after contacting every known provider of abortions – clinics, hospitals and physicians’ offices – in the country. It uses questionnaires and health department data, and it provides estimates for abortion providers that don’t respond to its inquiries. (In 2020, the last year for which it has released data on the number of abortions in the U.S., it used estimates for 12% of abortions.) For most of the 2000s, Guttmacher has conducted these national surveys every three years, each time getting abortion data for the prior two years. For each interim year, Guttmacher has calculated estimates based on trends from its own figures and from other data.

The latest full summary of Guttmacher data came in the institute’s report titled “Abortion Incidence and Service Availability in the United States, 2020.” It includes figures for 2020 and 2019 and estimates for 2018. The report includes a methods section.

In addition, this post uses data from StatPearls, an online health care resource, on complications from abortion.

An exact answer is hard to come by. The CDC and the Guttmacher Institute have each tried to measure this for around half a century, but they use different methods and publish different figures.

The last year for which the CDC reported a yearly national total for abortions is 2021. It found there were 625,978 abortions in the District of Columbia and the 46 states with available data that year, up from 597,355 in those states and D.C. in 2020. The corresponding figure for 2019 was 607,720.

The last year for which Guttmacher reported a yearly national total was 2020. It said there were 930,160 abortions that year in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, compared with 916,460 in 2019.

  • How the CDC gets its data: It compiles figures that are voluntarily reported by states’ central health agencies, including separate figures for New York City and the District of Columbia. Its latest totals do not include figures from California, Maryland, New Hampshire or New Jersey, which did not report data to the CDC. ( Read the methodology from the latest CDC report .)
  • How Guttmacher gets its data: It compiles its figures after contacting every known abortion provider – clinics, hospitals and physicians’ offices – in the country. It uses questionnaires and health department data, then provides estimates for abortion providers that don’t respond. Guttmacher’s figures are higher than the CDC’s in part because they include data (and in some instances, estimates) from all 50 states. ( Read the institute’s latest full report and methodology .)

While the Guttmacher Institute supports abortion rights, its empirical data on abortions in the U.S. has been widely cited by  groups  and  publications  across the political spectrum, including by a  number of those  that  disagree with its positions .

These estimates from Guttmacher and the CDC are results of multiyear efforts to collect data on abortion across the U.S. Last year, Guttmacher also began publishing less precise estimates every few months , based on a much smaller sample of providers.

The figures reported by these organizations include only legal induced abortions conducted by clinics, hospitals or physicians’ offices, or those that make use of abortion pills dispensed from certified facilities such as clinics or physicians’ offices. They do not account for the use of abortion pills that were obtained  outside of clinical settings .

(Back to top)

A line chart showing the changing number of legal abortions in the U.S. since the 1970s.

The annual number of U.S. abortions rose for years after Roe v. Wade legalized the procedure in 1973, reaching its highest levels around the late 1980s and early 1990s, according to both the CDC and Guttmacher. Since then, abortions have generally decreased at what a CDC analysis called  “a slow yet steady pace.”

Guttmacher says the number of abortions occurring in the U.S. in 2020 was 40% lower than it was in 1991. According to the CDC, the number was 36% lower in 2021 than in 1991, looking just at the District of Columbia and the 46 states that reported both of those years.

(The corresponding line graph shows the long-term trend in the number of legal abortions reported by both organizations. To allow for consistent comparisons over time, the CDC figures in the chart have been adjusted to ensure that the same states are counted from one year to the next. Using that approach, the CDC figure for 2021 is 622,108 legal abortions.)

There have been occasional breaks in this long-term pattern of decline – during the middle of the first decade of the 2000s, and then again in the late 2010s. The CDC reported modest 1% and 2% increases in abortions in 2018 and 2019, and then, after a 2% decrease in 2020, a 5% increase in 2021. Guttmacher reported an 8% increase over the three-year period from 2017 to 2020.

As noted above, these figures do not include abortions that use pills obtained outside of clinical settings.

Guttmacher says that in 2020 there were 14.4 abortions in the U.S. per 1,000 women ages 15 to 44. Its data shows that the rate of abortions among women has generally been declining in the U.S. since 1981, when it reported there were 29.3 abortions per 1,000 women in that age range.

The CDC says that in 2021, there were 11.6 abortions in the U.S. per 1,000 women ages 15 to 44. (That figure excludes data from California, the District of Columbia, Maryland, New Hampshire and New Jersey.) Like Guttmacher’s data, the CDC’s figures also suggest a general decline in the abortion rate over time. In 1980, when the CDC reported on all 50 states and D.C., it said there were 25 abortions per 1,000 women ages 15 to 44.

That said, both Guttmacher and the CDC say there were slight increases in the rate of abortions during the late 2010s and early 2020s. Guttmacher says the abortion rate per 1,000 women ages 15 to 44 rose from 13.5 in 2017 to 14.4 in 2020. The CDC says it rose from 11.2 per 1,000 in 2017 to 11.4 in 2019, before falling back to 11.1 in 2020 and then rising again to 11.6 in 2021. (The CDC’s figures for those years exclude data from California, D.C., Maryland, New Hampshire and New Jersey.)

The CDC broadly divides abortions into two categories: surgical abortions and medication abortions, which involve pills. Since the Food and Drug Administration first approved abortion pills in 2000, their use has increased over time as a share of abortions nationally, according to both the CDC and Guttmacher.

The majority of abortions in the U.S. now involve pills, according to both the CDC and Guttmacher. The CDC says 56% of U.S. abortions in 2021 involved pills, up from 53% in 2020 and 44% in 2019. Its figures for 2021 include the District of Columbia and 44 states that provided this data; its figures for 2020 include D.C. and 44 states (though not all of the same states as in 2021), and its figures for 2019 include D.C. and 45 states.

Guttmacher, which measures this every three years, says 53% of U.S. abortions involved pills in 2020, up from 39% in 2017.

Two pills commonly used together for medication abortions are mifepristone, which, taken first, blocks hormones that support a pregnancy, and misoprostol, which then causes the uterus to empty. According to the FDA, medication abortions are safe  until 10 weeks into pregnancy.

Surgical abortions conducted  during the first trimester  of pregnancy typically use a suction process, while the relatively few surgical abortions that occur  during the second trimester  of a pregnancy typically use a process called dilation and evacuation, according to the UCLA School of Medicine.

In 2020, there were 1,603 facilities in the U.S. that provided abortions,  according to Guttmacher . This included 807 clinics, 530 hospitals and 266 physicians’ offices.

A horizontal stacked bar chart showing the total number of abortion providers down since 1982.

While clinics make up half of the facilities that provide abortions, they are the sites where the vast majority (96%) of abortions are administered, either through procedures or the distribution of pills, according to Guttmacher’s 2020 data. (This includes 54% of abortions that are administered at specialized abortion clinics and 43% at nonspecialized clinics.) Hospitals made up 33% of the facilities that provided abortions in 2020 but accounted for only 3% of abortions that year, while just 1% of abortions were conducted by physicians’ offices.

Looking just at clinics – that is, the total number of specialized abortion clinics and nonspecialized clinics in the U.S. – Guttmacher found the total virtually unchanged between 2017 (808 clinics) and 2020 (807 clinics). However, there were regional differences. In the Midwest, the number of clinics that provide abortions increased by 11% during those years, and in the West by 6%. The number of clinics  decreased  during those years by 9% in the Northeast and 3% in the South.

The total number of abortion providers has declined dramatically since the 1980s. In 1982, according to Guttmacher, there were 2,908 facilities providing abortions in the U.S., including 789 clinics, 1,405 hospitals and 714 physicians’ offices.

The CDC does not track the number of abortion providers.

In the District of Columbia and the 46 states that provided abortion and residency information to the CDC in 2021, 10.9% of all abortions were performed on women known to live outside the state where the abortion occurred – slightly higher than the percentage in 2020 (9.7%). That year, D.C. and 46 states (though not the same ones as in 2021) reported abortion and residency data. (The total number of abortions used in these calculations included figures for women with both known and unknown residential status.)

The share of reported abortions performed on women outside their state of residence was much higher before the 1973 Roe decision that stopped states from banning abortion. In 1972, 41% of all abortions in D.C. and the 20 states that provided this information to the CDC that year were performed on women outside their state of residence. In 1973, the corresponding figure was 21% in the District of Columbia and the 41 states that provided this information, and in 1974 it was 11% in D.C. and the 43 states that provided data.

In the District of Columbia and the 46 states that reported age data to  the CDC in 2021, the majority of women who had abortions (57%) were in their 20s, while about three-in-ten (31%) were in their 30s. Teens ages 13 to 19 accounted for 8% of those who had abortions, while women ages 40 to 44 accounted for about 4%.

The vast majority of women who had abortions in 2021 were unmarried (87%), while married women accounted for 13%, according to  the CDC , which had data on this from 37 states.

A pie chart showing that, in 2021, majority of abortions were for women who had never had one before.

In the District of Columbia, New York City (but not the rest of New York) and the 31 states that reported racial and ethnic data on abortion to  the CDC , 42% of all women who had abortions in 2021 were non-Hispanic Black, while 30% were non-Hispanic White, 22% were Hispanic and 6% were of other races.

Looking at abortion rates among those ages 15 to 44, there were 28.6 abortions per 1,000 non-Hispanic Black women in 2021; 12.3 abortions per 1,000 Hispanic women; 6.4 abortions per 1,000 non-Hispanic White women; and 9.2 abortions per 1,000 women of other races, the  CDC reported  from those same 31 states, D.C. and New York City.

For 57% of U.S. women who had induced abortions in 2021, it was the first time they had ever had one,  according to the CDC.  For nearly a quarter (24%), it was their second abortion. For 11% of women who had an abortion that year, it was their third, and for 8% it was their fourth or more. These CDC figures include data from 41 states and New York City, but not the rest of New York.

A bar chart showing that most U.S. abortions in 2021 were for women who had previously given birth.

Nearly four-in-ten women who had abortions in 2021 (39%) had no previous live births at the time they had an abortion,  according to the CDC . Almost a quarter (24%) of women who had abortions in 2021 had one previous live birth, 20% had two previous live births, 10% had three, and 7% had four or more previous live births. These CDC figures include data from 41 states and New York City, but not the rest of New York.

The vast majority of abortions occur during the first trimester of a pregnancy. In 2021, 93% of abortions occurred during the first trimester – that is, at or before 13 weeks of gestation,  according to the CDC . An additional 6% occurred between 14 and 20 weeks of pregnancy, and about 1% were performed at 21 weeks or more of gestation. These CDC figures include data from 40 states and New York City, but not the rest of New York.

About 2% of all abortions in the U.S. involve some type of complication for the woman , according to an article in StatPearls, an online health care resource. “Most complications are considered minor such as pain, bleeding, infection and post-anesthesia complications,” according to the article.

The CDC calculates  case-fatality rates for women from induced abortions – that is, how many women die from abortion-related complications, for every 100,000 legal abortions that occur in the U.S .  The rate was lowest during the most recent period examined by the agency (2013 to 2020), when there were 0.45 deaths to women per 100,000 legal induced abortions. The case-fatality rate reported by the CDC was highest during the first period examined by the agency (1973 to 1977), when it was 2.09 deaths to women per 100,000 legal induced abortions. During the five-year periods in between, the figure ranged from 0.52 (from 1993 to 1997) to 0.78 (from 1978 to 1982).

The CDC calculates death rates by five-year and seven-year periods because of year-to-year fluctuation in the numbers and due to the relatively low number of women who die from legal induced abortions.

In 2020, the last year for which the CDC has information , six women in the U.S. died due to complications from induced abortions. Four women died in this way in 2019, two in 2018, and three in 2017. (These deaths all followed legal abortions.) Since 1990, the annual number of deaths among women due to legal induced abortion has ranged from two to 12.

The annual number of reported deaths from induced abortions (legal and illegal) tended to be higher in the 1980s, when it ranged from nine to 16, and from 1972 to 1979, when it ranged from 13 to 63. One driver of the decline was the drop in deaths from illegal abortions. There were 39 deaths from illegal abortions in 1972, the last full year before Roe v. Wade. The total fell to 19 in 1973 and to single digits or zero every year after that. (The number of deaths from legal abortions has also declined since then, though with some slight variation over time.)

The number of deaths from induced abortions was considerably higher in the 1960s than afterward. For instance, there were 119 deaths from induced abortions in  1963  and 99 in  1965 , according to reports by the then-U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, a precursor to the Department of Health and Human Services. The CDC is a division of Health and Human Services.

Note: This is an update of a post originally published May 27, 2022, and first updated June 24, 2022.

descriptive research vs

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivered Saturday mornings

Key facts about the abortion debate in America

Public opinion on abortion, three-in-ten or more democrats and republicans don’t agree with their party on abortion, partisanship a bigger factor than geography in views of abortion access locally, do state laws on abortion reflect public opinion, 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 .

IMAGES

  1. Difference Between Descriptive and Experimental Research

    descriptive research vs

  2. Differences Between Descriptive Research and Correlational Research

    descriptive research vs

  3. Descriptive Research vs Analytical Research-What is Descriptive

    descriptive research vs

  4. descriptive study vs case study

    descriptive research vs

  5. What is Descriptive Research

    descriptive research vs

  6. Descriptive Research: Methods, Types, and Examples

    descriptive research vs

VIDEO

  1. DESCRIPTIVE Research Design

  2. Research Design, Research Method: What's the Difference?

  3. Descriptive Research Design #researchmethodology

  4. Descriptive vs Normative Science #science #ethics #reels #shorts #upsc #gspaper4

  5. Descriptive and Experimental Research

  6. Unit 1: Descriptive Research (AP Psychology)

COMMENTS

  1. Descriptive Research

    Descriptive research methods. Descriptive research is usually defined as a type of quantitative research, though qualitative research can also be used for descriptive purposes. The research design should be carefully developed to ensure that the results are valid and reliable.. Surveys. Survey research allows you to gather large volumes of data that can be analyzed for frequencies, averages ...

  2. What is Descriptive Research? Definition, Methods, Types and Examples

    Descriptive research is a methodological approach that seeks to depict the characteristics of a phenomenon or subject under investigation. In scientific inquiry, it serves as a foundational tool for researchers aiming to observe, record, and analyze the intricate details of a particular topic. This method provides a rich and detailed account ...

  3. Study designs: Part 2

    INTRODUCTION. In our previous article in this series, [ 1] we introduced the concept of "study designs"- as "the set of methods and procedures used to collect and analyze data on variables specified in a particular research question.". Study designs are primarily of two types - observational and interventional, with the former being ...

  4. Descriptive Research: Design, Methods, Examples, and FAQs

    Descriptive research is a common investigatory model used by researchers in various fields, including social sciences, linguistics, and academia. To conduct effective research, you need to know a scenario's or target population's who, what, and where. Obtaining enough knowledge about the research topic is an important component of research.

  5. Descriptive research

    Descriptive research is mainly done when a researcher wants to gain a better understanding of a topic. That is, analysis of the past as opposed to the future. Descriptive research is the exploration of the existing certain phenomena. The details of the facts won't be known. The existing phenomena's facts are not known to the person.

  6. Descriptive Research Designs: Types, Examples & Methods

    Descriptive Research vs. Exploratory Research Descriptive research is a research method that focuses on providing a detailed and accurate account of a specific situation, group, or phenomenon. This type of research describes the characteristics, behaviors, or relationships within the given context without looking for an underlying cause.

  7. Descriptive Research Design: What It Is and How to Use It

    Descriptive research design. Descriptive research design uses a range of both qualitative research and quantitative data (although quantitative research is the primary research method) to gather information to make accurate predictions about a particular problem or hypothesis. As a survey method, descriptive research designs will help ...

  8. Descriptive Research and Qualitative Research

    Abstract. Descriptive research is a study of status and is widely used in education, nutrition, epidemiology, and the behavioral sciences. Its value is based on the premise that problems can be solved and practices improved through observation, analysis, and description. The most common descriptive research method is the survey, which includes ...

  9. Descriptive Research Design

    Descriptive research methods. Descriptive research is usually defined as a type of quantitative research, though qualitative research can also be used for descriptive purposes. The research design should be carefully developed to ensure that the results are valid and reliable.. Surveys. Survey research allows you to gather large volumes of data that can be analysed for frequencies, averages ...

  10. The 3 Descriptive Research Methods of Psychology

    Types of descriptive research. Observational method. Case studies. Surveys. Recap. Descriptive research methods are used to define the who, what, and where of human behavior and other ...

  11. Descriptive Research Studies

    Descriptive research may identify areas in need of additional research and relationships between variables that require future study. Descriptive research is often referred to as "hypothesis generating research." Depending on the data collection method used, descriptive studies can generate rich datasets on large and diverse samples.

  12. Descriptive Research Design

    As discussed earlier, common research methods for descriptive research include surveys, case studies, observational studies, cross-sectional studies, and longitudinal studies. Design your study: Plan the details of your study, including the sampling strategy, data collection methods, and data analysis plan.

  13. Descriptive vs Experimental Research

    Descriptive Research is a research approach that involves collecting data to describe a phenomenon or group. The goal of descriptive research is to provide an accurate and detailed picture of a particular population, event, or situation. Descriptive research can be conducted using various methods, such as surveys, observations, and case studies.

  14. Qualitative and descriptive research: Data type versus data analysis

    Qualitative research collects data qualitatively, and the method of analysis is also primarily qualitative. This often involves an inductive exploration of the data to identify recurring themes, patterns, or concepts and then describing and interpreting those categories. Of course, in qualitative research, the data collected qualitatively can ...

  15. An overview of the qualitative descriptive design within nursing research

    Qualitative descriptive designs are common in nursing and healthcare research due to their inherent simplicity, flexibility and utility in diverse healthcare contexts. However, the application of descriptive research is sometimes critiqued in terms of scientific rigor. Inconsistency in decision making within the research process coupled with a ...

  16. Descriptive Research vs. Experimental Research: What's the Difference?

    14. Descriptive research steadfastly adheres to capturing the status quo without asserting any alterations to its environment or subjects. This type of research embraces methodologies like observational studies, case-study approaches, and surveys to garner data. Whereas, experimental research delves into systematic exploration through ...

  17. Descriptive Research and Case Studies

    Descriptive research is distinct from correlational research, in which psychologists formally test whether a relationship exists between two or more variables. Experimental research goes a step further beyond descriptive and correlational research and randomly assigns people to different conditions, using hypothesis testing to make inferences ...

  18. Descriptive and Analytical Research: What's the Difference?

    Descriptive research classifies, describes, compares, and measures data. Meanwhile, analytical research focuses on cause and effect. For example, take numbers on the changing trade deficits between the United States and the rest of the world in 2015-2018. This is descriptive research.

  19. Difference Between Descriptive and Experimental Research

    The main difference between descriptive and experimental research is that the descriptive research describes the characteristics of the study group or a certain occurrence while the experimental research manipulates the variables to arrive at conclusions. Descriptive research and experimental research are two types of research people use when ...

  20. Correlational Research vs. Descriptive Research

    Correlational research aims to examine the relationship between two or more variables and determine the strength and direction of their association. It seeks to establish whether a relationship exists, but it does not imply causation. On the other hand, descriptive research focuses on describing and documenting the characteristics or behaviors ...

  21. Exploratory vs. Descriptive Research: The Comparison Guide

    This type of research is often used in the social sciences to study human behavior. In contrast to exploratory research, which is used to gather information about a topic, descriptive research is used to describe something that has already been observed. Descriptive research can be used to answer questions about who, what, when, where, and how.

  22. Exploratory Research vs. Descriptive Research: What's the Difference?

    6. While "Exploratory Research" is flexible and open-ended, aiming to identify patterns, hypotheses, or areas that need more scrutiny, "Descriptive Research" employs structured and predefined methods to provide a comprehensive profile of events, behaviors, or conditions. 5. "Exploratory Research" typically employs qualitative methods like ...

  23. What the data says about abortion in the U.S.

    The CDC says that in 2021, there were 11.6 abortions in the U.S. per 1,000 women ages 15 to 44. (That figure excludes data from California, the District of Columbia, Maryland, New Hampshire and New Jersey.) Like Guttmacher's data, the CDC's figures also suggest a general decline in the abortion rate over time.