formulating research questions slideshare

No internet connection.

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

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

• Sign in Signed in
• My profile My Profile

• Offline Playback link

Have you created a personal profile? sign in or create a profile so that you can create alerts, save clips, playlists and searches.

How to Formulate Effective Research Questions

• Watching now: Chapter 1: Identifying Research Questions in Research Start time: 00:00:00 End time: 00:03:32
• Chapter 2: Developing Research Questions Start time: 00:03:33 End time: 00:09:37

Video Type: Tutorial

White, C. (Academic). (2018). How to formulate effective research questions [Video]. Sage Research Methods. https:// doi. org/10.4135/9781526442727

White, Claire. "How to Formulate Effective Research Questions." In Sage Video . London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2018. Video, 00:09:37. https:// doi. org/10.4135/9781526442727.

White, C., 2018. How to Formulate Effective Research Questions , Sage Video. [Streaming Video] London: Sage Publications Ltd. Available at: <https:// doi. org/10.4135/9781526442727 & gt; [Accessed 25 Mar 2024].

White, Claire. How to Formulate Effective Research Questions . Online video clip. SAGE Video. London: SAGE Publications, Ltd., 5 Mar 2018. doi: https:// doi. org/10.4135/9781526442727. 25 Mar 2024.

How to Formulate Effective Research Questions [Streaming video]. 2018. doi:10.4135/9781526442727. Accessed 03/25/2024

Please log in from an authenticated institution or log into your member profile to access the email feature.

• Sign in/register

Add this content to your learning management system or webpage by copying the code below into the HTML editor on the page. Look for the words HTML or </>. Learn More about Embedding Video   icon link (opens in new window)

Sample View:

• Download PDF opens in new window
• icon/tools/download-video icon/tools/video-downloaded Download video Downloading... Video downloaded

Claire White explains the process of developing a research question. White then offers strategies for designing sub-questions and a general research framework off of the initial question.

Chapter 1: Identifying Research Questions in Research

• Start time: 00:00:00
• End time: 00:03:32

Chapter 2: Developing Research Questions

• Start time: 00:03:33
• End time: 00:09:37
• Product: Sage Research Methods Video: Practical Research and Academic Skills
• Type of Content: Tutorial
• Title: How to Formulate Effective Research Questions
• Publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd
• Publication year: 2018
• Online pub date: March 05, 2018
• Discipline: Sociology
• Methods: Question formation , Planning research
• Duration: 00:09:37
• DOI: https:// doi. org/10.4135/9781526442727
• Keywords: inquiry processes Show all Show less

Academic: Claire White

Sign in to access this content

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

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

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

Navigating away from this page will delete your results

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

Sign in to my profile

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

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

Get off-campus access

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

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

• view my profile
• view my lists

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
• Indian J Anaesth
• v.63(8); 2019 Aug

Formulating a good research question: Pearls and pitfalls

Wilson fandino.

Guys' and St Thomas' Hospital National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom

The process of formulating a good research question can be challenging and frustrating. While a comprehensive literature review is compulsory, the researcher usually encounters methodological difficulties in the conduct of the study, particularly if the primary study question has not been adequately selected in accordance with the clinical dilemma that needs to be addressed. Therefore, optimising time and resources before embarking in the design of a clinical protocol can make an impact on the final results of the research project. Researchers have developed effective ways to convey the message of how to build a good research question that can be easily recalled under the acronyms of PICOT (population, intervention, comparator, outcome, and time frame) and FINER (feasible, interesting, novel, ethical, and relevant). In line with these concepts, this article highlights the main issues faced by clinicians, when developing a research question.

INTRODUCTION

What is your research question? This is very often one of the first queries made by statisticians, when researchers come up with an interesting idea. In fact, the findings of a study may only acquire relevance if they provide an accurate and unbiased answer to a specific question,[ 1 , 2 ] and it has been suggested that up to one-third of the time spent in the whole process—from the conception of an idea to the publication of the manuscript—could be invested in finding the right primary study question.[ 3 ] Furthermore, selecting a good research question can be a time-consuming and challenging task: in one retrospective study, Mayo et al . reported that 3 out of 10 articles published would have needed a major rewording of the question.[ 1 ] This paper explores some recommendations to consider before starting any research project, and outlines the main difficulties faced by young and experienced clinicians, when it comes time to turn an exciting idea into a valuable and feasible research question.

OPTIMISATION OF TIME AND RESOURCES

Focusing on the primary research question.

The process of developing a new idea usually stems from a dilemma inherent to the clinical practice.[ 2 , 3 , 4 ] However, once the problem has been identified, it is tempting to formulate multiple research questions. Conducting a clinical trial with more than one primary study question would not be feasible. First, because each question may require a different research design, and second, because the necessary statistical power of the study would demand unaffordable sample sizes. It is the duty of editors and reviewers to make sure that authors clearly identify the primary research question, and as a consequence, studies approaching more than one primary research question may not be suitable for publication.

Working in the right environment

Teamwork is essential to find the appropriate research question. Working in the right environment will enable the investigator to interact with colleagues with different backgrounds, and create opportunities to exchange experiences in a collaborative way between clinicians and researchers. Likewise, it is of paramount importance to get involved colleagues with expertise in the field (lead clinicians, education supervisors, research mentors, department chairs, epidemiologists, biostatisticians, and ethical consultants, among others), and ask for their guidance.[ 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 ]

Evaluating the pertinence of the study

The researcher should wonder if, on the basis of the research question formulated, there is a need for a study to address the problem, as clinical research usually entails a large investment of resources and workforce involvement. Thus, if the answer to the posed clinical question seems to be evident before starting the study, investing in research to address the problem would become superfluous. For example, in a clinical trial, Herzog-Niescery et al . compared laryngeal masks with cuffed and uncuffed tracheal tubes, in the context of surgeons' exposure to sevoflurane, in infants undergoing adenoidectomy. However, it appears obvious that cuffed tracheal tubes are preferred to minimise surgeons' exposure to volatile gases, as authors concluded after recruiting 60 patients.[ 9 ]

Conducting a thorough literature review

Any research project requires the identification of at least one of three problems: the evidence is scarce, the existing literature yields conflicting results, or the results could be improved. Hence, a comprehensive review of the topic is imperative, as it allows the researcher to identify this gap in the literature, formulate a hypothesis and develop a research question.[ 2 ] To this end, it is crucial to be attentive to new ideas, keep the imagination roaming with reflective attitude, and remain sceptical to the new-gained information.[ 4 , 7 ]

Narrowing the research question

A broad research question may encompass an unaffordable extensive topic. For instance, do supraglottic devices provide similar conditions for the visualization of the glottis aperture in a German hospital? Such a general research question usually needs to be narrowed, not only by cutting away unnecessary components (a German hospital is irrelevant in this context), but also by defining a target population, a specific intervention, an alternative treatment or procedure to be compared with the intervention, a measurable primary outcome, and a time frame of the study. In contrast, an example of a good research question would be: among children younger than 1 year of age undergoing elective minor procedures, to what extent the insertion times are different, comparing the Supreme™ laryngeal mask airway (LMA) to Proseal™ LMA, when placed after reaching a BIS index <60?[ 10 ] In this example, the core ingredients of the research question can be easily identified as: children <1 year of age undergoing minor elective procedures, Supreme™ LMA, Proseal™ LMA and insertion times at anaesthetic induction when reaching a BIS index <60. These components are usually gathered in the literature under the acronym of PICOT (population, intervention, comparator, outcome and time frame, respectively).[ 1 , 3 , 5 ]

PICOT FRAMEWORK

Table 1 summarises the foremost questions likely to be addressed when working on PICOT frame.[ 1 , 6 , 8 ] These components are also applicable to observational studies, where the exposure takes place of the intervention.[ 1 , 11 ] Remarkably, if after browsing the title and the abstract of a paper, the reader is not able to clearly identify the PICOT parameters, and elucidate the question posed by the authors, there should be reasonable scepticism regarding the scientific rigor of the work.[ 12 , 13 ] All these elements are crucial in the design and methodology of a clinical trial, as they can affect the feasibility and reliability of results. Having formulated the primary study question in the context of the PICOT framework [ Table 1 ],[ 1 , 6 , 8 ] the researcher should be able to elucidate which design is most suitable for their work, determine what type of data needs to be collected, and write a structured introduction tailored to what they want to know, explicitly mentioning the primary study hypothesis, which should lead to formulate the main research question.[ 1 , 2 , 6 , 8 ]

Key questions to be answered when working with the PICOT framework (population, intervention, comparator, outcome, and time frame) in a clinical research design

Occasionally, the intended population of the study needs to be modified, in order to overcome any potential ethical issues, and/or for the sake of convenience and feasibility of the project. Yet, the researcher must be aware that the external validity of the results may be compromised. As an illustration, in a randomised clinical trial, authors compared the ease of tracheal tube insertion between C-MAC video laryngoscope and direct laryngoscopy, in patients presenting to the emergency department with an indication of rapid sequence intubation. However, owing to the existence of ethical concerns, a substantial amount of patients requiring emergency tracheal intubation, including patients with major maxillofacial trauma and ongoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation, had to be excluded from the trial.[ 14 ] In fact, the design of prospective studies to explore this subset of patients can be challenging, not only because of ethical considerations, but because of the low incidence of these cases. In another study, Metterlein et al . compared the glottis visualisation among five different supraglottic airway devices, using fibreroptic-guided tracheal intubation in an adult population. Despite that the study was aimed to explore the ease of intubation in patients with anticipated difficult airway (thus requiring fibreoptic tracheal intubation), authors decided to enrol patients undergoing elective laser treatment for genital condylomas, as a strategy to hasten the recruitment process and optimise resources.[ 15 ]

Intervention

Anaesthetic interventions can be classified into pharmacological (experimental treatment) and nonpharmacological. Among nonpharmacological interventions, the most common include anaesthetic techniques, monitoring instruments and airway devices. For example, it would be appropriate to examine the ease of insertion of Supreme™ LMA, when compared with ProSeal™ LMA. Notwithstanding, a common mistake is the tendency to be focused on the data aimed to be collected (the “stated” objective), rather than the question that needs to be answered (the “latent” objective).[ 1 , 4 ] In one clinical trial, authors stated: “we compared the Supreme™ and ProSeal™ LMAs in infants by measuring their performance characteristics, including insertion features, ventilation parameters, induced changes in haemodynamics, and rates of postoperative complications”.[ 10 ] Here, the research question has been centered on the measurements (insertion characteristics, haemodynamic variables, LMA insertion characteristics, ventilation parameters) rather than the clinical problem that needs to be addressed (is Supreme™ LMA easier to insert than ProSeal™ LMA?).

Comparators in clinical research can also be pharmacological (e.g., gold standard or placebo) or nonpharmacological. Typically, not more than two comparator groups are included in a clinical trial. Multiple comparisons should be generally avoided, unless there is enough statistical power to address the end points of interest, and statistical analyses have been adjusted for multiple testing. For instance, in the aforementioned study of Metterlein et al .,[ 15 ] authors compared five supraglottic airway devices by recruiting only 10--12 participants per group. In spite of the authors' recommendation of using two supraglottic devices based on the results of the study, there was no mention of statistical adjustments for multiple comparisons, and given the small sample size, larger clinical trials will undoubtedly be needed to confirm or refute these findings.[ 15 ]

A clear formulation of the primary outcome results of vital importance in clinical research, as the primary statistical analyses, including the sample size calculation (and therefore, the estimation of the effect size and statistical power), will be derived from the main outcome of interest. While it is clear that using more than one primary outcome would not be appropriate, it would be equally inadequate to include multiple point measurements of the same variable as the primary outcome (e.g., visual analogue scale for pain at 1, 2, 6, and 12 h postoperatively).

Composite outcomes, in which multiple primary endpoints are combined, may make it difficult to draw any conclusions based on the study findings. For example, in a clinical trial, 200 children undergoing ophthalmic surgery were recruited to explore the incidence of respiratory adverse events, when comparing desflurane with sevoflurane, following the removal of flexible LMA during the emergence of the anaesthesia. The primary outcome was the number of respiratory events, including breath holding, coughing, secretions requiring suction, laryngospasm, bronchospasm, and mild desaturation.[ 16 ] Should authors had claimed a significant difference between these anaesthetic volatiles, it would have been important to elucidate whether those differences were due to serious adverse events, like laryngospasm or bronchospasm, or the results were explained by any of the other events (e.g., secretions requiring suction). While it is true that clinical trials evaluating the occurrence of adverse events like laryngospasm/bronchospasm,[ 16 , 17 ] or life-threating complications following a tracheal intubation (e.g., inadvertent oesophageal placement, dental damage or injury of the larynx/pharynx)[ 14 ] are almost invariably underpowered, because the incidence of such events is expected to be low, subjective outcomes like coughing or secretions requiring suction should be avoided, as they are highly dependent on the examiner's criteria.[ 16 ]

Secondary outcomes are useful to document potential side effects (e.g., gastric insufflation after placing a supraglottic device), and evaluate the adherence (say, airway leak pressure) and safety of the intervention (for instance, occurrence, or laryngospasm/bronchospasm).[ 17 ] Nevertheless, the problem of addressing multiple secondary outcomes without the adequate statistical power is habitual in medical literature. A good illustration of this issue can be found in a study evaluating the performance of two supraglottic devices in 50 anaesthetised infants and neonates, whereby authors could not draw any conclusions in regard to potential differences in the occurrence of complications, because the sample size calculated made the study underpowered to explore those differences.[ 17 ]

Among PICOT components, the time frame is the most likely to be omitted or inappropriate.[ 1 , 12 ] There are two key aspects of the time component that need to be clearly specified in the research question: the time of measuring the outcome variables (e.g. visual analogue scale for pain at 1, 2, 6, and 12 h postoperatively), and the duration of each measurement (when indicated). The omission of these details in the study protocol might lead to substantial differences in the methodology used. For instance, if a study is designed to compare the insertion times of three different supraglottic devices, and researchers do not specify the exact moment of LMA insertion in the clinical trial protocol (i.e., at the anaesthetic induction after reaching a BIS index < 60), placing an LMA with insufficient depth of anaesthesia would have compromised the internal validity of the results, because inserting a supraglottic device in those patients would have resulted in failed attempts and longer insertion times.[ 10 ]

FINER CRITERIA

A well-elaborated research question may not necessarily be a good question. The proposed study also requires being achievable from both ethical and realistic perspectives, interesting and useful to the clinical practice, and capable to formulate new hypotheses, that may contribute to the generation of knowledge. Researchers have developed an effective way to convey the message of how to build a good research question, that is usually recalled under the acronym of FINER (feasible, interesting, novel, ethical and relevant).[ 5 , 6 , 7 ] Table 2 highlights the main characteristics of FINER criteria.[ 7 ]

Main features of FINER criteria (Feasibility, interest, novelty, ethics, and relevance) to formulate a good research question. Adapted from Cummings et al .[ 7 ]

Novelty and relevance

Although it is clear that any research project should commence with an accurate literature interpretation, in many instances it represents the start and the end of the research: the reader will soon realise that the answer to several questions can be easily found in the published literature.[ 5 ] When the question overcomes the test of a thorough literature review, the project may become novel (there is a gap in the knowledge, and therefore, there is a need for new evidence on the topic) and relevant (the paper may contribute to change the clinical practice). In this context, it is important to distinguish the difference between statistical significance and clinical relevance: in the aforementioned study of Oba et al .,[ 10 ] despite the means of insertion times were reported as significant for the Supreme™ LMA, as compared with ProSeal™ LMA, the difference found in the insertion times (528 vs. 486 sec, respectively), although reported as significant, had little or no clinical relevance.[ 10 ] Conversely, a statistically significant difference of 12 sec might be of clinical relevance in neonates weighing <5 kg.[ 17 ] Thus, statistical tests must be interpreted in the context of a clinically meaningful effect size, which should be previously defined by the researcher.

Feasibility and ethical aspects

Among FINER criteria, there are two potential barriers that may prevent the successful conduct of the project and publication of the manuscript: feasibility and ethical aspects. These obstacles are usually related to the target population, as discussed above. Feasibility refers not only to the budget but also to the complexity of the design, recruitment strategy, blinding, adequacy of the sample size, measurement of the outcome, time of follow-up of participants, and commitment of clinicians, among others.[ 3 , 7 ] Funding, as a component of feasibility, may also be implicated in the ethical principles of clinical research, because the choice of the primary study question may be markedly influenced by the specific criteria demanded in the interest of potential funders.

Discussing ethical issues with local committees is compulsory, as rules applied might vary among countries.[ 18 ] Potential risks and benefits need to be carefully weighed, based upon the four principles of respect for autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice.[ 19 ] Although many of these issues may be related to the population target (e.g., conducting a clinical trial in patients with ongoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation would be inappropriate, as would be anaesthetising patients undergoing elective LASER treatment for condylomas, to examine the performance of supraglottic airway devices),[ 14 , 15 ] ethical conflicts may also arise from the intervention (particularly those involving the occurrence of side effects or complications, and their potential for reversibility), comparison (e.g., use of placebo or sham procedures),[ 19 ] outcome (surrogate outcomes should be considered in lieu of long term outcomes), or time frame (e.g., unnecessary longer exposition to an intervention). Thus, FINER criteria should not be conceived without a concomitant examination of the PICOT checklist, and consequently, PICOT framework and FINER criteria should not be seen as separated components, but rather complementary ingredients of a good research question.

Undoubtedly, no research project can be conducted if it is deemed unfeasible, and most institutional review boards would not be in a position to approve a work with major ethical problems. Nonetheless, whether or not the findings are interesting, is a subjective matter. Engaging the attention of readers also depends upon a number of factors, including the manner of presenting the problem, the background of the topic, the intended audience, and the reader's expectations. Furthermore, the interest is usually linked to the novelty and relevance of the topic, and it is worth nothing that editors and peer reviewers of high-impact medical journals are usually reluctant to accept any publication, if there is no novelty inherent to the research hypothesis, or there is a lack of relevance in the results.[ 11 ] Nevertheless, a considerable number of papers have been published without any novelty or relevance in the topic addressed. This is probably reflected in a recent survey, according to which only a third of respondents declared to have read thoroughly the most recent papers downloaded, and at least half of those manuscripts remained unread.[ 20 ] The same study reported that up to one-third of papers examined remained uncited after 5 years of publication, and only 20% of papers accounted for 80% of the citations.[ 20 ]

Formulating a good research question can be fascinating, albeit challenging, even for experienced investigators. While it is clear that clinical experience in combination with the accurate interpretation of literature and teamwork are essential to develop new ideas, the formulation of a clinical problem usually requires the compliance with PICOT framework in conjunction with FINER criteria, in order to translate a clinical dilemma into a researchable question. Working in the right environment with the adequate support of experienced researchers, will certainly make a difference in the generation of knowledge. By doing this, a lot of time will be saved in the search of the primary study question, and undoubtedly, there will be more chances to become a successful researcher.

Financial support and sponsorship

Conflicts of interest.

There are no conflicts of interest.

Formulating Research Questions and Designing Studies

Apr 07, 2019

430 likes | 681 Views

Formulating Research Questions and Designing Studies. 2 March 2011 Facilitator: Larry Gruppen, Ph.D. University of Michigan Development team: Carol Hodgson, LuAnn Wilkerson, David Irby, Judy Shea, Clair Kuykendall, Larry Gruppen. Preview.

Share Presentation

• research designsquasi experimental
• accessible population
• randomization control groups experimental
• statistical regression
• solomon four group design
• independent variable

Presentation Transcript

Formulating Research Questions and Designing Studies 2 March 2011 Facilitator: Larry Gruppen, Ph.D. University of Michigan Development team: Carol Hodgson, LuAnn Wilkerson, David Irby, Judy Shea, Clair Kuykendall, Larry Gruppen

Preview • Moving from general issues to specific research questions • Using the literature to refine the question • Measuring the variables • Selecting the right research design

The Research Process Define Research Question No hole in the literature Hole in literature Conduct Literature Review Refine Question Operationalize variables Design Study Obtain IRB Approval Collect & Analyze Data Write and Report Results

Recognizing & Choosing Among Research Opportunities • What situations or problems tend to puzzle, fascinate, challenge, or interest you? • List as many research questions as you can as quickly as possible • Identify which are: • - Most interesting (I) • - Feasible (F) • - Fundable ($) • - Best overall (*) • Rewrite your best research question at least twice

The Research Question • Based on literature/theory • Includes sample description (e.g., 4th-year medical students) • Includes study design (e.g., relationship, difference between groups, etc.) • Includes the independent & dependent variables • Is measurable • Stated as a question or hypothesis

Definitions • Variable • Independent and dependent variables • Covariates • Operationalization and measurement • Sample and population

Example Research Question • Does training in airway management on a simulator improve resident performance (correct selection of equipment, # of errors, time to intubation), compared with standard didactic/demonstration instruction.

Example Research Question • What is the independent variable? • What is the dependent variable? • What are possible covariates? • What is the population and sample? • What is your design?

Example Research Question Do first-year medical students who complete a student-run anatomy review course score higher on the anatomy final exam than students who do not complete the review course? • What is the independent variable? • What is the dependent variable? • What are possible control variables? • What is the sample? • What is your design?

The Research Process Define Research Question No hole in the literature Hole in literature Conduct Literature Review Refine Question Operationalize variables Operationalize variables Design Study Obtain IRB Approval Collect & Analyze Data Write and Report Results

Searching for Related Work • Identify possible sources of information • Colleagues and librarians • Databases, PUBMED, PSYCLIT, Science Citation Index • Journals, chapters, books, publications • Read critically and summarize • Citations referenced • Sample size • Study design and limitations • Overall conclusions

What to Look For • Conceptualization and theory • How variables are defined & measured • Sample size • Study design and limitations • Overall conclusions • Citations referenced

Refining the Research Question • Share your best question • Critique each other’s research questions • Determine which is the best/most interesting question • Refine this group question based on critique • Write final version of question

Critique Your Question • Clearly stated? • Stated as a question? • Testable? • Defines variables to be studied? • Defines sample to be studied? • Describes the setting for the study?

Operationalization and Measurement • Three basic questions • What do you measure? • How do you measure? • How well do you measure?

What do you measure? • Defined by research question • Dependent, independent variables • Covariates

How do You Measure? • Operationalization is essential to the conduct of the study • Counting events • Measuring time and physical quantities • Externalizing internal (psychological) states, events, and processes

Measurement Instruments • Knowledge • Tests (MCQ, essay, oral) • Attitudes • Questionnaires, surveys • Behavior or performance (skills) • Clinical exams (OSCE), standardized patients, direct observation • Checklists, ratings, error rates

How Well do You Measure? • Reliability — score accuracy or stability • Would the score be reproduced if tested again? • Would the score be reproduced by different raters? • Validity — score meaning • Does the score measure what you intend to measure?

Use When Focus on meaning and context In-depth recording and triangulation Inductively derived interpretation Methods Interview Observation Think aloud, stimulated recall Chart review Surveys Qualitative ResearchWhat is the phenomenon?

Use When Predictors can’t be randomized Subjects &/or treatments not controllable Control groups not available Methods Surveys Chart review Archived data Correlational Research All data is confidential

Use When Specific intervention Temporal relationship Feasible explanatory mechanism Subjects and treatments controlled Methods Control over treatment and measurement Randomization Control Groups Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Research

Defining Your Sample • Target population • Accessible population • Intended sample • Inclusion and exclusion criteria • Availability • Time frame • Willingness to participate • Intended variables • Actual sample

Research DesignsQuasi Experimental • One shot case study X -----O • One group Pretest-Posttest O-----X-----O (O=Observation X=Treatment)

Research Designs Quasi-Experimental • Post-test only control group X---------O -----------O • Pre-test/Post-test Control Group O--------X-------O O-----------------O

Research Designs Experimental • Post-test only control group (Randomized) X---------O -----------O • Pre-test/Post-test Control Group (Randomized) O--------X-------O O-----------------O • Solomon Four Group Design (Randomized) (1) O------X------O (2) O--------------O (3) ------X------O (4) --------------O R = randomization R R R

Threats to Internal Validity • History • Maturation • Repeated measurement • Statistical regression • Selection • Loss of Subjects/mortality • Investigator bias

External Validity • Is the sample representative of the population? Can the study be generalized to the population? • Are the conditions the same? For example, laboratory setting versus natural setting. • Did the subjects act differently because they were subjects in the study (Hawthorne Effect)?

Is Your Study Research? • Research means a systematic investigation including research, development, testing, and evaluation to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge • If you might publish the results, it’s research AND NEEDS IRB REVIEW • What about quality or evaluation studies?

Issues for the IRB • Data normally collected in your course? • Data collected specifically for your study? • Will the data be anonymous? • Will you use an any identifier? Is it linked? • Do you need an informed consent? • What kind of review? Exempt, Expedited, Full

Analyzing Data • Get a consultation on the analysis • Even if you know biostatistics - ed research uses some different methods • Do it before you start the study!

Analyzing Data • Where to look for consultations • Department - colleagues who have done this before • Medical school - Dean’s office, ed research unit • University - school of ed, public health, psychology, educational support centers

Publishing Med Ed Research • Emergency Medicine journals & meetings • General Medical Education journals & meetings • Academic Medicine, Medical Education, Teaching and Learning in Medicine, Advances in Health Sciences Education, Medical Teacher, … • Assoc. of American Medical Colleges, Ottawa Conference, Assoc. for Medical Education in Europe, ACGME, and many more

Research That Makes a Difference • Investigates important questions • Connects study to prior research and to theory • Uses appropriate research design & data analysis procedures • Disseminates results

Planning Next Steps • Create a project plan: tasks & deadlines • Find collaborators, mentors, consultants • Search for funding • Protect time for research • Keep a research journal • Have fun

References • Bass, Dunn, Norton, Stewart, & Tudiver. (1993). Conducting Research in the Practice Setting. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. • Campbell & Stanley (1963). Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Research. Dallas: Houghton Mifflin. • Glesne & Peshkin (1992). Becoming Qualitative Researcher: An Introduction. Longman. • Hulley & Cummings (1988). Designing Clinical Research. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.

• More by User

Formulating Research Problem

Formulating Research Problem. COMMUNITY RESEARCH PROGRAM 20 12. Introduction. Research problem: Uncertainty about something in the population To be resolved By making measurement. Choosing research questions. Infer. Infer. Truth in the universe. Truth in the study.

1.44k views • 19 slides

Formulating the research design

Formulating the research design. Research design - the general plan of how you will go about answering your research questions Objectives Sources Constraints p hilosophy = question = design. The purpose of your research. Exploratory studies : good means of finding out

924 views • 22 slides

Designing Studies

Designing Studies. Section 4.1A. Statistical Studies. National Hwy Traffic Safety Administration reports that seat belt use in passenger vehicles increased from 83% to 84% in 2009.

478 views • 33 slides

Formulating and Clarifying the Research Topic

Formulating and Clarifying the Research Topic. Faisal Abbas, PhD Lecture 3 rd. What we have already discussed?. Important steps of for formulating the topic include; 1). Attributes

543 views • 20 slides

Formulating and Clarifying the Research Topic. Faisal Abbas, PhD Lecture 2 nd. Formulating &amp; Clarifying Research Topic. The important steps Identifying the “ A ttributes” of a good research topic Generating “ I deas” that help you select a suitable topic

1.47k views • 29 slides

Formulating Research Problem. COMMUNITY RESEARCH PROGRAM 20 12. Introduction . Research problem: Uncertainty about something in the population To be resolved By making measurement. Choosing research questions. Infer. Infer. Truth in the universe. Truth in the study.

1.12k views • 19 slides

Formulating a Research Question

Formulating a Research Question. October 2012. A 7-Point Summary. A research topic usually deals with at least two concepts or ideas. The focus of the research topic is usually the relationship between the two concepts.

500 views • 6 slides

Formulating a Research Problem

Formulating a Research Problem. To be Discussed!!!. The Research Problem The importance of Formulating a Research Problem Sources of Research Problem Consideration in selecting a research problem Steps in the formulation of a research problem Establishing operational definitions.

8.22k views • 15 slides

Formulating Interview Questions

Formulating Interview Questions. Use o pen-ended questions. Use o pen-ended q uestions. A question that allows the interview subject to formulate an in-depth answer. NOT allow for a yes / no answer (closed-ended). Use open-ended questions.

627 views • 21 slides

Formulating a Research Question. Spring 2014. Doing research . A research topic usually deals with at least two concepts or ideas. The focus of the research topic is usually the relationship between the two concepts.

782 views • 6 slides

Formulating research questions

Dr Alexandra Allan. Formulating research questions. Overview. Why are research questions important? What makes a good research question? What types of research questions exist? How do I begin to formulate my own questions?. Introduction. Research as a journey...

777 views • 23 slides

Formulating a Research Question. Sources We Use When Formulating a Research Question Include: Personal Experiences Stated Objectives of a Program Research Articles Theory Pragmatic Reasons Identify Research Question to Meet Qualifications of Grant. Own Experience .

908 views • 8 slides

Formulating a Research Plan

Formulating a Research Plan. Maureen Cahill and TJ Striepe January 2012. Introduction. Using tools from Legal Research &amp; Writing Issue spotting Formulating issues for research Creating a research plan Identifying and finding resources Tracking results Finalizing research. Introduction.

833 views • 20 slides

WORKS Research Questions Organisational case studies

WORKS Research Questions Organisational case studies. Restructuring of value chains = decomposition and recomposition of jobs, workplaces, companies and sectors Impacts on the quality of work: Direct effects on employment conditions Indirect effects on employment conditions

270 views • 14 slides

Formulating and Clarifying Research Topics

Formulating and Clarifying Research Topics. MSc. Nguyen Duc Hoa Cuong [email protected] Skype: Insight.Vietnam Cell: 0912120860. Objectives. Generate ideas that will help in the choice of a suitable research topic Identify the attributes of a good research topic

663 views • 13 slides

Formulating Statistical Questions and Collecting Data

Formulating Statistical Questions and Collecting Data. Alliance Class September 2011. GAISE: Instructional programs from Pre K-12 should enable all students to:. Formulate questions that can be addressed with data Collect , organize, and display data Analyze data 4. Interpret results.

634 views • 39 slides

Formulating and clarifying the research topic

Formulating and clarifying the research topic. How to find a question. ...how the process of generating research topic which is waterproof intriguing exiting manageable feasible ...should go? ...what are the parameters of a good question? ...why was Einstein brilliant?

575 views • 15 slides

Formulating the Research Design

Formulating the Research Design. Faisal Abbas, PhD Lecture 9 th. Action Research. Focuses on and emphasizes the purpose of the research: the management of change.

320 views • 14 slides

Identifying Issues &amp; Formulating Questions

Identifying Issues &amp; Formulating Questions. 46-566: Program Evaluation. What could go wrong?. Organization wishes to design a new bonus system Problems: The old system Promise: The new system The new system Two Components Profit Customer Loyalty Most Important Industry Measure.

107 views • 8 slides

Formulating a Research Topic

Formulating a Research Topic. Abhinay Sawant February 18, 2009 Economics 201FS. Update from Last Time. Fixed programs: Z-Scores Tri-Power Quarticity Realized Volatility Signature Plots Still Coarse Sampling: Currently, sampling frequency = 8 min

352 views • 16 slides

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base
• Starting the research process
• 10 Research Question Examples to Guide Your Research Project

10 Research Question Examples to Guide your Research Project

Published on October 30, 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on October 19, 2023.

The research question is one of the most important parts of your research paper , thesis or dissertation . It’s important to spend some time assessing and refining your question before you get started.

The exact form of your question will depend on a few things, such as the length of your project, the type of research you’re conducting, the topic , and the research problem . However, all research questions should be focused, specific, and relevant to a timely social or scholarly issue.

Once you’ve read our guide on how to write a research question , you can use these examples to craft your own.

Note that the design of your research question can depend on what method you are pursuing. Here are a few options for qualitative, quantitative, and statistical research questions.

Other interesting articles

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

Methodology

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit 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, October 19). 10 Research Question Examples to Guide your Research Project. Scribbr. Retrieved March 23, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/research-question-examples/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, how to choose a dissertation topic | 8 steps to follow, evaluating sources | methods & examples, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Formulating research objectives.ppt

Related Papers

Maternal & child nutrition

Neha Singh , Bernadette Daelmans

Suboptimal complementary feeding practices contribute to a rapid increase in the prevalence of stunting in young children from age 6 months. The design of effective programmes to improve infant and young child feeding requires a sound understanding of the local situation and a systematic process for prioritizing interventions, integrating them into existing delivery platforms and monitoring their implementation and impact. The identification of adequate food-based feeding recommendations that respect locally available foods and address gaps in nutrient availability is particularly challenging. We describe two tools that are now available to strengthen infant and young child-feeding programming at national and subnational levels. ProPAN is a set of research tools that guide users through a step-by-step process for identifying problems related to young child nutrition; defining the context in which these problems occur; formulating, testing, and selecting behaviour-change recommendati...

Naveen Kumar

leduyen hoang

caroline tobing

tan yong ling

Kimhok Taing

This is a work of an anonymous person whose work my friend shared with me and my friends in Year 3 during the struggle of exam preparation in Research Methodologies 302, IFL, RUPP.

RELATED PAPERS

Ali ahmad shoaib

Nils Magerøy

Eleni Miltsakaki

Revista De La Facultad De Agronomia De La Universidad Del Zulia

Gabi Linari

Alina Rynio

American Political Science Review

Barbara Grosh

Fertility and Sterility

Cássio Pires

Investigando os sons de línguas não nativas: Uma introdução

Reiner Perozzo

Free Radical Biology and Medicine

Patrick Sun

Pediatrics &amp; Neonatology

MUSTAFA KUL

청담안마DДLP0CHД 7ㆍCØM청담건마ꘕ달포차☷청담오피

Margaret Camms

Luiza Berger Von Ende

Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology

NAYAN ADHIKARY

Journal of Clinical Microbiology

Scott Winston

Thamara Domínguez

Diego Londoño

Alex Lumpkin

Biodiversitas

Ramses Firdaus

Michal Bočák

SOCIAL WORK IN ADDICTIONS AND HEALTH CARE, Claudiu Ștefani • Nicoleta Neamțu (eds.), Universitatea Babeș‐Bolyai, Presa Universitară Clujeană, Cluj‐Napoca, România

Željko V I D O S A V A Kaluđerović

International Journal of Value Chain Management

Ahmed Mohammad

Oral Oncology Supplement

Alexander Rapidis

La sociedad argentina en la postpandemia.

Fernando Peirano

Journal of Approximation Theory

See More Documents Like This

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024