• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • QuestionPro

survey software icon

  • Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case NPS+ Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
  • Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

theoretical study research questions

Home Market Research Research Tools and Apps

Theoretical Research: Definition, Methods + Examples

Theoretical research allows to explore and analyze a research topic by employing abstract theoretical structures and philosophical concepts.

Research is the careful study of a particular research problem or concern using the scientific method. A theory is essential for any research project because it gives it direction and helps prove or disprove something. Theoretical basis helps us figure out how things work and why we do certain things.

Theoretical research lets you examine and discuss a research object using philosophical ideas and abstract theoretical structures.

In theoretical research, you can’t look at the research object directly. With the help of research literature, your research aims to define and sketch out the chosen topic’s conceptual models, explanations, and structures.

LEARN ABOUT: Research Process Steps

This blog will cover theoretical research and why it is essential. In addition to that, we are going to go over some examples.

What is the theoretical research?

Theoretical research is the systematic examination of a set of beliefs and assumptions.

It aims to learn more about a subject and help us understand it better. The information gathered in this way is not used for anything in particular because this kind of research aims to learn more.

All professionals, like biologists, chemists, engineers, architects, philosophers, writers, sociologists, historians, etc., can do theoretical research. No matter what field you work in, theoretical research is the foundation for new ideas.

It tries to answer basic questions about people, which is why this kind of research is used in every field of knowledge.

For example , a researcher starts with the idea that we need to understand the world around us. To do this, he begins with a hypothesis and tests it through experiments that will help him develop new ideas. 

What is the theoretical framework?

A theoretical framework is a critical component in research that provides a structured foundation for investigating a specific topic or problem. It encompasses a set of interconnected theories, existing theories, and concepts that guide the entire research process. 

The theoretical framework introduces a comprehensive understanding of the subject matter. Also, the theoretical framework strengthens the research’s validity and specifies the key elements that will be explored. Furthermore, it connects different ideas and theories, forming a cohesive structure that underpins the research endeavor.

A complete theoretical framework consists of a network of theories, existing theories, and concepts that collectively shape the direction of a research study. 

The theoretical framework is the fundamental principle that will be explored, strengthens the research’s credibility by aligning it with established knowledge, specifies the variables under investigation, and connects different aspects of the research to create a unified approach.

Theoretical frameworks are the intellectual scaffolding upon which the research is constructed. It is the lens through which researchers view their subject, guiding their choice of methodologies, data collection, analysis, and interpretation. By incorporating existing theory, and established concepts, a theoretical framework not only grounds the research but also provides a coherent roadmap for exploring the intricacies of the chosen topic.

Benefits of theoretical research

Theoretical research yields a wealth of benefits across various fields, from social sciences to human resource development and political science. Here’s a breakdown of these benefits while incorporating the requested topics:

Predictive power

Theoretical models are the cornerstone of theoretical research. They grant us predictive power, enabling us to forecast intricate behaviors within complex systems, like societal interactions. In political science, for instance, a theoretical model helps anticipate potential outcomes of policy changes.

Understanding human behavior

Drawing from key social science theories, it assists us in deciphering human behavior and societal dynamics. For instance, in the context of human resource development, theories related to motivation and psychology provide insights into how to effectively manage a diverse workforce.

Optimizing workforce

In the realm of human resource development, insights gleaned from theoretical research, along with the research methods knowledge base, help create targeted training programs. By understanding various learning methodologies and psychological factors, organizations can optimize workforce training for better results.

Building on foundations

It doesn’t exist in isolation; it builds upon existing theories. For instance, within the human resource development handbook, theoretical research expands established concepts, refining their applicability to contemporary organizational challenges.

Ethical policy formulation

Within political science, theoretical research isn’t confined to governance structures. It extends to ethical considerations, aiding policymakers in creating policies that balance the collective good with individual rights, ensuring just and fair governance. 

Rigorous investigations

Theoretical research underscores the importance of research methods knowledge base. This knowledge equips researchers in theory-building research methods and other fields to design robust research methodologies, yielding accurate data and credible insights.

Long-term impact

Theoretical research leaves a lasting impact. The theoretical models and insights from key social science theories provide enduring frameworks for subsequent research, contributing to the cumulative growth of knowledge in these fields.

Innovation and practical applications

It doesn’t merely remain theoretical. It inspires innovation and practical applications. By merging insights from diverse theories and fields, practitioners in human resource development devise innovative strategies to foster employee growth and well-being.

Theoretical research method

Researchers follow so many methods when doing research. There are two types of theoretical research methods.

  • Scientific methods
  • Social science method 

Let’s explore them below:

theoretical-research-method

Scientific method

Scientific methods have some important points that you should know. Let’s figure them out below:

  • Observation: Any part you want to explain can be found through observation. It helps define the area of research.
  • Hypothesis: The hypothesis is the idea put into words, which helps us figure out what we see.
  • Experimentation: Hypotheses are tested through experiments to see if they are true. These experiments are different for each research.
  • Theory: When we create a theory, we do it because we believe it will explain hypotheses of higher probability.
  • Conclusions: Conclusions are the learnings we derive from our investigation.

Social science methods

There are different methods for social science theoretical research. It consists of polls, documentation, and statistical analysis.

  • Polls: It is a process whereby the researcher uses a topic-specific questionnaire to gather data. No changes are made to the environment or the phenomenon where the polls are conducted to get the most accurate results. QuestionPro live polls are a great way to get live audiences involved and engaged.
  • Documentation: Documentation is a helpful and valuable technique that helps the researcher learn more about the subject. It means visiting libraries or other specialized places, like documentation centers, to look at the existing bibliography. With the documentation, you can find out what came before the investigated topic and what other investigations have found. This step is important because it shows whether or not similar investigations have been done before and what the results were.
  • Statistic analysis : Statistics is a branch of math that looks at random events and differences. It follows the rules that are established by probability. It’s used a lot in sociology and language research. 

Examples of theoretical research

We talked about theoretical study methods in the previous part. We’ll give you some examples to help you understand it better.

Example 1: Theoretical research into the health benefits of hemp

The plant’s active principles are extracted and evaluated, and by studying their components, it is possible to determine what they contain and whether they can potentially serve as a medication.

Example 2: Linguistics research

Investigate to determine how many people in the Basque Country speak Basque. Surveys can be used to determine the number of native Basque speakers and those who speak Basque as a second language.

Example 3: Philosophical research

Research politics and ethics as they are presented in the writings of Hanna Arendt from a theoretical perspective.

LEARN ABOUT: 12 Best Tools for Researchers

From our above discussion, we learned about theoretical research and its methods and gave some examples. It explains things and leads to more knowledge for the sake of knowledge. This kind of research tries to find out more about a thing or an idea, but the results may take time to be helpful in the real world. 

This research is sometimes called basic research. Theoretical research is an important process that gives researchers valuable data with insight.

QuestionPro is a strong platform for managing your data. You can conduct simple surveys to more complex research using QuestionPro survey software.

At QuestionPro, we give researchers tools for collecting data, such as our survey software and a library of insights for any long-term study. Contact our expert team to find out more about it.

FREE TRIAL         LEARN MORE

MORE LIKE THIS

theoretical study research questions

A Tale of Evolution: Cristina Ortega’s Life@QuestionPro

Feb 23, 2024

subscription management software

Top 10 Subscription Management Software for Your Business

importance of customer experience management

Importance of Customer Experience Management | QuestionPro

engagement survey vendors

10 Engagement Survey Vendors for Workplace Success in 2024

Feb 22, 2024

Other categories

  • Academic Research
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Assessments
  • Brand Awareness
  • Case Studies
  • Communities
  • Consumer Insights
  • Customer effort score
  • Customer Engagement
  • Customer Experience
  • Customer Loyalty
  • Customer Research
  • Customer Satisfaction
  • Employee Benefits
  • Employee Engagement
  • Employee Retention
  • Friday Five
  • General Data Protection Regulation
  • Insights Hub
  • Life@QuestionPro
  • Market Research
  • Mobile diaries
  • Mobile Surveys
  • New Features
  • Online Communities
  • Question Types
  • Questionnaire
  • QuestionPro Products
  • Release Notes
  • Research Tools and Apps
  • Revenue at Risk
  • Survey Templates
  • Training Tips
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Learning Series
  • What’s Coming Up
  • Workforce Intelligence
  • USC Libraries
  • Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

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

Theories are formulated to explain, predict, and understand phenomena and, in many cases, to challenge and extend existing knowledge within the limits of critical bounded assumptions or predictions of behavior. The theoretical framework is the structure that can hold or support a theory of a research study. The theoretical framework encompasses not just the theory but the narrative explanation about how the researcher engages in using the theory and its underlying assumptions to investigate the research problem.

Abend, Gabriel. "The Meaning of Theory." Sociological Theory 26 (June 2008): 173–199; Kivunja, Charles. "Distinguishing between Theory, Theoretical Framework, and Conceptual Framework: A Systematic Review of Lessons from the Field." International Journal of Higher Education 7 (2018): 44-53; Swanson, Richard A. Theory Building in Applied Disciplines . San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers 2013; Varpio, Lara, Elise Paradis, Sebastian Uijtdehaage, and Meredith Young. "The Distinctions between Theory, Theoretical Framework, and Conceptual Framework." Academic Medicine 95 (July 2020): 989-994.

Importance of Theory and a Theoretical Framework

Theories can be unfamiliar to the beginning researcher because they are rarely used in high school social studies curriculum and, as a result, can come across as dubious and imprecise when first introduced as part of a writing assignment. However, in their most simplified form, a theory is simply a set of assumptions or predictions about something you think will happen based on existing evidence and that can be tested to see if those outcomes turn out to be true. Of course, it is slightly more deliberate than that and so, summarized from Kivunja (2018, p. 46), here are the essential characteristics of a theory.

  • It is logical and coherent
  • It has clear definitions of terms or variables, and has boundary conditions [i.e., it is not an open-ended statement]
  • It has a domain where it applies
  • It has clearly described relationships among variables
  • It describes, explains, and makes specific predictions
  • It comprises of concepts, themes, principles, and constructs
  • It must have been based on empirical data [i.e., it is not a guess]
  • It must have made claims that are subject to testing, been tested and verified
  • It must be clear and concise
  • Its assertions or predictions must be different and better than those in existing theories
  • Its predictions must be general enough to be applicable to and understood within multiple contexts
  • Its assertions or predictions are relevant, and if applied as predicted, will result in the predicted outcome
  • The assertions and predictions are not immutable, but subject to revision and improvement as researchers use the theory to make sense of phenomena
  • Its concepts and principles explain what is going on and why
  • Its concepts and principles are substantive enough to enable us to predict a future

Given these characteristics, a theory can be understood as the foundation from which you conduct research to test existing assumptions or predictions about the research problem in a way that leads to new knowledge and understanding as well as, in some cases, discovering ways to improve the relevance of the theory itself.

A theoretical framework consists of concepts and, together with their definitions and reference to relevant scholarly literature, existing theory that is used for your particular study. The theoretical framework must demonstrate an understanding of theories and concepts that are relevant to the topic of your research paper and that relate to the broader areas of knowledge being considered.

The theoretical framework is most often not something readily found within the literature . You must review course readings and pertinent research studies for theories and analytic models that are relevant to the research problem you are investigating. The selection of a theory should depend on its appropriateness, ease of application, and explanatory power.

The theoretical framework strengthens the study in the following ways :

  • An explicit statement of  theoretical assumptions permits the reader to evaluate them critically.
  • The theoretical framework connects the researcher to existing knowledge. Guided by a relevant theory, you are given a basis for your hypotheses and choice of research methods.
  • Articulating the theoretical assumptions of a research study forces you to address questions of why and how. It permits you to intellectually transition from simply describing a phenomenon you have observed to generalizing about various aspects of that phenomenon.
  • Having a theory helps you identify the limits to those generalizations. A theoretical framework specifies which key variables influence a phenomenon of interest and highlights the need to examine how those key variables might differ and under what circumstances.

By virtue of its applicative nature, good theory in the social sciences is of value precisely because it fulfills one primary purpose: to explain the meaning, nature, and challenges associated with a phenomenon, often experienced but unexplained in the world in which we live, so that we may use that knowledge and understanding to act in more informed and effective ways.

The Conceptual Framework. College of Education. Alabama State University; Corvellec, Hervé, ed. What is Theory?: Answers from the Social and Cultural Sciences . Stockholm: Copenhagen Business School Press, 2013; Asher, Herbert B. Theory-Building and Data Analysis in the Social Sciences . Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Press, 1984; Drafting an Argument. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Kivunja, Charles. "Distinguishing between Theory, Theoretical Framework, and Conceptual Framework: A Systematic Review of Lessons from the Field." International Journal of Higher Education 7 (2018): 44-53; Ravitch, Sharon M. and Matthew Riggan. Reason and Rigor: How Conceptual Frameworks Guide Research . Second edition. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2017; Trochim, William M.K. Philosophy of Research. Research Methods Knowledge Base. 2006; Jarvis, Peter. The Practitioner-Researcher. Developing Theory from Practice . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1999.

Strategies for Developing the Theoretical Framework

I.  Developing the Framework

Here are some strategies to develop of an effective theoretical framework:

  • Examine your thesis title and research problem . The research problem anchors your entire study and forms the basis from which you construct your theoretical framework.
  • Brainstorm about what you consider to be the key variables in your research . Answer the question, "What factors contribute to the presumed effect?"
  • Review related literature to find how scholars have addressed your research problem. Identify the assumptions from which the author(s) addressed the problem.
  • List  the constructs and variables that might be relevant to your study. Group these variables into independent and dependent categories.
  • Review key social science theories that are introduced to you in your course readings and choose the theory that can best explain the relationships between the key variables in your study [note the Writing Tip on this page].
  • Discuss the assumptions or propositions of this theory and point out their relevance to your research.

A theoretical framework is used to limit the scope of the relevant data by focusing on specific variables and defining the specific viewpoint [framework] that the researcher will take in analyzing and interpreting the data to be gathered. It also facilitates the understanding of concepts and variables according to given definitions and builds new knowledge by validating or challenging theoretical assumptions.

II.  Purpose

Think of theories as the conceptual basis for understanding, analyzing, and designing ways to investigate relationships within social systems. To that end, the following roles served by a theory can help guide the development of your framework.

  • Means by which new research data can be interpreted and coded for future use,
  • Response to new problems that have no previously identified solutions strategy,
  • Means for identifying and defining research problems,
  • Means for prescribing or evaluating solutions to research problems,
  • Ways of discerning certain facts among the accumulated knowledge that are important and which facts are not,
  • Means of giving old data new interpretations and new meaning,
  • Means by which to identify important new issues and prescribe the most critical research questions that need to be answered to maximize understanding of the issue,
  • Means of providing members of a professional discipline with a common language and a frame of reference for defining the boundaries of their profession, and
  • Means to guide and inform research so that it can, in turn, guide research efforts and improve professional practice.

Adapted from: Torraco, R. J. “Theory-Building Research Methods.” In Swanson R. A. and E. F. Holton III , editors. Human Resource Development Handbook: Linking Research and Practice . (San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler, 1997): pp. 114-137; Jacard, James and Jacob Jacoby. Theory Construction and Model-Building Skills: A Practical Guide for Social Scientists . New York: Guilford, 2010; Ravitch, Sharon M. and Matthew Riggan. Reason and Rigor: How Conceptual Frameworks Guide Research . Second edition. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2017; Sutton, Robert I. and Barry M. Staw. “What Theory is Not.” Administrative Science Quarterly 40 (September 1995): 371-384.

Structure and Writing Style

The theoretical framework may be rooted in a specific theory , in which case, your work is expected to test the validity of that existing theory in relation to specific events, issues, or phenomena. Many social science research papers fit into this rubric. For example, Peripheral Realism Theory, which categorizes perceived differences among nation-states as those that give orders, those that obey, and those that rebel, could be used as a means for understanding conflicted relationships among countries in Africa. A test of this theory could be the following: Does Peripheral Realism Theory help explain intra-state actions, such as, the disputed split between southern and northern Sudan that led to the creation of two nations?

However, you may not always be asked by your professor to test a specific theory in your paper, but to develop your own framework from which your analysis of the research problem is derived . Based upon the above example, it is perhaps easiest to understand the nature and function of a theoretical framework if it is viewed as an answer to two basic questions:

  • What is the research problem/question? [e.g., "How should the individual and the state relate during periods of conflict?"]
  • Why is your approach a feasible solution? [i.e., justify the application of your choice of a particular theory and explain why alternative constructs were rejected. I could choose instead to test Instrumentalist or Circumstantialists models developed among ethnic conflict theorists that rely upon socio-economic-political factors to explain individual-state relations and to apply this theoretical model to periods of war between nations].

The answers to these questions come from a thorough review of the literature and your course readings [summarized and analyzed in the next section of your paper] and the gaps in the research that emerge from the review process. With this in mind, a complete theoretical framework will likely not emerge until after you have completed a thorough review of the literature .

Just as a research problem in your paper requires contextualization and background information, a theory requires a framework for understanding its application to the topic being investigated. When writing and revising this part of your research paper, keep in mind the following:

  • Clearly describe the framework, concepts, models, or specific theories that underpin your study . This includes noting who the key theorists are in the field who have conducted research on the problem you are investigating and, when necessary, the historical context that supports the formulation of that theory. This latter element is particularly important if the theory is relatively unknown or it is borrowed from another discipline.
  • Position your theoretical framework within a broader context of related frameworks, concepts, models, or theories . As noted in the example above, there will likely be several concepts, theories, or models that can be used to help develop a framework for understanding the research problem. Therefore, note why the theory you've chosen is the appropriate one.
  • The present tense is used when writing about theory. Although the past tense can be used to describe the history of a theory or the role of key theorists, the construction of your theoretical framework is happening now.
  • You should make your theoretical assumptions as explicit as possible . Later, your discussion of methodology should be linked back to this theoretical framework.
  • Don’t just take what the theory says as a given! Reality is never accurately represented in such a simplistic way; if you imply that it can be, you fundamentally distort a reader's ability to understand the findings that emerge. Given this, always note the limitations of the theoretical framework you've chosen [i.e., what parts of the research problem require further investigation because the theory inadequately explains a certain phenomena].

The Conceptual Framework. College of Education. Alabama State University; Conceptual Framework: What Do You Think is Going On? College of Engineering. University of Michigan; Drafting an Argument. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Lynham, Susan A. “The General Method of Theory-Building Research in Applied Disciplines.” Advances in Developing Human Resources 4 (August 2002): 221-241; Tavallaei, Mehdi and Mansor Abu Talib. "A General Perspective on the Role of Theory in Qualitative Research." Journal of International Social Research 3 (Spring 2010); Ravitch, Sharon M. and Matthew Riggan. Reason and Rigor: How Conceptual Frameworks Guide Research . Second edition. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2017; Reyes, Victoria. Demystifying the Journal Article. Inside Higher Education; Trochim, William M.K. Philosophy of Research. Research Methods Knowledge Base. 2006; Weick, Karl E. “The Work of Theorizing.” In Theorizing in Social Science: The Context of Discovery . Richard Swedberg, editor. (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2014), pp. 177-194.

Writing Tip

Borrowing Theoretical Constructs from Other Disciplines

An increasingly important trend in the social and behavioral sciences is to think about and attempt to understand research problems from an interdisciplinary perspective. One way to do this is to not rely exclusively on the theories developed within your particular discipline, but to think about how an issue might be informed by theories developed in other disciplines. For example, if you are a political science student studying the rhetorical strategies used by female incumbents in state legislature campaigns, theories about the use of language could be derived, not only from political science, but linguistics, communication studies, philosophy, psychology, and, in this particular case, feminist studies. Building theoretical frameworks based on the postulates and hypotheses developed in other disciplinary contexts can be both enlightening and an effective way to be more engaged in the research topic.

CohenMiller, A. S. and P. Elizabeth Pate. "A Model for Developing Interdisciplinary Research Theoretical Frameworks." The Qualitative Researcher 24 (2019): 1211-1226; Frodeman, Robert. The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity . New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Another Writing Tip

Don't Undertheorize!

Do not leave the theory hanging out there in the introduction never to be mentioned again. Undertheorizing weakens your paper. The theoretical framework you describe should guide your study throughout the paper. Be sure to always connect theory to the review of pertinent literature and to explain in the discussion part of your paper how the theoretical framework you chose supports analysis of the research problem or, if appropriate, how the theoretical framework was found to be inadequate in explaining the phenomenon you were investigating. In that case, don't be afraid to propose your own theory based on your findings.

Yet Another Writing Tip

What's a Theory? What's a Hypothesis?

The terms theory and hypothesis are often used interchangeably in newspapers and popular magazines and in non-academic settings. However, the difference between theory and hypothesis in scholarly research is important, particularly when using an experimental design. A theory is a well-established principle that has been developed to explain some aspect of the natural world. Theories arise from repeated observation and testing and incorporates facts, laws, predictions, and tested assumptions that are widely accepted [e.g., rational choice theory; grounded theory; critical race theory].

A hypothesis is a specific, testable prediction about what you expect to happen in your study. For example, an experiment designed to look at the relationship between study habits and test anxiety might have a hypothesis that states, "We predict that students with better study habits will suffer less test anxiety." Unless your study is exploratory in nature, your hypothesis should always explain what you expect to happen during the course of your research.

The key distinctions are:

  • A theory predicts events in a broad, general context;  a hypothesis makes a specific prediction about a specified set of circumstances.
  • A theory has been extensively tested and is generally accepted among a set of scholars; a hypothesis is a speculative guess that has yet to be tested.

Cherry, Kendra. Introduction to Research Methods: Theory and Hypothesis. About.com Psychology; Gezae, Michael et al. Welcome Presentation on Hypothesis. Slideshare presentation.

Still Yet Another Writing Tip

Be Prepared to Challenge the Validity of an Existing Theory

Theories are meant to be tested and their underlying assumptions challenged; they are not rigid or intransigent, but are meant to set forth general principles for explaining phenomena or predicting outcomes. Given this, testing theoretical assumptions is an important way that knowledge in any discipline develops and grows. If you're asked to apply an existing theory to a research problem, the analysis will likely include the expectation by your professor that you should offer modifications to the theory based on your research findings.

Indications that theoretical assumptions may need to be modified can include the following:

  • Your findings suggest that the theory does not explain or account for current conditions or circumstances or the passage of time,
  • The study reveals a finding that is incompatible with what the theory attempts to explain or predict, or
  • Your analysis reveals that the theory overly generalizes behaviors or actions without taking into consideration specific factors revealed from your analysis [e.g., factors related to culture, nationality, history, gender, ethnicity, age, geographic location, legal norms or customs , religion, social class, socioeconomic status, etc.].

Philipsen, Kristian. "Theory Building: Using Abductive Search Strategies." In Collaborative Research Design: Working with Business for Meaningful Findings . Per Vagn Freytag and Louise Young, editors. (Singapore: Springer Nature, 2018), pp. 45-71; Shepherd, Dean A. and Roy Suddaby. "Theory Building: A Review and Integration." Journal of Management 43 (2017): 59-86.

  • << Previous: The Research Problem/Question
  • Next: 5. The Literature Review >>
  • Last Updated: Feb 8, 2024 1:57 PM
  • URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

  • Knowledge Base
  • Dissertation

What is a Theoretical Framework? | A Step-by-Step Guide

Published on 14 February 2020 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 10 October 2022.

A theoretical framework is a foundational review of existing theories that serves as a roadmap for developing the arguments you will use in your own work.

Theories are developed by researchers to explain phenomena, draw connections, and make predictions. In a theoretical framework, you explain the existing theories that support your research, showing that your work is grounded in established ideas.

In other words, your theoretical framework justifies and contextualises your later research, and it’s a crucial first step for your research paper , thesis, or dissertation . A well-rounded theoretical framework sets you up for success later on in your research and writing process.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Be assured that you'll submit flawless writing. Upload your document to correct all your mistakes.

upload-your-document-ai-proofreader

Table of contents

Why do you need a theoretical framework, how to write a theoretical framework, structuring your theoretical framework, example of a theoretical framework, frequently asked questions about theoretical frameworks.

Before you start your own research, it’s crucial to familiarise yourself with the theories and models that other researchers have already developed. Your theoretical framework is your opportunity to present and explain what you’ve learned, situated within your future research topic.

There’s a good chance that many different theories about your topic already exist, especially if the topic is broad. In your theoretical framework, you will evaluate, compare, and select the most relevant ones.

By “framing” your research within a clearly defined field, you make the reader aware of the assumptions that inform your approach, showing the rationale behind your choices for later sections, like methodology and discussion . This part of your dissertation lays the foundations that will support your analysis, helping you interpret your results and make broader generalisations .

  • In literature , a scholar using postmodernist literary theory would analyse The Great Gatsby differently than a scholar using Marxist literary theory.
  • In psychology , a behaviourist approach to depression would involve different research methods and assumptions than a psychoanalytic approach.
  • In economics , wealth inequality would be explained and interpreted differently based on a classical economics approach than based on a Keynesian economics one.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

theoretical study research questions

Correct my document today

To create your own theoretical framework, you can follow these three steps:

  • Identifying your key concepts
  • Evaluating and explaining relevant theories
  • Showing how your research fits into existing research

1. Identify your key concepts

The first step is to pick out the key terms from your problem statement and research questions . Concepts often have multiple definitions, so your theoretical framework should also clearly define what you mean by each term.

To investigate this problem, you have identified and plan to focus on the following problem statement, objective, and research questions:

Problem : Many online customers do not return to make subsequent purchases.

Objective : To increase the quantity of return customers.

Research question : How can the satisfaction of company X’s online customers be improved in order to increase the quantity of return customers?

2. Evaluate and explain relevant theories

By conducting a thorough literature review , you can determine how other researchers have defined these key concepts and drawn connections between them. As you write your theoretical framework, your aim is to compare and critically evaluate the approaches that different authors have taken.

After discussing different models and theories, you can establish the definitions that best fit your research and justify why. You can even combine theories from different fields to build your own unique framework if this better suits your topic.

Make sure to at least briefly mention each of the most important theories related to your key concepts. If there is a well-established theory that you don’t want to apply to your own research, explain why it isn’t suitable for your purposes.

3. Show how your research fits into existing research

Apart from summarising and discussing existing theories, your theoretical framework should show how your project will make use of these ideas and take them a step further.

You might aim to do one or more of the following:

  • Test whether a theory holds in a specific, previously unexamined context
  • Use an existing theory as a basis for interpreting your results
  • Critique or challenge a theory
  • Combine different theories in a new or unique way

A theoretical framework can sometimes be integrated into a literature review chapter , but it can also be included as its own chapter or section in your dissertation. As a rule of thumb, if your research involves dealing with a lot of complex theories, it’s a good idea to include a separate theoretical framework chapter.

There are no fixed rules for structuring your theoretical framework, but it’s best to double-check with your department or institution to make sure they don’t have any formatting guidelines. The most important thing is to create a clear, logical structure. There are a few ways to do this:

  • Draw on your research questions, structuring each section around a question or key concept
  • Organise by theory cluster
  • Organise by date

As in all other parts of your research paper , thesis, or dissertation , make sure to properly cite your sources to avoid plagiarism .

To get a sense of what this part of your thesis or dissertation might look like, take a look at our full example .

While a theoretical framework describes the theoretical underpinnings of your work based on existing research, a conceptual framework allows you to draw your own conclusions, mapping out the variables you may use in your study and the interplay between them.

A literature review and a theoretical framework are not the same thing and cannot be used interchangeably. While a theoretical framework describes the theoretical underpinnings of your work, a literature review critically evaluates existing research relating to your topic. You’ll likely need both in your dissertation .

A theoretical framework can sometimes be integrated into a  literature review chapter , but it can also be included as its own chapter or section in your dissertation . As a rule of thumb, if your research involves dealing with a lot of complex theories, it’s a good idea to include a separate theoretical framework chapter.

A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources (such as books, journal articles, and theses) related to a specific topic or research question .

It is often written as part of a dissertation , thesis, research paper , or proposal .

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). What is a Theoretical Framework? | A Step-by-Step Guide. Scribbr. Retrieved 22 February 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/the-theoretical-framework/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is a literature review | guide, template, & examples, how to write a results section | tips & examples, how to write a discussion section | tips & examples.

Logo for Mavs Open Press

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

5.5 Developing a theoretical framework

Social work researchers develop theoretical frameworks based on social science theories and empirical literature. A study’s theory describes the theoretical foundations of the research and consists of the big-T theory(ies) that guide the investigation. It provides overarching perspectives, explanations, and predictions about the social problem and research topic.

In deductive research (e.g., quantitative research), researchers create a theoretical framework to explain the thought process behind the study’s research questions and hypotheses. The theoretical framework includes the constructs of interest in the study and the associations the researchers expect to find. These constructs and their relations are based on the broader theory, but likely do not entail all the components of the theory.  The theoretical framework is specific to a particular study or analysis and provides the rationale for the research question(s). In inductive studies such as grounded theory, a theoretical framework can be the final result of the research.  In this case, the theoretical framework is also a combination of concepts and their associations, but it is derived from the data collected during the research. This contrasts to theoretical frameworks in deductive research, which are created before collecting data and derive from theories and other empirical findings.

In Chapter 8, we will develop your quantitative theoretical framework further, identifying associations or causal relations in a research question. Developing a quantitative theoretical framework is also instructive for revising and clarifying your working research question and identifying concepts that serve as keywords for additional literature searching. But first, we will consider identifying your theory. The greater clarity you have with your theoretical perspective, the easier each subsequent step in the research process will be. Getting acquainted with the important theoretical concepts in a new area can be challenging. While social work education provides a broad overview of social theory, you will find much greater fulfillment out of reading about the theories related to your topic area. We discussed some strategies for finding theoretical information in Chapter 3 as part of literature searching. To extend that conversation a bit, some strategies for searching for theories in the literature include:

  • Consider searching for these keywords in the title or abstract, specifically
  • Looking at the references and cited by links within theoretical articles and textbooks
  • Looking at books, edited volumes, and textbooks that discuss theory
  • Talking with a scholar on your topic, or asking a professor if they can help connect you to someone
  • It is helpful when authors are clear about how they use theory to inform their research project, usually in the introduction and discussion section.
  • For example, from the broad umbrella of systems theory, you might pick out family systems theory if you want to understand the effectiveness of a family counseling program.

It’s important to remember that knowledge arises within disciplines, and that disciplines have different theoretical frameworks for explaining the same topic. While it is certainly important for the social work perspective to be a part of your analysis, social workers benefit from searching across disciplines to come to a more comprehensive understanding of the topic. Reaching across disciplines can provide uncommon insights during conceptualization, and once the study is completed, a multidisciplinary researcher will be able to share results in a way that speaks to a variety of audiences. A study by An and colleagues (2015) [1] uses game theory from the discipline of economics to understand problems in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program. In order to receive TANF benefits, mothers must cooperate with paternity and child support requirements unless they have “good cause,” as in cases of domestic violence, in which providing that information would put the mother at greater risk of violence. Game theory can help us understand how TANF recipients and caseworkers respond to the incentives in their environment, and highlight why the design of the “good cause” waiver program may not achieve its intended outcome of increasing access to benefits for survivors of family abuse.

Of course, there are natural limits on the depth with which student researchers can and should engage in a search for theory about their topic. At minimum, you should be able to draw connections across studies and be able to assess the relative importance of each theory within the literature. Just because you found one article applying your theory (like game theory, in our example above) does not mean it is important or often used in the domestic violence literature. Indeed, it would be much more common in the family violence literature to find psychological theories of trauma, feminist theories of power and control, and similar theoretical perspectives used to inform research projects rather than game theory, which is equally applicable to survivors of family violence as workers and bosses at a corporation. Consider using the Cited By feature to identify articles, books, and other sources of theoretical information that are seminal or well-cited in the literature. Similarly, by using the name of a theory in the keywords of a search query (along with keywords related to your topic), you can get a sense of how often the theory is used in your topic area. You should have a sense of what theories are commonly used to analyze your topic, even if you end up choosing a different one to inform your project.

theoretical study research questions

Theories that are not cited or used as often are still immensely valuable. As we saw before with TANF and “good cause” waivers, using theories from other disciplines can produce uncommon insights and help you make a new contribution to the social work literature. Given the privileged position that the social work curriculum places on theories developed by white men, students may want to explore Afrocentricity as a social work practice theory (Pellebon, 2007) [2] or abolitionist social work (Jacobs et al., 2021) [3] when deciding on a theoretical framework for their research project that addresses concepts of racial justice. Start with your working question, and explain how each theory helps you answer your question. Some explanations are going to feel right, and some concepts will feel more salient to you than others. Keep in mind that this is an iterative process. Your theoretical framework will likely change as you continue to conceptualize your research project, revise your research question, and design your study.

By trying on many different theoretical explanations for your topic area, you can better clarify your own theoretical framework. Some of you may be fortunate enough to find theories that match perfectly with how you think about your topic, are used often in the literature, and are therefore relatively straightforward to apply. However, many of you may find that a combination of theoretical perspectives is most helpful for you to investigate your project. For example, maybe the group counseling program for which you are evaluating client outcomes draws from both motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioral therapy. In order to understand the change happening in the client population, you would need to know each theory separately as well as how they work in tandem with one another. Because theoretical explanations and even the definitions of concepts are debated by scientists, it may be helpful to find a specific social scientist or group of scientists whose perspective on the topic you find matches with your understanding of the topic. Of course, it is also perfectly acceptable to develop your own theoretical framework, though you should be able to articulate how your framework fills a gap within the literature.

Much like paradigm, theory plays a supporting role for the conceptualization of your research project. Recall the ice float from Figure 5.1. Theoretical explanations support the design and methods you use to answer your research question. In projects that lack a theoretical framework, you may see the biases and errors in reasoning that we discussed in Chapter 1 that get in the way of good social science. That’s because theories mark which concepts are important, provide a framework for understanding them, and measure their interrelationships. If research is missing this foundation, it may instead operate on informal observation, messages from authority, and other forms of unsystematic and unscientific thinking we reviewed in Chapter 1.

Theory-informed inquiry is incredibly helpful for identifying key concepts and how to measure them in your research project, but there is a risk in aligning research too closely with theory. The theory-ladenness of facts and observations produced by social science research means that we may be making our ideas real through research. This is a potential source of confirmation bias in social science. Moreover, as Tan (2016) [4] demonstrates, social science often proceeds by adopting as true the perspective of Western and Global North countries, and cross-cultural research is often when ethnocentric and biased ideas are most visible . In her example, a researcher from the West studying teacher-centric classrooms in China that rely partially on rote memorization may view them as less advanced than student-centered classrooms developed in a Western country simply because of Western philosophical assumptions about the importance of individualism and self-determination. Developing a clear theoretical framework is a way to guard against biased research, and it will establish a firm foundation on which you will develop the design and methods for your study.

Key Takeaways

  • Just as empirical evidence is important for conceptualizing a research project, so too are the key concepts and relationships identified by social work theory.
  • Using theory your theory textbook will provide you with a sense of the broad theoretical perspectives in social work that might be relevant to your project.
  • Try to find small-t theories that are more specific to your topic area and relevant to your working question.

TRACK 1 (IF YOU ARE CREATING A RESEARCH PROPOSAL FOR THIS CLASS):

In Chapter 2, you developed a concept map for your proposal.

  • Take a moment to revisit your concept map now as your theoretical framework is taking shape. Make any updates to the key concepts and relationships in your concept map.

If you need a refresher, we have embedded a short how-to video from the University of Guelph Library (CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0) that we also used in Chapter 2.

TRACK 2 (IF YOU AREN’T CREATING A RESEARCH PROPOSAL FOR THIS CLASS):

You are interested in researching bullying among school-aged children, and how this impacts students’ academic success.

  • Find two theoretical frameworks that have been used in published articles on this topic. Identify similarities and differences between the frameworks.

5.6 Designing your project using theory and paradigm

Learning Objectives

Learners will be able to…

  • Apply the assumptions of each paradigm to your project
  • Summarize what aspects of your project stem from positivist, constructivist, or critical assumptions

In the previous sections, we reviewed the major paradigms and theories in social work research. In this section, we will provide an example of how to apply theory and paradigm in research. This process is depicted in Figure 5.2 below with some quick summary questions for each stage. Some questions in the figure below have example answers like designs (i.e., experimental, survey) and data analysis approaches (i.e., discourse analysis). These examples are arbitrary. There are a lot of options that are not listed. So, don’t feel like you have to memorize them or use them in your study.

A linear process moving from initial research questions (defining the purpose of research and its context), then moving to paradigmatic questions of ontology and epistemology which help us refine research questions; then moving to methodology, methods, and data analysis.

This diagram (taken from an archived Open University (UK) course entitled E89 ​- Educational Inquiry ) ​ shows one way to visualize the research design process. While research is far from linear, in general, this is how research projects progress sequentially. Researchers begin with a working question, and through engaging with the literature, develop and refine those questions into research questions (a process we will finalize in Chapter 9). But in order to get to the part where you gather your sample, measure your participants, and analyze your data, you need to start with paradigm. Based on your work in section 5.3, you should have a sense of which paradigm or paradigms are best suited to answering your question. The approach taken will often reflect the nature of the research question; the kind of data it is possible to collect; and work previously done in the area under consideration. When evaluating paradigm and theory, it is important to look at what other authors have done previously and the framework used by studies that are similar to the one you are thinking of conducting.

Once you situate your project in a research paradigm, it becomes possible to start making concrete choices about methods. Depending on the project, this will involve choices about things like:

  • What is my final research question?
  • What are the key variables and concepts under investigation, and how will I measure them?
  • How do I find a representative sample of people who experience the topic I’m studying?
  • What design is most appropriate for my research question?
  • How will I collect and analyze data?
  • How do I determine whether my results describe real patterns in the world or are the result of bias or error?

The data collection phase can begin once these decisions are made. It can be very tempting to start collecting data as soon as possible in the research process as this gives a sense of progress. However, it is usually worth getting things exactly right before collecting data as an error found in your approach further down the line can be harder to correct or recalibrate around.

Designing a study using paradigm and theory: An example

Paradigm and theory have the potential to turn some people off since there is a lot of abstract terminology and thinking about real-world social work practice contexts. In this section, I’ll use an example from my own research, and I hope it will illustrate a few things. First, it will show that paradigms are really just philosophical statements about things you already understand and think about normally. It will also show that no project neatly sits in one paradigm and that a social work researcher should use whichever paradigm or combination of paradigms suit their question the best. Finally, I hope it is one example of how to be a pragmatist and strategically use the strengths of different theories and paradigms to answering a research question. We will pick up the discussion of mixed methods in the next chapter.

Thinking as an expert: Positivism

In my undergraduate research methods class, I used an open textbook much like this one and wanted to study whether it improved student learning. You can read a copy of the article we wrote on based on our study . We’ll learn more about the specifics of experiments and evaluation research in Chapter 13, but you know enough to understand what evaluating an intervention might look like. My first thought was to conduct an experiment, which placed me firmly within the positivist or “expert” paradigm.

Experiments focus on isolating the relationship between cause and effect. For my study, this meant studying an open textbook (the cause, or intervention) and final grades (the effect, or outcome). Notice that my position as “expert” lets me assume many things in this process. First, it assumes that I can distill the many dimensions of student learning into one number—the final grade. Second, as the “expert,” I’ve determined what the intervention is: indeed, I created the book I was studying, and applied a theory from experts in the field that explains how and why it should impact student learning.

Theory is part of applying all paradigms, but I’ll discuss its impact within positivism first. Theories grounded in positivism help explain why one thing causes another. More specifically, these theories isolate a causal relationship between two (or more) concepts while holding constant the effects of other variables that might confound the relationship between the key variables. That is why experimental design is so common in positivist research. The researcher isolates the environment from anything that might impact or bias the cause and effect relationship they want to investigate.

But in order for one thing to lead to change in something else, there must be some logical, rational reason why it would do so. In open education, there are a few hypotheses (though no full-fledged theories) on why students might perform better using open textbooks. The most common is the access hypothesis , which states that students who cannot afford expensive textbooks or wouldn’t buy them anyway can access open textbooks because they are free, which will improve their grades. It’s important to note that I held this theory prior to starting the experiment, as in positivist research you spell out your hypotheses in advance and design an experiment to support or refute that hypothesis.

Notice that the hypothesis here applies not only to the people in my experiment, but to any student in higher education. Positivism seeks generalizable truth, or what is true for everyone. The results of my study should provide evidence that  anyone  who uses an open textbook would achieve similar outcomes. Of course, there were a number of limitations as it was difficult to tightly control the study. I could not randomly assign students or prevent them from sharing resources with one another, for example. So, while this study had many positivist elements, it was far from a perfect positivist study because I was forced to adapt to the pragmatic limitations of my research context (e.g., I cannot randomly assign students to classes) that made it difficult to establish an objective, generalizable truth.

Thinking like an empathizer: constructivism

One of the things that did not sit right with me about the study was the reliance on final grades to signify everything that was going on with students. I added another quantitative measure that measured research knowledge, but this was still too simplistic. I wanted to understand how students used the book and what they thought about it. I could create survey questions that ask about these things, but to get at the subjective truths here, I thought it best to use focus groups in which students would talk to one another with a researcher moderating the discussion and guiding it using predetermined questions. You will learn more about focus groups in Chapter 18.

Researchers spoke with small groups of students during the last class of the semester. They prompted people to talk about aspects of the textbook they liked and didn’t like, compare it to textbooks from other classes, describe how they used it, and so forth. It was this focus on  understanding and subjective experience that brought us into the constructivist paradigm. Alongside other researchers, I created the focus group questions but encouraged researchers who moderated the focus groups to allow the conversation to flow organically.

We originally started out with the assumption, for which there is support in the literature, that students would be angry with the high-cost textbook that we used prior to the free one, and this cost shock might play a role in students’ negative attitudes about research. But unlike the hypotheses in positivism, these are merely a place to start and are open to revision throughout the research process. This is because the researchers are not the experts, the participants are! Just like your clients are the experts on their lives, so were the students in my study. Our job as researchers was to create a group in which they would reveal their informed thoughts about the issue, coming to consensus around a few key themes.

theoretical study research questions

When we initially analyzed the focus groups, we uncovered themes that seemed to fit the data. But the overall picture was murky. How were themes related to each other? And how could we distill these themes and relationships into something meaningful? We went back to the data again. We could do this because there isn’t one truth, as in positivism, but multiple truths and multiple ways of interpreting the data. When we looked again, we focused on some of the effects of having a textbook customized to the course. It was that customization process that helped make the language more approachable, engaging, and relevant to social work practice.

Ultimately, our data revealed differences in how students perceived a free textbook versus a free textbook that is customized to the class. When we went to interpret this finding, the remix  hypothesis of open textbook was helpful in understanding that relationship. It states that the more faculty incorporate editing and creating into the course, the better student learning will be. Our study helped flesh out that theory by discussing the customization process and how students made sense of a customized resource.

In this way, theoretical analysis operates differently in constructivist research. While positivist research tests existing theories, constructivist research creates theories based on the stories of research participants. However, it is difficult to say if this theory was totally emergent in the dataset or if my prior knowledge of the remix hypothesis influenced my thinking about the data. Constructivist researchers are encouraged to put a box around their previous experiences and beliefs, acknowledging them, but trying to approach the data with fresh eyes. Constructivists know that this is never perfectly possible, though, as we are always influenced by our previous experiences when interpreting data and conducting scientific research projects.

Thinking like an activist: Critical

Although adding focus groups helped ease my concern about reducing student learning down to just final grades by providing a more rich set of conversations to analyze. However, my role as researcher and “expert” was still an important part of the analysis. As someone who has been out of school for a while, and indeed has taught this course for years, I have lost touch with what it is like to be a student taking research methods for the first time. How could I accurately interpret or understand what students were saying? Perhaps I would overlook things that reflected poorly on my teaching or my book. I brought other faculty researchers on board to help me analyze the data, but this still didn’t feel like enough.

By luck, an undergraduate student approached me about wanting to work together on a research project. I asked her if she would like to collaborate on evaluating the textbook with me. Over the next year, she assisted me with conceptualizing the project, creating research questions, as well as conducting and analyzing the focus groups. Not only would she provide an “insider” perspective on coding the data, steeped in her lived experience as a student, but she would serve as a check on my power through the process.

Including people from the group you are measuring as part of your research team is a common component of critical research. Ultimately, critical theorists would find my study to be inadequate in many ways. I still developed the research question, created the intervention, and wrote up the results for publication, which privileges my voice and role as “expert.” Instead, critical theorists would emphasize the role of students (community members) in identifying research questions, choosing the best intervention to used, and so forth. But collaborating with students as part of a research team did address some of the power imbalances in the research process.

Critical research projects also aim to have an impact on the people and systems involved in research. No students or researchers had profound personal realizations as a result of my study, nor did it lessen the impact of oppressive structures in society. I can claim some small victory that my department switched to using my textbook after the study was complete (changing a system), though this was likely the result of factors other than the study (my advocacy for open textbooks).

Social work research is almost always designed to create change for people or systems. To that end, every social work project is at least somewhat critical. However, the additional steps of conducting research with people rather than on people reveal a depth to the critical paradigm. By bringing students on board the research team, study had student perspectives represented in conceptualization, data collection, and analysis. That said, there was much to critique about this study from a critical perspective. I retained a lot of the power in the research process, and students did not have the ability to determine the research question or purpose of the project. For example, students might likely have said that textbook costs and the quality of their research methods textbook were less important than student debt, racism, or other potential issues experienced by students in my class. Instead of a ground-up research process based in community engagement, my research included some important participation by students on project created and led by faculty.

Designing research is an iterative process

I hope this conversation was useful in applying paradigms to a research project. While my example discusses education research, the same would apply for social work research about social welfare programs, clinical interventions, or other topics. Paradigm and theory are covered at the beginning of the project because these assumptions will structure the rest of the project. Each of the research steps that occur after this chapter (e.g., forming a question, choosing a design) rely upon philosophical and theoretical assumptions. As you continue designing a project, you may find yourself shifting between paradigms. That is normal, as conceptualization is not a linear process. As you move through the next steps of conceptualizing and designing a project, you’ll find philosophies and theories that best match how you want to study your topic.

Viewing theoretical and empirical arguments through this lens is one of the true gifts of the social work approach to research. The multi-paradigmatic perspective is a hallmark of social work research and one that helps us contribute something unique on research teams and in practice.

  • Multi-paradigmatic research is a distinguishing hallmark of social work research. Understanding the limitations and strengths of each paradigm will help you justify your research approach and strategically choose elements from one or more paradigms to answer your question.
  • Paradigmatic assumptions help you understand the “blind spots” in your research project and how to adjust and address these areas. Keep in mind, it is not necessary to address all of your blind spots, as all projects have limitations.

Post-awareness check (Emotion)

Of the introduced social science paradigms, which would you say aligns with your current perspective on your research topic?

  • Sketch out which paradigm applies best to your project. Second, building on your answer to the exercise in section 6.3, identify how the theory you chose and the paradigm in which you find yourself are consistent or are in conflict with one another. For example, if you are using systems theory in a positivist framework, you might talk about how they both rely on a deterministic approach to human behavior with a focus on the status-quo and social order.
  • Select one paradigm and one theoretical framework. How does your selected theoretical framework align with your paradigm? How could the theory and paradigm together inform the overall research design?
  • An, S., Yoo, J., & Nackerud, L. G. (2015). Using game theory to understand screening for domestic violence under the TANF family violence option.  Advances in Social Work ,  16 (2), 338-357. ↵
  • Pellebon, D. A. (2007). An analysis of Afrocentricity as theory for social work practice.  Advances in Social Work ,  8 (1), 169-183. ↵
  • Jacobs, L. A., Kim, M. E., Whitfield, D. L., Gartner, R. E., Panichelli, M., Kattari, S. K., ... & Mountz, S. E. (2021). Defund the police: Moving towards an anti-carceral social work.  Journal of Progressive Human Services ,  32 (1), 37-62. ↵
  • Tan, C. (2016). Investigator bias and theory-ladenness in cross-cultural research: Insights from Wittgenstein. Current Issues in Comparative Education ,  18 (1), 83-95. ↵

a network of linked concepts that together provide a rationale for a research project or analysis; theoretical frameworks are based in theory and empirical literature

Doctoral Research Methods in Social Work Copyright © by Mavs Open Press. All Rights Reserved.

Share This Book

Sacred Heart University Library

Organizing Academic Research Papers: Theoretical Framework

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

Theories are formulated to explain, predict, and understand phenomena and, in many cases, to challenge and extend existing knowledge, within the limits of the critical bounding assumptions. The theoretical framework is the structure that can hold or support a theory of a research study. The theoretical framework introduces and describes the theory which explains why the research problem under study exists.

Importance of Theory

A theoretical framework consists of concepts, together with their definitions, and existing theory/theories that are used for your particular study. The theoretical framework must demonstrate an understanding of theories and concepts that are relevant to the topic of your  research paper and that will relate it to the broader fields of knowledge in the class you are taking.

The theoretical framework is not something that is found readily available in the literature . You must review course readings and pertinent research literature for theories and analytic models that are relevant to the research problem you are investigating. The selection of a theory should depend on its appropriateness, ease of application, and explanatory power.

The theoretical framework strengthens the study in the following ways .

  • An explicit statement of  theoretical assumptions permits the reader to evaluate them critically.
  • The theoretical framework connects the researcher to existing knowledge. Guided by a relevant theory, you are given a basis for your hypotheses and choice of research methods.
  • Articulating the theoretical assumptions of a research study forces you to address questions of why and how. It permits you to move from simply describing a phenomenon observed to generalizing about various aspects of that phenomenon.
  • Having a theory helps you to identify the limits to those generalizations. A theoretical framework specifies which key variables influence a phenomenon of interest. It alerts you to examine how those key variables might differ and under what circumstances.

By virtue of its application nature, good theory in the social sciences is of value precisely because it fulfills one primary purpose: to explain the meaning, nature, and challenges of a phenomenon, often experienced but unexplained in the world in which we live, so that we may use that knowledge and understanding to act in more informed and effective ways.

The Conceptual Framework. College of Education. Alabama State University; Drafting an Argument . Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Trochim, William M.K. Philosophy of Research. Research Methods Knowledge Base. 2006.

Strategies for Developing the Theoretical Framework

I.  Developing the Framework

Here are some strategies to develop of an effective theoretical framework:

  • Examine your thesis title and research problem . The research problem anchors your entire study and forms the basis from which you construct your theoretical framework.
  • Brainstorm on what you consider to be the key variables in your research . Answer the question, what factors contribute to the presumed effect?
  • Review related literature to find answers to your research question.
  • List  the constructs and variables that might be relevant to your study. Group these variables into independent and dependent categories.
  • Review the key social science theories that are introduced to you in your course readings and choose the theory or theories that can best explain the relationships between the key variables in your study [note the Writing Tip on this page].
  • Discuss the assumptions or propositions of this theory and point out their relevance to your research.

A theoretical framework is used to limit the scope of the relevant data by focusing on specific variables and defining the specific viewpoint (framework) that the researcher will take in analyzing and interpreting the data to be gathered, understanding concepts and variables according to the given definitions, and building knowledge by validating or challenging theoretical assumptions.

II.  Purpose

Think of theories as the conceptual basis for understanding, analyzing, and designing ways to investigate relationships within social systems. To the end, the following roles served by a theory can help guide the development of your framework.*

  • Means by which new research data can be interpreted and coded for future use,
  • Response to new problems that have no previously identified solutions strategy,
  • Means for identifying and defining research problems,
  • Means for prescribing or evaluating solutions to research problems,
  • Way of telling us that certain facts among the accumulated knowledge are important and which facts are not,
  • Means of giving old data new interpretations and new meaning,
  • Means by which to identify important new issues and prescribe the most critical research questions that need to be answered to maximize understanding of the issue,
  • Means of providing members of a professional discipline with a common language and a frame of reference for defining boundaries of their profession, and
  • Means to guide and inform research so that it can, in turn, guide research efforts and improve professional practice.

*Adapted from: Torraco, R. J. “Theory-Building Research Methods.” In Swanson R. A. and E. F. Holton III , editors. Human Resource Development Handbook: Linking Research and Practice . (San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler, 1997): pp. 114-137; Sutton, Robert I. and Barry M. Staw. “What Theory is Not.” Administrative Science Quarterly 40 (September 1995): 371-384.

Structure and Writing Style

The theoretical framework may be rooted in a specific theory , in which case, you are expected to test the validity of an existing theory in relation to specific events, issues, or phenomena. Many social science research papers fit into this rubric. For example, Peripheral Realism theory, which categorizes perceived differences between nation-states as those that give orders, those that obey, and those that rebel, could be used as a means for understanding conflicted relationships among countries in Africa. A test of this theory could be the following: Does Peripheral Realism theory help explain intra-state actions, such as, the growing split between southern and northern Sudan that may likely lead to the creation of two nations?

However, you may not always be asked by your professor to test a specific theory in your paper, but to develop your own framework from which your analysis of the research problem is derived . Given this, it is perhaps easiest to understand the nature and function of a theoretical framework if it is viewed as the answer to two basic questions:

  • What is the research problem/question? [e.g., "How should the individual and the state relate during periods of conflict?"]
  • Why is your approach a feasible solution? [I could choose to test Instrumentalist or Circumstantialists models developed among Ethnic Conflict Theorists that rely upon socio-economic-political factors to explain individual-state relations and to apply this theoretical model to periods of war between nations].

The answers to these questions come from a thorough review of the literature and your course readings [summarized and analyzed in the next section of your paper] and the gaps in the research that emerge from the review process. With this in mind, a complete theoretical framework will likely not emerge until after you have completed a thorough review of the literature .

In writing this part of your research paper, keep in mind the following:

  • Clearly describe the framework, concepts, models, or specific theories that underpin your study . This includes noting who the key theorists are in the field who have conducted research on the problem you are investigating and, when necessary, the historical context that supports the formulation of that theory. This latter element is particularly important if the theory is relatively unknown or it is borrowed from another discipline.
  • Position your theoretical framework within a broader context of related frameworks , concepts, models, or theories . There will likely be several concepts, theories, or models that can be used to help develop a framework for understanding the research problem. Therefore, note why the framework you've chosen is the appropriate one.
  • The present tense is used when writing about theory.
  • You should make your theoretical assumptions as explicit as possible . Later, your discussion of methodology should be linked back to this theoretical framework.
  • Don’t just take what the theory says as a given! Reality is never accurately represented in such a simplistic way; if you imply that it can be, you fundamentally distort a reader's ability to understand the findings that emerge. Given this, always note the limitiations of the theoretical framework you've chosen [i.e., what parts of the research problem require further investigation because the theory does not explain a certain phenomena].

The Conceptual Framework. College of Education. Alabama State University; Conceptual Framework: What Do You Think is Going On? College of Engineering. University of Michigan; Drafting an Argument . Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Lynham, Susan A. “The General Method of Theory-Building Research in Applied Disciplines.” Advances in Developing Human Resources 4 (August 2002): 221-241; Tavallaei, Mehdi and Mansor Abu Talib. A General Perspective on the Role of Theory in Qualitative Research. Journal of International Social Research 3 (Spring 2010); Trochim, William M.K. Philosophy of Research. Research Methods Knowledge Base. 2006.

Writing Tip

Borrowing Theoretical Constructs from Elsewhere

A growing and increasingly important trend in the social sciences is to think about and attempt to understand specific research problems from an interdisciplinary perspective. One way to do this is to not rely exclusively on the theories you've read about in a particular class, but to think about how an issue might be informed by theories developed in other disciplines. For example, if you are a political science student studying the rhetorical strategies used by female incumbants in state legislature campaigns, theories about the use of language could be derived, not only from political science, but linguistics, communication studies, philosophy, psychology, and, in this particular case, feminist studies. Building theoretical frameworks based on the postulates and hypotheses developed in other disciplinary contexts can be both enlightening and an effective way to be fully engaged in the research topic.

Another Writing Tip

Don't Undertheorize!

Never leave the theory hanging out there in the Introduction never to be mentioned again. Undertheorizing weakens your paper. The theoretical framework you introduce should guide your study throughout the paper. Be sure to always connect theory to the analysis and to explain in the discussion part of your paper how the theoretical framework you chose fit the research problem, or if appropriate, was inadequate in explaining the phenomenon you were investigating. In that case, don't be afraid to propose your own theory based on your findings.

Still Another Writing Tip

What's a Theory? What's a Hypothesis?

The terms theory and hypothesis are often used interchangeably in everyday use. However, the difference between them in scholarly research is important, particularly when using an experimental design. A theory is a well-established principle that has been developed to explain some aspect of the natural world. Theories arise from repeated observation and testing and incorporates facts, laws, predictions, and tested hypotheses that are widely accepted [e.g., rational choice theory; grounded theory].

A hypothesis is a specific, testable prediction about what you expect to happen in your study. For example, an experiment designed to look at the relationship between study habits and test anxiety might have a hypothesis that states, "We predict that students with better study habits will suffer less test anxiety." Unless your study is exploratory in nature, your hypothesis should always explain what you expect to happen during the course of your research.

The key distinctions are:

  • A theory predicts events in a broad, general context;  a hypothesis makes a specific prediction about a specified set of circumstances.
  • A theory has been extensively tested and is generally accepted among scholars; a hypothesis is a speculative guess that has yet to be tested.

Cherry, Kendra. Introduction to Research Methods: Theory and Hypothesis . About.com Psychology; Gezae, Michael et al. Welcome Presentation on Hypothesis . Slideshare presentation.

  • << Previous: The Research Problem/Question
  • Next: 5. The Literature Review >>
  • Last Updated: Jul 18, 2023 11:58 AM
  • URL: https://library.sacredheart.edu/c.php?g=29803
  • QuickSearch
  • Library Catalog
  • Databases A-Z
  • Publication Finder
  • Course Reserves
  • Citation Linker
  • Digital Commons
  • Our Website

Research Support

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

Using the Library

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

User Information

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

My Accounts

  • Interlibrary Loan
  • Staff Site Login

Sacred Heart University

FIND US ON  

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
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • J Korean Med Sci
  • v.37(16); 2022 Apr 25

Logo of jkms

A Practical Guide to Writing Quantitative and Qualitative Research Questions and Hypotheses in Scholarly Articles

Edward barroga.

1 Department of General Education, Graduate School of Nursing Science, St. Luke’s International University, Tokyo, Japan.

Glafera Janet Matanguihan

2 Department of Biological Sciences, Messiah University, Mechanicsburg, PA, USA.

The development of research questions and the subsequent hypotheses are prerequisites to defining the main research purpose and specific objectives of a study. Consequently, these objectives determine the study design and research outcome. The development of research questions is a process based on knowledge of current trends, cutting-edge studies, and technological advances in the research field. Excellent research questions are focused and require a comprehensive literature search and in-depth understanding of the problem being investigated. Initially, research questions may be written as descriptive questions which could be developed into inferential questions. These questions must be specific and concise to provide a clear foundation for developing hypotheses. Hypotheses are more formal predictions about the research outcomes. These specify the possible results that may or may not be expected regarding the relationship between groups. Thus, research questions and hypotheses clarify the main purpose and specific objectives of the study, which in turn dictate the design of the study, its direction, and outcome. Studies developed from good research questions and hypotheses will have trustworthy outcomes with wide-ranging social and health implications.

INTRODUCTION

Scientific research is usually initiated by posing evidenced-based research questions which are then explicitly restated as hypotheses. 1 , 2 The hypotheses provide directions to guide the study, solutions, explanations, and expected results. 3 , 4 Both research questions and hypotheses are essentially formulated based on conventional theories and real-world processes, which allow the inception of novel studies and the ethical testing of ideas. 5 , 6

It is crucial to have knowledge of both quantitative and qualitative research 2 as both types of research involve writing research questions and hypotheses. 7 However, these crucial elements of research are sometimes overlooked; if not overlooked, then framed without the forethought and meticulous attention it needs. Planning and careful consideration are needed when developing quantitative or qualitative research, particularly when conceptualizing research questions and hypotheses. 4

There is a continuing need to support researchers in the creation of innovative research questions and hypotheses, as well as for journal articles that carefully review these elements. 1 When research questions and hypotheses are not carefully thought of, unethical studies and poor outcomes usually ensue. Carefully formulated research questions and hypotheses define well-founded objectives, which in turn determine the appropriate design, course, and outcome of the study. This article then aims to discuss in detail the various aspects of crafting research questions and hypotheses, with the goal of guiding researchers as they develop their own. Examples from the authors and peer-reviewed scientific articles in the healthcare field are provided to illustrate key points.

DEFINITIONS AND RELATIONSHIP OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

A research question is what a study aims to answer after data analysis and interpretation. The answer is written in length in the discussion section of the paper. Thus, the research question gives a preview of the different parts and variables of the study meant to address the problem posed in the research question. 1 An excellent research question clarifies the research writing while facilitating understanding of the research topic, objective, scope, and limitations of the study. 5

On the other hand, a research hypothesis is an educated statement of an expected outcome. This statement is based on background research and current knowledge. 8 , 9 The research hypothesis makes a specific prediction about a new phenomenon 10 or a formal statement on the expected relationship between an independent variable and a dependent variable. 3 , 11 It provides a tentative answer to the research question to be tested or explored. 4

Hypotheses employ reasoning to predict a theory-based outcome. 10 These can also be developed from theories by focusing on components of theories that have not yet been observed. 10 The validity of hypotheses is often based on the testability of the prediction made in a reproducible experiment. 8

Conversely, hypotheses can also be rephrased as research questions. Several hypotheses based on existing theories and knowledge may be needed to answer a research question. Developing ethical research questions and hypotheses creates a research design that has logical relationships among variables. These relationships serve as a solid foundation for the conduct of the study. 4 , 11 Haphazardly constructed research questions can result in poorly formulated hypotheses and improper study designs, leading to unreliable results. Thus, the formulations of relevant research questions and verifiable hypotheses are crucial when beginning research. 12

CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

Excellent research questions are specific and focused. These integrate collective data and observations to confirm or refute the subsequent hypotheses. Well-constructed hypotheses are based on previous reports and verify the research context. These are realistic, in-depth, sufficiently complex, and reproducible. More importantly, these hypotheses can be addressed and tested. 13

There are several characteristics of well-developed hypotheses. Good hypotheses are 1) empirically testable 7 , 10 , 11 , 13 ; 2) backed by preliminary evidence 9 ; 3) testable by ethical research 7 , 9 ; 4) based on original ideas 9 ; 5) have evidenced-based logical reasoning 10 ; and 6) can be predicted. 11 Good hypotheses can infer ethical and positive implications, indicating the presence of a relationship or effect relevant to the research theme. 7 , 11 These are initially developed from a general theory and branch into specific hypotheses by deductive reasoning. In the absence of a theory to base the hypotheses, inductive reasoning based on specific observations or findings form more general hypotheses. 10

TYPES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

Research questions and hypotheses are developed according to the type of research, which can be broadly classified into quantitative and qualitative research. We provide a summary of the types of research questions and hypotheses under quantitative and qualitative research categories in Table 1 .

Research questions in quantitative research

In quantitative research, research questions inquire about the relationships among variables being investigated and are usually framed at the start of the study. These are precise and typically linked to the subject population, dependent and independent variables, and research design. 1 Research questions may also attempt to describe the behavior of a population in relation to one or more variables, or describe the characteristics of variables to be measured ( descriptive research questions ). 1 , 5 , 14 These questions may also aim to discover differences between groups within the context of an outcome variable ( comparative research questions ), 1 , 5 , 14 or elucidate trends and interactions among variables ( relationship research questions ). 1 , 5 We provide examples of descriptive, comparative, and relationship research questions in quantitative research in Table 2 .

Hypotheses in quantitative research

In quantitative research, hypotheses predict the expected relationships among variables. 15 Relationships among variables that can be predicted include 1) between a single dependent variable and a single independent variable ( simple hypothesis ) or 2) between two or more independent and dependent variables ( complex hypothesis ). 4 , 11 Hypotheses may also specify the expected direction to be followed and imply an intellectual commitment to a particular outcome ( directional hypothesis ) 4 . On the other hand, hypotheses may not predict the exact direction and are used in the absence of a theory, or when findings contradict previous studies ( non-directional hypothesis ). 4 In addition, hypotheses can 1) define interdependency between variables ( associative hypothesis ), 4 2) propose an effect on the dependent variable from manipulation of the independent variable ( causal hypothesis ), 4 3) state a negative relationship between two variables ( null hypothesis ), 4 , 11 , 15 4) replace the working hypothesis if rejected ( alternative hypothesis ), 15 explain the relationship of phenomena to possibly generate a theory ( working hypothesis ), 11 5) involve quantifiable variables that can be tested statistically ( statistical hypothesis ), 11 6) or express a relationship whose interlinks can be verified logically ( logical hypothesis ). 11 We provide examples of simple, complex, directional, non-directional, associative, causal, null, alternative, working, statistical, and logical hypotheses in quantitative research, as well as the definition of quantitative hypothesis-testing research in Table 3 .

Research questions in qualitative research

Unlike research questions in quantitative research, research questions in qualitative research are usually continuously reviewed and reformulated. The central question and associated subquestions are stated more than the hypotheses. 15 The central question broadly explores a complex set of factors surrounding the central phenomenon, aiming to present the varied perspectives of participants. 15

There are varied goals for which qualitative research questions are developed. These questions can function in several ways, such as to 1) identify and describe existing conditions ( contextual research question s); 2) describe a phenomenon ( descriptive research questions ); 3) assess the effectiveness of existing methods, protocols, theories, or procedures ( evaluation research questions ); 4) examine a phenomenon or analyze the reasons or relationships between subjects or phenomena ( explanatory research questions ); or 5) focus on unknown aspects of a particular topic ( exploratory research questions ). 5 In addition, some qualitative research questions provide new ideas for the development of theories and actions ( generative research questions ) or advance specific ideologies of a position ( ideological research questions ). 1 Other qualitative research questions may build on a body of existing literature and become working guidelines ( ethnographic research questions ). Research questions may also be broadly stated without specific reference to the existing literature or a typology of questions ( phenomenological research questions ), may be directed towards generating a theory of some process ( grounded theory questions ), or may address a description of the case and the emerging themes ( qualitative case study questions ). 15 We provide examples of contextual, descriptive, evaluation, explanatory, exploratory, generative, ideological, ethnographic, phenomenological, grounded theory, and qualitative case study research questions in qualitative research in Table 4 , and the definition of qualitative hypothesis-generating research in Table 5 .

Qualitative studies usually pose at least one central research question and several subquestions starting with How or What . These research questions use exploratory verbs such as explore or describe . These also focus on one central phenomenon of interest, and may mention the participants and research site. 15

Hypotheses in qualitative research

Hypotheses in qualitative research are stated in the form of a clear statement concerning the problem to be investigated. Unlike in quantitative research where hypotheses are usually developed to be tested, qualitative research can lead to both hypothesis-testing and hypothesis-generating outcomes. 2 When studies require both quantitative and qualitative research questions, this suggests an integrative process between both research methods wherein a single mixed-methods research question can be developed. 1

FRAMEWORKS FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

Research questions followed by hypotheses should be developed before the start of the study. 1 , 12 , 14 It is crucial to develop feasible research questions on a topic that is interesting to both the researcher and the scientific community. This can be achieved by a meticulous review of previous and current studies to establish a novel topic. Specific areas are subsequently focused on to generate ethical research questions. The relevance of the research questions is evaluated in terms of clarity of the resulting data, specificity of the methodology, objectivity of the outcome, depth of the research, and impact of the study. 1 , 5 These aspects constitute the FINER criteria (i.e., Feasible, Interesting, Novel, Ethical, and Relevant). 1 Clarity and effectiveness are achieved if research questions meet the FINER criteria. In addition to the FINER criteria, Ratan et al. described focus, complexity, novelty, feasibility, and measurability for evaluating the effectiveness of research questions. 14

The PICOT and PEO frameworks are also used when developing research questions. 1 The following elements are addressed in these frameworks, PICOT: P-population/patients/problem, I-intervention or indicator being studied, C-comparison group, O-outcome of interest, and T-timeframe of the study; PEO: P-population being studied, E-exposure to preexisting conditions, and O-outcome of interest. 1 Research questions are also considered good if these meet the “FINERMAPS” framework: Feasible, Interesting, Novel, Ethical, Relevant, Manageable, Appropriate, Potential value/publishable, and Systematic. 14

As we indicated earlier, research questions and hypotheses that are not carefully formulated result in unethical studies or poor outcomes. To illustrate this, we provide some examples of ambiguous research question and hypotheses that result in unclear and weak research objectives in quantitative research ( Table 6 ) 16 and qualitative research ( Table 7 ) 17 , and how to transform these ambiguous research question(s) and hypothesis(es) into clear and good statements.

a These statements were composed for comparison and illustrative purposes only.

b These statements are direct quotes from Higashihara and Horiuchi. 16

a This statement is a direct quote from Shimoda et al. 17

The other statements were composed for comparison and illustrative purposes only.

CONSTRUCTING RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

To construct effective research questions and hypotheses, it is very important to 1) clarify the background and 2) identify the research problem at the outset of the research, within a specific timeframe. 9 Then, 3) review or conduct preliminary research to collect all available knowledge about the possible research questions by studying theories and previous studies. 18 Afterwards, 4) construct research questions to investigate the research problem. Identify variables to be accessed from the research questions 4 and make operational definitions of constructs from the research problem and questions. Thereafter, 5) construct specific deductive or inductive predictions in the form of hypotheses. 4 Finally, 6) state the study aims . This general flow for constructing effective research questions and hypotheses prior to conducting research is shown in Fig. 1 .

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is jkms-37-e121-g001.jpg

Research questions are used more frequently in qualitative research than objectives or hypotheses. 3 These questions seek to discover, understand, explore or describe experiences by asking “What” or “How.” The questions are open-ended to elicit a description rather than to relate variables or compare groups. The questions are continually reviewed, reformulated, and changed during the qualitative study. 3 Research questions are also used more frequently in survey projects than hypotheses in experiments in quantitative research to compare variables and their relationships.

Hypotheses are constructed based on the variables identified and as an if-then statement, following the template, ‘If a specific action is taken, then a certain outcome is expected.’ At this stage, some ideas regarding expectations from the research to be conducted must be drawn. 18 Then, the variables to be manipulated (independent) and influenced (dependent) are defined. 4 Thereafter, the hypothesis is stated and refined, and reproducible data tailored to the hypothesis are identified, collected, and analyzed. 4 The hypotheses must be testable and specific, 18 and should describe the variables and their relationships, the specific group being studied, and the predicted research outcome. 18 Hypotheses construction involves a testable proposition to be deduced from theory, and independent and dependent variables to be separated and measured separately. 3 Therefore, good hypotheses must be based on good research questions constructed at the start of a study or trial. 12

In summary, research questions are constructed after establishing the background of the study. Hypotheses are then developed based on the research questions. Thus, it is crucial to have excellent research questions to generate superior hypotheses. In turn, these would determine the research objectives and the design of the study, and ultimately, the outcome of the research. 12 Algorithms for building research questions and hypotheses are shown in Fig. 2 for quantitative research and in Fig. 3 for qualitative research.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is jkms-37-e121-g002.jpg

EXAMPLES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS FROM PUBLISHED ARTICLES

  • EXAMPLE 1. Descriptive research question (quantitative research)
  • - Presents research variables to be assessed (distinct phenotypes and subphenotypes)
  • “BACKGROUND: Since COVID-19 was identified, its clinical and biological heterogeneity has been recognized. Identifying COVID-19 phenotypes might help guide basic, clinical, and translational research efforts.
  • RESEARCH QUESTION: Does the clinical spectrum of patients with COVID-19 contain distinct phenotypes and subphenotypes? ” 19
  • EXAMPLE 2. Relationship research question (quantitative research)
  • - Shows interactions between dependent variable (static postural control) and independent variable (peripheral visual field loss)
  • “Background: Integration of visual, vestibular, and proprioceptive sensations contributes to postural control. People with peripheral visual field loss have serious postural instability. However, the directional specificity of postural stability and sensory reweighting caused by gradual peripheral visual field loss remain unclear.
  • Research question: What are the effects of peripheral visual field loss on static postural control ?” 20
  • EXAMPLE 3. Comparative research question (quantitative research)
  • - Clarifies the difference among groups with an outcome variable (patients enrolled in COMPERA with moderate PH or severe PH in COPD) and another group without the outcome variable (patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH))
  • “BACKGROUND: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) in COPD is a poorly investigated clinical condition.
  • RESEARCH QUESTION: Which factors determine the outcome of PH in COPD?
  • STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We analyzed the characteristics and outcome of patients enrolled in the Comparative, Prospective Registry of Newly Initiated Therapies for Pulmonary Hypertension (COMPERA) with moderate or severe PH in COPD as defined during the 6th PH World Symposium who received medical therapy for PH and compared them with patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH) .” 21
  • EXAMPLE 4. Exploratory research question (qualitative research)
  • - Explores areas that have not been fully investigated (perspectives of families and children who receive care in clinic-based child obesity treatment) to have a deeper understanding of the research problem
  • “Problem: Interventions for children with obesity lead to only modest improvements in BMI and long-term outcomes, and data are limited on the perspectives of families of children with obesity in clinic-based treatment. This scoping review seeks to answer the question: What is known about the perspectives of families and children who receive care in clinic-based child obesity treatment? This review aims to explore the scope of perspectives reported by families of children with obesity who have received individualized outpatient clinic-based obesity treatment.” 22
  • EXAMPLE 5. Relationship research question (quantitative research)
  • - Defines interactions between dependent variable (use of ankle strategies) and independent variable (changes in muscle tone)
  • “Background: To maintain an upright standing posture against external disturbances, the human body mainly employs two types of postural control strategies: “ankle strategy” and “hip strategy.” While it has been reported that the magnitude of the disturbance alters the use of postural control strategies, it has not been elucidated how the level of muscle tone, one of the crucial parameters of bodily function, determines the use of each strategy. We have previously confirmed using forward dynamics simulations of human musculoskeletal models that an increased muscle tone promotes the use of ankle strategies. The objective of the present study was to experimentally evaluate a hypothesis: an increased muscle tone promotes the use of ankle strategies. Research question: Do changes in the muscle tone affect the use of ankle strategies ?” 23

EXAMPLES OF HYPOTHESES IN PUBLISHED ARTICLES

  • EXAMPLE 1. Working hypothesis (quantitative research)
  • - A hypothesis that is initially accepted for further research to produce a feasible theory
  • “As fever may have benefit in shortening the duration of viral illness, it is plausible to hypothesize that the antipyretic efficacy of ibuprofen may be hindering the benefits of a fever response when taken during the early stages of COVID-19 illness .” 24
  • “In conclusion, it is plausible to hypothesize that the antipyretic efficacy of ibuprofen may be hindering the benefits of a fever response . The difference in perceived safety of these agents in COVID-19 illness could be related to the more potent efficacy to reduce fever with ibuprofen compared to acetaminophen. Compelling data on the benefit of fever warrant further research and review to determine when to treat or withhold ibuprofen for early stage fever for COVID-19 and other related viral illnesses .” 24
  • EXAMPLE 2. Exploratory hypothesis (qualitative research)
  • - Explores particular areas deeper to clarify subjective experience and develop a formal hypothesis potentially testable in a future quantitative approach
  • “We hypothesized that when thinking about a past experience of help-seeking, a self distancing prompt would cause increased help-seeking intentions and more favorable help-seeking outcome expectations .” 25
  • “Conclusion
  • Although a priori hypotheses were not supported, further research is warranted as results indicate the potential for using self-distancing approaches to increasing help-seeking among some people with depressive symptomatology.” 25
  • EXAMPLE 3. Hypothesis-generating research to establish a framework for hypothesis testing (qualitative research)
  • “We hypothesize that compassionate care is beneficial for patients (better outcomes), healthcare systems and payers (lower costs), and healthcare providers (lower burnout). ” 26
  • Compassionomics is the branch of knowledge and scientific study of the effects of compassionate healthcare. Our main hypotheses are that compassionate healthcare is beneficial for (1) patients, by improving clinical outcomes, (2) healthcare systems and payers, by supporting financial sustainability, and (3) HCPs, by lowering burnout and promoting resilience and well-being. The purpose of this paper is to establish a scientific framework for testing the hypotheses above . If these hypotheses are confirmed through rigorous research, compassionomics will belong in the science of evidence-based medicine, with major implications for all healthcare domains.” 26
  • EXAMPLE 4. Statistical hypothesis (quantitative research)
  • - An assumption is made about the relationship among several population characteristics ( gender differences in sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of adults with ADHD ). Validity is tested by statistical experiment or analysis ( chi-square test, Students t-test, and logistic regression analysis)
  • “Our research investigated gender differences in sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of adults with ADHD in a Japanese clinical sample. Due to unique Japanese cultural ideals and expectations of women's behavior that are in opposition to ADHD symptoms, we hypothesized that women with ADHD experience more difficulties and present more dysfunctions than men . We tested the following hypotheses: first, women with ADHD have more comorbidities than men with ADHD; second, women with ADHD experience more social hardships than men, such as having less full-time employment and being more likely to be divorced.” 27
  • “Statistical Analysis
  • ( text omitted ) Between-gender comparisons were made using the chi-squared test for categorical variables and Students t-test for continuous variables…( text omitted ). A logistic regression analysis was performed for employment status, marital status, and comorbidity to evaluate the independent effects of gender on these dependent variables.” 27

EXAMPLES OF HYPOTHESIS AS WRITTEN IN PUBLISHED ARTICLES IN RELATION TO OTHER PARTS

  • EXAMPLE 1. Background, hypotheses, and aims are provided
  • “Pregnant women need skilled care during pregnancy and childbirth, but that skilled care is often delayed in some countries …( text omitted ). The focused antenatal care (FANC) model of WHO recommends that nurses provide information or counseling to all pregnant women …( text omitted ). Job aids are visual support materials that provide the right kind of information using graphics and words in a simple and yet effective manner. When nurses are not highly trained or have many work details to attend to, these job aids can serve as a content reminder for the nurses and can be used for educating their patients (Jennings, Yebadokpo, Affo, & Agbogbe, 2010) ( text omitted ). Importantly, additional evidence is needed to confirm how job aids can further improve the quality of ANC counseling by health workers in maternal care …( text omitted )” 28
  • “ This has led us to hypothesize that the quality of ANC counseling would be better if supported by job aids. Consequently, a better quality of ANC counseling is expected to produce higher levels of awareness concerning the danger signs of pregnancy and a more favorable impression of the caring behavior of nurses .” 28
  • “This study aimed to examine the differences in the responses of pregnant women to a job aid-supported intervention during ANC visit in terms of 1) their understanding of the danger signs of pregnancy and 2) their impression of the caring behaviors of nurses to pregnant women in rural Tanzania.” 28
  • EXAMPLE 2. Background, hypotheses, and aims are provided
  • “We conducted a two-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate and compare changes in salivary cortisol and oxytocin levels of first-time pregnant women between experimental and control groups. The women in the experimental group touched and held an infant for 30 min (experimental intervention protocol), whereas those in the control group watched a DVD movie of an infant (control intervention protocol). The primary outcome was salivary cortisol level and the secondary outcome was salivary oxytocin level.” 29
  • “ We hypothesize that at 30 min after touching and holding an infant, the salivary cortisol level will significantly decrease and the salivary oxytocin level will increase in the experimental group compared with the control group .” 29
  • EXAMPLE 3. Background, aim, and hypothesis are provided
  • “In countries where the maternal mortality ratio remains high, antenatal education to increase Birth Preparedness and Complication Readiness (BPCR) is considered one of the top priorities [1]. BPCR includes birth plans during the antenatal period, such as the birthplace, birth attendant, transportation, health facility for complications, expenses, and birth materials, as well as family coordination to achieve such birth plans. In Tanzania, although increasing, only about half of all pregnant women attend an antenatal clinic more than four times [4]. Moreover, the information provided during antenatal care (ANC) is insufficient. In the resource-poor settings, antenatal group education is a potential approach because of the limited time for individual counseling at antenatal clinics.” 30
  • “This study aimed to evaluate an antenatal group education program among pregnant women and their families with respect to birth-preparedness and maternal and infant outcomes in rural villages of Tanzania.” 30
  • “ The study hypothesis was if Tanzanian pregnant women and their families received a family-oriented antenatal group education, they would (1) have a higher level of BPCR, (2) attend antenatal clinic four or more times, (3) give birth in a health facility, (4) have less complications of women at birth, and (5) have less complications and deaths of infants than those who did not receive the education .” 30

Research questions and hypotheses are crucial components to any type of research, whether quantitative or qualitative. These questions should be developed at the very beginning of the study. Excellent research questions lead to superior hypotheses, which, like a compass, set the direction of research, and can often determine the successful conduct of the study. Many research studies have floundered because the development of research questions and subsequent hypotheses was not given the thought and meticulous attention needed. The development of research questions and hypotheses is an iterative process based on extensive knowledge of the literature and insightful grasp of the knowledge gap. Focused, concise, and specific research questions provide a strong foundation for constructing hypotheses which serve as formal predictions about the research outcomes. Research questions and hypotheses are crucial elements of research that should not be overlooked. They should be carefully thought of and constructed when planning research. This avoids unethical studies and poor outcomes by defining well-founded objectives that determine the design, course, and outcome of the study.

Disclosure: The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

Author Contributions:

  • Conceptualization: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.
  • Methodology: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.
  • Writing - original draft: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.
  • Writing - review & editing: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.
  • Open access
  • Published: 20 February 2024

Educating the nurses of tomorrow: exploring first-year nursing students’ reflections on a one-week senior peer-mentor supervised inspiration practice in nursing homes

  • Daniela Lillekroken   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7463-8977 1 ,
  • Heidi M. Kvalvaag 1 ,
  • Katrin Lindeflaten 1 ,
  • Tone Nygaard Flølo 1 ,
  • Kristine Krogstad 1 &
  • Elisabeth Hessevaagbakke 1  

BMC Nursing volume  23 , Article number:  132 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

156 Accesses

7 Altmetric

Metrics details

Worldwide, the healthcare system stresses a severe deficit of nurses because of elevated levels of work-induced stress, burnout and turnover rates, as well as the ageing of the nursing workforce. The diminishing number of nursing students opting for a career in nursing older people has exacerbated this shortage. A determining factor in the choice of a career within the field of residential care for nursing students is educational institutions offering students learning opportunities with positive learning experiences. Therefore, educational institutions must develop programmes that employ student active learning methods during clinical periods. Although much focus has been given to the development of new educational programs, insufficient consideration has been given to the value of peer mentoring and students’ interactions during the clinical placement at nursing homes. The aim of the present study is to explore first-year nursing students’ perceptions and experiences with peer mentoring as an educational model during their inspiration practice week at nursing home.

The study employed a qualitative exploratory and descriptive research design. Data collection took place in October 2022 using focus group interviews. A total of 53 students in their first year of the bachelor’s programme at the Oslo Metropolitan University participated in eight focus group interviews. The data were analysed following the principles of inductive content analysis.

The analysis resulted in one main category, ‘Being inspired—keep learning and moving forward’, representing first-year nursing students’ common perceptions of being mentored by third-year students. The main category is supported by two categories: ‘Closeness to the mentor’ and ‘Confidence in mentors’ professional knowledge and teaching and supervision methods’, which are interpreted as the drivers that enabled first-year students to learn more about nurses’ roles and responsibilities in the nursing home.

Mentorship enhances the learning transfer from third-year nursing students over to first-year nursing students by providing them with real-world exposure and guidance from their more experienced peers. This hands-on approach allows them to bridge the gap between theory and practice more effectively, boosting first-year nursing students’ confidence and competence in nursing and caring for older people living in nursing homes.

Peer Review reports

Nursing is one of the main professions that provides care to older people [ 1 ]. To meet society’s challenges of providing quality healthcare to older people, knowledgeable and skilled future generations of nurses are needed [ 2 ]. International research reveals that one of the key challenges for nursing in residential care is recruiting and retaining knowledgeable and skilled nurses [ 3 ]. Although nursing students have positive [ 4 ], or moderately positive attitudes towards nursing older people [ 5 ], they generally do not see caring for older people as an interesting area of their future careers [ 6 ]. Students may lack the motivation to study and work in this field; therefore, it is necessary to increase the attractiveness of working within the gerontological nursing field [ 7 ].

Generation Z nurses, born 1995 or later (aged ≤ 24 years of age), have introduced new expectations and ideals of life and work into the nursing profession [ 8 ]. People belonging to generation Z exhibit traits such as tolerance, respect, social-change oriented, collaboration and confidence but with caution while embracing diversity and growing up with friends from various ethnic backgrounds [ 9 , 10 ]. To meet their expectations and retain them into the nursing profession, it is vital to design educational programmes and work conditions accordingly. Moreover, to ensure that graduating nurses possess the necessary levels of gerontological nursing competence, nursing education programmes must prepare future nurses accordingly. This implies that faculties must emphasise the importance of having gerontological nursing knowledge and competences among nursing students right from the early years of training [ 11 ]. This may contribute to providing comprehensive education to nursing students and instil a positive attitude towards nursing older adult patients [ 7 ].

Nursing education in Norway, as well as in other European countries, complies with the European Union’s (EU) directives [ 12 , 13 ], and is completed in accordance with the Bologna Process [ 14 ], requiring bachelor’s and master’s degrees as the norm. This means that it takes 180 ECTS (European Credit Transfer System) to obtain a bachelor’s degree and a further 120 ECTS to complete a master’s degree. In Norway, nursing education consists of at least 4,600 h, including theoretical knowledge and clinical practice, in which clinical practice represents half of the education period; therefore, clinical practice must cover a minimum of 2,300 h [ 12 ]. As required by the EU [ 12 , 13 ], theoretical and clinical studies alternate during these three years, and students intertwine theoretical and clinical knowledge during lectures, seminars, workshops and clinical periods conducted in different clinical contexts. After attending a three-year nursing education programme, the student achieves a bachelor’s degree in nursing as a registered nurse (RN) with competence at a general level. For students to obtain a nursing degree, they must demonstrate the knowledge and ability required in the national goals to become RNs at the end of their education, consisting of three main goals: knowledge, skills and general competence [ 15 ].

Since 2020, Oslo Metropolitan University [OsloMet], as well as other Norwegian universities, has implemented a new bachelor’s programme in nursing. The programme aims to qualify candidates for practicing professional nursing based on up-to-date evidence-based knowledge, professional suitability and respect for human autonomy and participation [ 16 ].

To educate knowledgeable and skilled nurses to meet Norwegian society’s healthcare challenges, knowledge and skills of how to provide better and safer fundamental care are part of the curriculum of the first year during the bachelor’s programme in nursing [ 15 ], and clinical placements in nursing homes where students learn to plan and provide fundamental care to older people are mandatory courses [ 12 , 17 ]. During the course ‘Theoretical Foundations of Nursing’ (SYK1000) that is taken in the students’ first term, the first-year students have a one-week clinical period (inspiration practice) in nursing homes. This one-week inspiration practice period is in addition to their six-week clinical placement during the second term. The focus of the inspiration practice is to observe and gain knowledge about the nurse’s role and responsibilities in nursing homes, including planning and participating in providing fundamental care to nursing home residents. During this period, the third-year nursing students attend the clinical period ‘Nursing Patients with Complex Health Challenges’ (SYKPRA60) in nursing homes. One of the learning outcomes of this course is related to students developing skills and knowledge about learning, mastering and changing processes, as well as supervising and teaching patients, next-of-kin, students and healthcare personnel. To pass the clinical period, as a mandatory learning activity, the third-year students will supervise, plan and carry out supervision for one or a group of two to three first-year students in cooperation with the nurse preceptor and nurse educator from the university [ 16 ], hence employing peer mentoring as a learning and teaching method during the clinical period at nursing home for both student groups.

Mentoring is an encouraging and supportive one-to-one relationship with a more experienced worker or peer student and is characterised by positive role modelling, promoting aspirations, positive reinforcement, open-ended counselling and joint problem-solving [ 18 ]. Peer mentoring is a relational process where a more experienced individual (mentor) contributes to the professional and personal development of a less experienced individual (mentee) [ 19 ]. This approach aligns with the educational philosophy of peer-assisted learning, which engages students in the teaching process [ 20 ]. However, it is worth noting that the term ‘peer mentoring’ lacks a consistent definition [ 21 ]; therefore, various interchangeable terms, such as ‘peer learning’, ‘peer coaching’ and ‘near-peer teaching’, are utilised in the literature [ 22 ]. In the present study, ‘peer mentors’ or ‘mentors’ refers to senior nursing students possessing more extensive experience than their junior counterparts, the ‘mentees’, and ‘peer mentoring’ refers to the process of learning transfer from mentors to their mentees.

The inspiration practice period has been implemented to provide first-year students with insights into the nurse’s role and responsibilities in nursing homes, hence, to prepare them for their first clinical placement period at nursing home and all subsequent clinical periods throughout their education. This preparation aims to prevent the occurrence of what is termed ‘reality shock’ [ 23 ], a phenomenon that may lead to negative consequences for their continuing nursing education and influence their choice of whether to pursue a career in nursing [ 24 ].

Despite the growing number of studies revealing the importance of the professional development of nursing students in clinical studies, little is known about the peer mentoring process used by students in learning from each other in higher education [ 25 ]. Results from previous studies reveal that peer mentoring increases mentees’ integration, academic success, class retention, self-esteem, psychosocial wellness, reduces anxiety in clinical setting, increases self-worth for both the mentee and the mentor [ 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 ]. Furthermore, positive outcomes for mentors have been observed, ranging from enhanced problem-solving abilities to heightened coping skills [ 31 , 32 ]. Recently, results from a longitudinal study indicate that a one-on-one mentorship program is beneficial for the retention of new graduate nurses, particularly during the first year [ 33 , 34 ].

Learning environment quality in clinical placement is vital for how nursing students achieve competence through reflection on their experiences [ 35 ]. Similarly, positive learning experiences in residential care are vital for their future choices regarding where to work and therefore crucial for employers striving to recruit newly qualified nurses. Facilitating optimal clinical mentoring is therefore of high priority in nursing education [ 36 ].

As shown above, although peer mentoring has been reviewed in many studies, several gaps on the effects the mentor program has in the context of nursing home as teaching and learning context remain. Specifically, no programs focus mentoring on a targeted discipline or degree of interest to cultivate specific gerontological professional development. Because of this, there is a lack of literature focusing on the first-year experience of a nursing student. Likewise, there is limited available research exploring the benefits of mentoring specifically for first-year nursing students during the clinical placement at nursing homes as a learning context. Therefore, the aim of the present study is to explore first-year nursing students’ perceptions and experiences with peer mentoring as an educational model during their inspiration practice week at nursing home.

Theoretical framework

To the best of the researchers’ knowledge, the application of peer mentoring as a learning and teaching strategy for first-year students within the context of nursing home learning is a novel approach. Therefore, the application of innovative and active learning strategies in clinical settings necessitates educational research. For the present study, the theory of learning transfer described by Wahlgren and Aarkrog [ 37 ] was chosen as the theoretical framework. The theory of transfer of learning is defined as the application or adaptation of previously learned knowledge, skills or understanding to new situations or contexts. Moreover, it involves the ability to make connections and use what a student has learned in one context to solve problems or understand concepts in different contexts. However, little is known about the processes used by students to transfer learning from each other and to apply or adapt knowledge to practice.

The theory of transfer of learning is influenced by three factors that may be seen as facilitators or barriers that promote or hinder students’ learning in clinical settings: (i) person-related transfer factors, which include motivation, the ability to set goals, having confidence and knowing how to apply the new knowledge and reflecting on how to apply the new knowledge [ 38 ]; (ii) teaching-related transfer factors, which refer to how the ‘teacher’ organises the learning situation, by, for example, giving theoretical and examples and demonstrating how to apply theoretical knowledge into real-life situations [ 38 ]; and (iii) factors related to the situation where the knowledge is applied [ 37 ], such as the context of where the knowledge is applied, that is, willingness to include the workers’ new knowledge and skills in the workplace, leadership characterised by openness to positive changes and willingness of using the necessary resources. During the analysis, the content of the processes described by students when learning from each other revealed similarities with the theory of transfer of learning [ 37 ]; therefore, the researchers decided to choose this theory as a framework for discussing the study’s findings.

Aim of the study

This study aims to explore first-year nursing students’ perceptions and experiences with peer mentoring as an educational model during their inspiration practice week at nursing homes.

Study design

The present study has a qualitative exploratory descriptive design [ 39 ]. The design was appropriate because it allowed the researchers to contextualise how the first-year students perceived peer mentoring and nursing home as learning environment and their role as mentees within the context of nursing home, thus providing a picture of what naturally occurred between the mentors and mentees.

Study setting

The study was conducted at Oslo Metropolitan University during the one-week inspiration practice at nursing homes for first-year nursing students.

Study population and sampling

All the students enrolled in the first year of the bachelor’s programme in nursing at the Department of Nursing and Health Promotion in the academic year 2022–2023 were informed about the study and invited to participate. All six researchers were engaged in providing information about the study and in the process of recruiting potential participants.

The students were provided with verbal and written information about the study during a face-to-face first meeting before and after inspiration practice week. For inclusion, the students should: (i) be enrolled in the academic year 2022–2023, (ii) voluntary to attend the study, (iii) agreed to be recorded during the interviews. If the students were interested and expressed their wish to participate, they were asked to contact the researchers by email and agree upon the date for the interview. When distributing the participants in focus groups, to make the participants feel confident and comfortable during the interviews, the researchers considered the students’ class affiliation and formed groups with students belonging to the same class, thus fostering a sense of familiarity and ease among the participants.

Of a total of 488 students enrolled in the academic year 2022–2023, only 53 expressed their interest and agreed to participate. The ages of the participants ranged between 19 and 54 years. Although most had no work experience in the field of healthcare/nursing, some had up to 13 years of clinical experience working in nursing homes or home care. The researchers strived to provide a gender balance among the participants; therefore, an equal proportion of female and male participants was encouraged to participate. Even so, only seven participants were males. As the research literature has demonstrated, nursing is a female-dominated profession with individuals still choosing gender role stereotypes for their careers [ 40 , 41 ] This may explain the large number of females among the participants.

Data collection

Data were collected during the fall semester of 2022, one week after the students conducted their inspiration practice week. Eight focus group interviews were conducted to collect data during October– November 2022. Focus groups involve people with similar characteristics coming together in a relaxed and permissive environment to share their thoughts, experiences and insights [ 42 ]. The choice of using focus group interviews as data collection methods was because allows participants share their own views and experiences, but also listen to and reflect on the experiences of other group members [ 42 ]. This synergistic process of group members interacting with each other promotes and refines participants’ 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 [ 42 , 43 ]. Prior to conducting the interviews, a semistructured interview guide inspired by peer mentoring in nursing literature was developed and used to guide the interviews. The interview guide used in the present study was developed based on recommendations from previous studies for further research to achieve a comprehensive understanding of how peer mentoring can be effectively employed in the context of nursing home [ 22 , 23 , 26 ]. The themes and questions that were posed during the interviews are presented in Table  1 .

The number of participants in each focus group ranged between 3 and 12. Depending on the number of participants in each focus group and on their verbal dynamism during the interviews, each focus group interview lasted between 30 and 55 min. The focus group interviews were held in a quiet classroom after a seminar class. As recommended by Krueger and Casey [ 42 ], the researchers planned to conduct each focus group interview in pairs. However, because of the busy work schedules among researchers, only two focus group interviews were conducted by two researchers, one acting as a moderator and the other as a ‘secretary’. While the moderator’s role was to pose questions and follow up the answers, the secretary’s role was to take notes, observe the group dynamic and use the recording device. During the interviews, the participants were encouraged to talk openly, share their thoughts and experiences with one week of inspiration practice in a nursing home and offer suggestions for improvement for the course. Hence, the participants offered deep and rich answers that contributed to the detailed expression of opinions.

Data analysis

All eight focus group interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim by the researchers immediately after completion. Except for one researcher (KK) who transcribed four focus group interviews, all authors transcribed each one to two focus group interviews. However, depending on the length of the interviews and the richness of the dialogs, the transcription process lasted between 6 and 8 weeks. The data generated from eight focus group interviews consisted of 106 A4 pages taped with 1.5 line spacing and Times New Roman font size. The analysis process has additionally taken eight weeks.

When conducting a focus group interview, it is the group rather than the individual that is the focus of analysis because data generated from focus groups represents situated accounts that can provide in-depth insights into contextualised social interactions [ 43 ]. The transcripts from the interviews were analysed following the three steps of inductive content analysis outlined by Kyngäs [ 44 ]: preparation, organising and reporting the findings.

As part of the first step, data analysis began during data collection through careful group moderation. By following transcription, reflexive engagement with the data enabled researchers’ familiarity with it as a whole before the coding process. The empirical data generated from eight focus groups were analysed independently by two researchers (DL & HK) to identify the key categories coded onto transcripts. At this step, the coding process helped reduce the amount of data. These codes were subsequently subjected to a more detailed subcoding of meaningful content, such as one word or a shorter sentence. At this step, no theoretical understanding influenced the selection of the units of analysis. Unit selection was based on the themes from the interview guide and derived from the data. Both authors then met and discussed the similarities and differences between the coded data from each interview, sharing their overall understanding of the data. If discrepancies occurred, they were solved by discussing before making a final decision.

In the second step, the researchers discussed, analysed and decided which codes should be grouped together into subcategories and determining the hallmarks of the categories. Following a discussion about the open coding process, a coding tree was developed to facilitate comparisons within and between groups. To validate and maximise the trustworthiness of the initial findings, a descriptive overview of the final analysis was presented to the other researchers, that is, the coauthors of the present paper, to confirm that it was a realistic interpretation of their views. For example, the code ‘following the mentors everywhere’ has gradually been incorporated into the subcategory ‘Spending time with mentors.’ In this step, influenced by the learning transfer theory [ 37 ] this subcategory was further placed under a category labeled ‘Closeness to the Mentor.’ It was interpreted as a person-related factor that facilitates learning transfer, thereby inspiring first-year students to continue learning and moving forward.

The third step was to present the findings by describing the content of the subcategories and categories as supported by participant quotes. An example of the coding tree is shown in Table  2 .

Rigour of the study

Rigour was ensured by employing several strategies. First, to ensure trustworthiness and rigour, the criteria described by Lincoln and Guba [ 45 ], known as credibility, dependability, confirmability and transferability, were employed.

To ensure transferability and dependability, the researchers clearly described the study’s theoretical framework, the recruitment and the characteristics of the participants, the research context, data collection and analysis processes so that readers could assess whether findings were applicable to their specific contexts and, if desired, repeating the study.

The data analysis was iterative and continued until all members of the research team agreed on a relevant and trustworthy formulation of the categories. To enhance trustworthiness, the consistency and dependability of data analysis was optimised by researcher triangulation. Two members of the research team (DL & HK), who independently coded interview transcripts and managed the coding and developed categories and subcategories that were assessed, verified and amended by all the members of the research team. Discrepancies in the coding were resolved through discussions until a consensus for each interview transcript was reached.

Confirmability is ensured by researchers presenting quotes from the participants that support the findings. The researchers strived to accurately represent the information provided by the participants, hence indicating that the interpretations of the data were not invented or based on preconceived notions.

In qualitative research, reflexivity should be oriented towards personal, interpersonal, methodological and contextual issues in the research [ 46 ]. Personal reflexivity refers to researchers reflecting on and clarifying their expectations, assumptions, and conscious and unconscious reactions to contexts, participants, and data [ 46 ]. The research team was composed of six women, all of whom had teaching experience with and knowledge of the first-year curriculum. Five of the research team members had experience with designing and conducting qualitative studies and collecting and analysing qualitative data. Although the analysis was performed by two researchers, all the researchers brought important contextual knowledge and insights to the analysis discussion, thus strengthening the study’s dependability. However, the researchers’ professional backgrounds as nurse educators who had knowledge of the curriculum and the course’s expected learning outcomes could address certain topics or follow-up questions during the focus group interviews, thus influencing the answers. Therefore, to minimize bias, the researchers discussed their prior experiences with interviewing, reflected on how questions were asked, and simultaneously managed their assumptions around how participants thought about and experienced being in the one-week inspiration practice.

Interpersonal reflexivity refers to the existing relationships and power dynamics between researcher and participants [ 46 ]. The participants in this study were first-year students, and some of the researchers who conducted the interviews were their teachers. Consequently, during the interviews, the power balance between researchers and participants could result in participants feeling that they were being evaluated, potentially leading to a focus on more positive experiences. To avoid this, researchers reinforced to participants that their participation is voluntary and that their answers will not influence their study progression. Moreover, during the interviews, researchers encouraged quieter participants to answer and allowed for differences of opinion.

Methodological reflexivity refers to researchers critically consider the nuances and impacts of their methodological decisions [ 46 ]. To strengthen methodological reflexivity, researchers discussed whether the study’s aim aligns with the chosen design and whether the data collection method and interview guide will generate data to answer questions posed during the focus group interviews. Another method to enhance methodological reflexivity was discussing the theoretical framework’s relevance to the study. After considerable discussions, the researchers decided to choose the theory of learning transfer [ 37 ] as it was considered the best theory to inform the data.

Contextual reflexivity entails researchers understanding the unique setting of the study [ 46 ]. To strengthen the study’s contextual reflexivity, researchers discussed which aspects of the context could influence the research and people involved, as well as how the research impacts the context. The study was conducted at a Norwegian university, and participants were enrolled in the first year of the nursing bachelor’s program. Although the interview guide was inspired by previous literature on peer-mentoring, the questions posed were developed to gain knowledge about students’ experiences with a one-week inspiration practice at a nursing home. This means that the research was influenced by the curriculum and mandatory courses conducted at this university. During discussions, some researchers mentioned that most focus group participants reflected on their clinical development and were looking forward to their turn being a mentor for first-year students. It was evident that this study also had a positive impact on participants.

Ethical approval

The present study was granted approval to be conducted from the researchers’ institution, Department of Nursing and Health Promotion at Oslo Metropolitan University and from the Norwegian Agency for Shared Services in Education and Research (Sikt/Ref. number 334855). The study was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration [ 47 ]. Informed consent, consequences and confidentiality were all obtained and maintained. All participants received verbal and written information about the study and written informed consent was obtained from all the participants prior to data collection. The participants were also informed that they would not receive any financial or other benefits for participating in the study. All participants were assured that, should they choose to withdraw from the study at any time and for any reason, there would be no negative consequences for their education at the university. Nevertheless, the researchers were mindful of the students’ potential vulnerability due to their role as students, which might discourage them from withdrawing. However, despite no reported discomfort during interviews, the potential for discomfort or reluctance to express negative experiences exists. Therefore, before each focus group interview, the students were reminded of their option to withdraw from the interview, providing them with additional opportunities to assent to or withdraw from the study. None of the students who agreed to be interviewed reported any discomfort during the interviews, and none chose to withdraw.

Following data analysis, one main category was generated, ‘Being inspired—keep learning and moving forward’, which was interpreted as the first-year nursing students’ common perception of being supervised by third-year students for one week of inspiration practice at nursing homes. During the interviews, the first-year students mentioned several times that they perceived third-year students as their mentors. To differentiate between first-year students and those in their third year, the third-year students will be referred to as ‘mentors’ throughout the manuscript.

Two categories—(i) ‘Closeness to the mentor’ and (ii) ‘Confidence in mentors’ professional knowledge and teaching and supervision methods’—were interpreted as the drivers enabling first-year students to learn more about nurses’ roles and responsibilities in nursing homes. Each category is supported by several subcategories.

In the following section, the findings are presented with excerpts from the participants’ statements. The statements end with a number representing the code each participant (i.e., P1) and focus group (i.e., FG2) were given before conducting the focus group interviews, meaning participant 1 in focus group 2.

Closeness to the mentor

This category was supported by four subcategories: spending time with mentors, perceiving mentors as role models, feelings of insecurity and mutual learning– learning from each other.

Spending time with mentors

The first subcategory was related to the time first-year students spent with their mentors. Because the mentors could allocate more time to spending with the first-year students, this time allowed mentors to share formal and informal knowledge and create learning opportunities for first-year students. Being close to the mentor and spending time together was decisive for several first-year students to experience a positive relationship with their mentor. This positive mentor-first-year student relationship was highlighted as one of the participants’ positive experiences in the inspiration practice. They experienced that their mentors were aware of their own roles and responsibilities and encouraged first-year students to follow them everywhere to gain insights into how it is to be a nurse employed at a nursing home. One of the participants said the following:

We were following the mentors everywhere… They explained us everything… However, we were only six students at that nursing home, so we get one mentor each… and I followed my mentor all the time, and she explained me a lot about how to help the resident with personal hygiene or how to use a Hoyer lift to help the resident to move from bed to wheelchair. I feel that I learned a lot.… (P4, FG1).

Other first-year students were grateful that, by being with mentors, they had the opportunity to be introduced to more complicated procedures, such as changing a stoma bag or measurements of vital signs or even weighing the residents. One participant shared her experience:

Yes, we have experienced a lot! We contributed to making breakfast and served it, we helped residents with personal hygiene… we weighed the residents and documented in their journal, and we learned how to document everything we did to or with a resident, in generally… However, I learned a new word: stoma and… [stoma bag]. I observed how my mentor changed the stoma bag to a resident. You know, I get the opportunity to meet the residents face-to-face and the life at that ward. (P1, FG3)

The first-year students stated that, with this type of supervision, they would be much more likely to reach their learning outcomes for the inspiration practice. One of the participants stated the following:

I feel that, for me, everything was good. They [mentors] showed us that they have knowledge… they were very open and receptive if we had some questions: ‘Just ask me!’ and they were honest if they could not provide the answer. It wasn’t like at school: ‘Use the contact form’ [laughter]… we got the answer at once, so this was OK. They were also very creative. They made cases about things we already had knowledge about, and I learned to use several measurement instruments, such as QSOFA [Quick Sepsis Related Organ Failure Assessment] and this kind of thing.… (P1, FG8).

Perceiving mentors as role models

The second subcategory was related to first-year students perceiving the mentors as role models. Being close to the mentor, the first-year students could engage in informal discussions, hence finding that mentors were people who had been in their shoes, who had journeyed close to where they wanted to be and who had made their own mistakes in their learning but also gained practical knowledge. They perceived mentors as someone who was close enough to them, willing to share their wisdom and experience, and could help them avoid certain pitfalls. These perceptions contributed to developing a positive relationship with the mentors, which positively influenced their learning. One of the participants said the following:

I am happy that my first encounter with practice was through third-year students. It is not a long time since they were in our situation, so they know how it feels. They explain in an easier way… and you get a kind of insider information… yes, they provide us with information that nurses don’t say because they believe that we already know things… I think that because they were in this situation, they explain or teach us things in the same way they wish they have been told… They have established good routines for learning to achieve learning outcomes.… (P3, FG5).

Feelings of insecurity

The third subcategory was related to feelings of insecurity among first-year students. Several first-year students asserted that they were not confident when they had to help the residents with their fundamental needs, such as toileting, changing diapers, personal hygiene or eating and drinking. One of the participants shared her experience:

I have never assisted someone with personal hygiene before… It was quite an experience…I felt hesitant, but I had to manage somehow… (P4, FG2).

Being close to the mentor offered opportunities to seek support. They appreciated that mentors accepted their insecurity, lack of experience and theoretical knowledge limitations. One of the participants said the following:

Going together with my mentor, I felt safe to fail… [laughter]. I am happy that I gained the opportunity to try and experience the challenges that came with… They asked questions and they sensed that we were not sure about the answer, but we gradually became confident when they ‘pushed’ us to try it on our own.… (P3, FG6).

Mutual learning– learning from each other

The last subcategory was related to the learning process as a mutual process. Some of the first-year students had clinical experience in healthcare services as healthcare assistants. This placed expectations on the inspiration practice period, and although these students knew the field very well, they were impressed by the amount of practical knowledge they gained during this week. However, being close to the mentor offered opportunities to learn from each other. When the mentors could not answer their questions, they experienced that they searched for knowledge and together agreed about the correct answer for the given situation. The participants experienced that learning was a mutual process, and it did not happen only from mentors to them but also vice versa, as one of the participants said:

Yes, we had a positive dialogue about knowledge… sometimes it was funny to see… I think that it was a positive experience for both of us [to share knowledge], that when we asked questions, they had to search for the answer… and figure it out together… This would not happen with a nurse that has 20 years’ experience that knows the answer: ‘that is it!’… (P1, FG4).

Confidence in mentors’ professional knowledge and teaching and supervision methods

This category was supported by two subcategories: mentors’ theoretical and practical knowledge and skills, and mentors’ ability to apply diversity in didactical and pedagogical methods.

Mentors’ theoretical and practical knowledge

The first subcategory relates to the first-year students’ perceptions of mentors’ professional competence, which can be defined in theoretical knowledge, skills and general competence. The first-year students were positively surprised about their mentors’ amount of theoretical and practical knowledge. This contributed to motivating first-year students to be curious and wanting to learn more. Several first-year students asserted that their expectations for the inspiration practice week were fulfilled because of the supervision they gained from mentors, hence assessing mentors as ‘competent’, meaning ‘knowledgeable and skilled’. One of the participants said the following:

I was quite content with my mentor… She [the mentor] had so much knowledge… it seemed that she worked there [at nursing home] for 10 years… I was motivated by that because I noticed how much they [mentors] have learned during these three years.… (P3, FG6).

Other first-year students reported that they got answers no matter what they asked. They were surprised by the mentors’ theoretical knowledge and how they could provide them with examples of the application of theory in real patient situations. This contributed to an increase in first-year students’ self-confidence. One of the participants described his experience as follows:

Our mentors were very knowledgeable and skilled… They provide us with answers… I was surprised how much knowledge a third-year student could gain through education… As third-year students, they were so well prepared to work and to meet patients in the clinical field.… (P10, FG5).

Other participants were impressed by mentors using professional language during formal and informal conversations and by the clinical gaze they developed. One participant stated the following:

… and they communicate with us by using professional terms… such as… I don’t remember all of them now, but they [mentors] mentioned frontal lobe, and other [laughter]… and yes, ‘she’s got Alzheimer’s [referring to a nursing home resident]… it’s only a name for me… but, you know, Alzheimer’s means that the woman has dementia… (P5, FG7).

The mentors’ practical skills were also praiseworthy among first-year students. They observed and learned from mentors how to use different medical instruments and measure vital signs/National Early Warning Score (NEWS) or the level of haemoglobin or insulin on real patients and then documenting the results. One participant said the following:

I could see that they [the mentors] were knowledgeable and skilled… when they presented and demonstrated for us, they knew what they were doing and talking about… They taught us and demonstrated different measures, and when we asked them, they answered us… yes, they were professional.… (P2, FG7).

A skill that first-year students could easily perceive as a challenge was communication with residents who had a cognitive impairment. However, several first-year students were impressed by the mentors’ communication skills. Many were surprised by the ethical challenges imposed by communication with people with dementia. Others noticed how respectful mentors were when asking the residents for permission to bring into the resident’s room another person who would assist the resident with personal hygiene or toileting. One of the participants expressed this as follows:

He [the mentor] I had was very good at communicating with the residents… he always asked them if we could enter the room to observe or help with the provision of personal hygiene.… (P2, FG8).

Mentors’ ability to apply diversity in didactical and pedagogical methods

The second subcategory was related to first-year students’ perceptions of the mentors’ ability to teach and supervise them and the diversity in didactical and pedagogical methods employed. The participants were content with the mentors’ explanations and demonstrations of all the work tasks a nurse has during a working day at a nursing home. Because the first-year students were not aware of what they should ask about, they particularly liked when their mentors provided them with knowledge without being asked for it or just demonstrated how the medical instruments or personal lift-assist device functioned. For most of them, this was perceived as the most appreciated first-hand knowledge, which mentors ‘just shared’ with them. They were also encouraged to ask questions and eventually provided additional answers if they could. One of the participants explained this as follows:

When we asked the mentors ‘Why are doing in this way and not in another…’, they always had good answers grounded in theory or in their prior clinical experiences… They acted very confident, so we also felt confident in what we were doing.… (P5, FG1).

Most of the participants were content with mentors’ methods of teaching or supervising them and giving feedback. They appreciated when mentors supported and encouraged them to learn things and become independent, but also to try new things and teach them how to do it. They appreciated being told what and how to help the resident prior to entering the resident’s room, not just being told what they had to do while the resident observed and listened, thus making them uncomfortable (i.e., during the provision of personal hygiene for a resident). One participant shared his less positive experience with providing personal hygiene to a female resident:

I had to ask my mentor how I should wash her body, and when I came to her breasts, I became very uncomfortable, but the mentor said to me, ‘Just lift her breasts and wash under and dry gently… it is OK’, and then I did it, but it was a strange experience.… (P3, FG7).

Another participant gladly shared her positive experience of being taught different procedures and routines regarding hygiene routines:

We had an interesting overview of hygiene routines at the ward, and then, we went through infection control equipment, and we had to take on and off, to learn these routines… We also learned how many times, how and when we had to use disinfecting alcohol on our hands and the order of taking on and off all that infection control equipment… a kind of ‘learning by doing’… (P1, FG2).

Another learning method that was much appreciated by first-year students was mentors asking questions during a procedure that engaged first-year students to reflect on knowledge before answering. One participant said the following:

When we got out of the resident’s room, they [mentors] asked us if we would do anything different.… (P3, FG7).

Because of the limited number of nursing homes that could have both first- and third-year students at the same time in the clinical field, a few of the first-year students had to complete their inspiration practice week by being two or three days at school or/and the department’s simulation learning environment and only one or two days in the nursing home. Although these students expressed that they learned a lot from their mentors, their expectations for inspiration practice week were not as positive as they expected to be. Some asserted that they got limited or almost no insights into the nurse’s role and responsibilities in the nursing home. One of the participants revealed her experiences in the department’s simulation learning environment:

Together with a few other students from my group, we were at the school’s simulation environment… They [mentors] had a good plan for us. The first day began with measuring vital signs on each other. and we could do it many times. They created several patient cases where we could measure and document NEWS for each case… Then, we learned to change the sheets on the bed while a ‘patient’ was lying there… I felt that I learned a lot, and I am content with how mentors taught us different procedures; however, I wish I could have been at a nursing home because, personally, I have no clinical experience; it would have been useful to get insights into the nurse’s role and responsibilities at nursing home before we start the clinical period at nursing home.… (P3, FG6).

During the focus group interviews, those first-year students who completed the inspiration practice week at the school’s simulation learning environment revealed some learning and teaching methods employed by their mentors, asserted as being very creative. The mentors could not offer learning activities regarding some procedures that could be done in real life (i.e., changing wound dressing on a resident’s leg ulcer); therefore, they had to think outside the box and create situations that could contribute to learning. One of the participants explained this as follows:

They [mentors] drew a ‘wound’ on their own leg and, by following the procedure, they changed the wound dressing on each other to demonstrate us how to change a leg ulcer dressing. I have to say that I learned a lot, although the wound was ‘fake’… [laughter]. (P2, FG7)

The aim of the present study was to explore first-year nursing students’ perceptions and experiences with peer mentoring as an educational model during their inspiration practice week at nursing homes. The analysis of the empirical data revealed that first-year students were inspired by their mentors, an inspiration that contributed to their learning progression.

As the findings have revealed, as a learning process, peer mentoring facilitates the transfer of learning by mentors designing instructional activities, thus encouraging first-year students to make connections between the theoretical knowledge they gained at school and the simulation learning environment and practical knowledge within new and real patient situations.

The findings from the current study have revealed first-year students’ descriptions of how mentors provided them with explicit instructions on how to apply knowledge or skills, thus engaging them in problem-solving activities that required learning transfer. Through these instructions, the mentors transferred learning over to first-year students, hence enabling their reflective thinking within the context of a nursing home. Moreover, acting as role models, being available and allocating time to be together with first-year students, the mentors were perceived as knowledgeable and skilled, features that contributed to enhancing first-year students’ motivation to search for new and more knowledge and, thus, to achieve learning outcomes. These features can be understood as person-related factors, which Wahlgren and Aarkrog [ 37 ] described as one of the factors facilitating learning transfer. Moreover, a person-related transfer factor was positively related to those participants who had previous clinical experience. As the findings have revealed, if the mentors could not answer the questions, the experienced participants, based on their previous clinical experience, suggested solutions; thus, learning was transferred the other way around, from the first-year students to mentors, with learning perceived as a mutual process [ 48 ].

In the present study, the first-year students showed receptiveness to acquiring knowledge and were concerned with making the most of the inspiration practice week. Their interest in learning was strengthened by mentors’ knowledge and abilities in providing instructions. This finding is similar to and supports the findings from previous studies demonstrating that peer mentoring contributes to students’ engagement and increases their cognitive skills, self-confidence, autonomy, clinical skills and reasoning [ 22 , 49 , 50 ].

The mentors’ specific knowledge about nurses’ roles and responsibilities in nursing homes, different procedures and communication challenges with people with cognitive impairment enhanced trust and the credibility of mentors’ preparedness for inspiration practice week. This led to first-year students’ trust in mentors’ ability to transfer learning. The participants’ curiosity and desire to gain insights into real-life patient situations have enabled their willingness to engage in learning activities. In the current study, the mentors adopted an active role when teaching and supervising first-year students. As the participants described, the mentors gladly shared their knowledge, demonstrated how to perform procedures and had informal and formal discussions about how first-year students could implement theory into practice. Similar to previous studies, which have demonstrated that learning with an equal peer facilitates making friends and developing relationships [ 25 ], hence reducing nursing student anxiety in the clinical setting [ 29 ] and promoting learning, the findings from the current study have revealed that the participants leaned on their mentors and felt safe and could trust their mentors. Although a few felt uncomfortable being exposed to new challenges (i.e., providing personal hygiene or helping residents with toileting), most of the participants stated that the mentors’ feedback given both during and postprocedure performance contributed to increasing their self-confidence when performing measures of vital signs or other procedures. These features resonate with Wahlgren and Aarkrogs’ [ 37 ] teacher-related transfer factor which emphasises the mentor’s ability to organise learning situations by including demonstrations, providing examples from theory and practice and reflecting on possible applications in real-life patient situations.

As suggested above, although person- and teacher-related transfer factors facilitated transfer learning, the situation-related factor raised some challenges. Despite the results from one study [ 51 ] demonstrating that nursing homes as a clinical placement will not add something new to students’ skills and competencies required for their future practice, other studies [ 35 , 52 ] have demonstrated that, in general, learning in a clinical context can affect nursing students’ learning outcomes and satisfaction, as well as influence their choice of future career. Although simulation may prepare students for clinical learning environments, there is no comparison to the learning that comes from nursing patients in a real clinical context and from a simulation learning environment at school [ 53 ].

The findings from the current study revealed that not all the students were content with the learning context during their inspiration practice week. Some first-year students, together with their mentors, used the department’s simulation learning environment and even classrooms as a learning context for two or three days or even for the entire week. In this situation, it is reasonable to think that situation-related transfer factors [ 37 ] posed some challenges, and they were not related only to mentors’ pedagogical methods, but also to the programme’s readiness to inspiration practice week and the leadership of the related factors of the nursing home (i.e., not being able to provide enough placements). If the first-year students and their mentors had the necessary theoretical knowledge but could not apply it in a real-life patient situation, the person-related transfer factors could also be challenged. Although none of the participants expressed that using the department’s simulation learning environment as a learning environment was worthless, some hinted at their disappointment. The lack of situational transfer factors seemed to negatively affect the participants’ motivation to gain knowledge. However, as the participants asserted, their mentors’ creativity contributed to creating potential patient situations similar to those in real life. They also encouraged first-year students to simulate different patient conditions and perform different procedures, thus creating opportunities for first-year students to apply theoretical knowledge and improve their skills. This supports the idea that, despite a lack of situational transfer factors, the transfer of learning was supported by mentors’ teacher-related transfer factors rather than situational transfer factors.

Finally, being a first-year student supervised by knowledgeable and skilled third-year students can contribute to first-year students mirroring themselves and their knowledge with their peers. Thus, first-year students can become more aware of themselves as professionals and develop an understanding of the nurse’s role and responsibilities in the nursing home. Consistent with results from previous studies, the results of the present study suggest that peer mentoring facilitates the development of self-understanding in students [ 25 , 26 , 32 , 36 ], which is essential for first-year students to gain a positive attitude towards nursing older people. The findings from the present study have suggested the use of peer mentoring in nursing education with structured training and supervision. Moreover, as the findings have indicated, peer mentoring facilitates learning transfer from mentors to mentees and provides valuable leadership experience for third-year students as mentors. In addition, mentoring may enhance a first-year student’s opportunity to be mentored and provide mentoring in the future.

Implications for nursing education and clinical practice

Peer mentoring, as a teaching and learning method, can be applied to enhance nursing curricula and clinical practice in several ways. Firstly, incorporating successful peer mentoring strategies into the curriculum can foster a collaborative and supportive learning environment among nursing students. The perceived closeness between mentors and first-year students suggests that fostering strong mentor– first year student relationships can serve as a driver for effective learning in the context of nursing homes. This closeness may create an environment that facilitates open communication, trust, and a sense of support, which are essential elements in the field of nursing. Additionally, the confidence instilled in first year students regarding their mentors’ professional knowledge and teaching and supervision methods can directly impact the students’ understanding of nurses’ roles and responsibilities in nursing homes. In clinical practice, the findings from the study can be used to promote mentorship programs that facilitate knowledge transfer and skill development among nurses and among senior and novice students during their clinical periods. Lastly, the study highlights first-year students’ overall positive experiences with peer mentoring program. This positive experience can help change students’ attitudes towards nursing older people, making it an interesting aspect of their future careers.

Strengths and limitations

The present study has several limitations that must be considered when interpreting the findings. First, although many students were invited to participate, the study was limited by a relatively small sample size restricted to students from Oslo Metropolitan University, hence limiting the findings’ national and international transferability. However, one strength may be that the findings and issues raised are relevant for both national and international nursing education programmes that apply the peer mentoring teaching and learning model in clinical placements. Another limitation may be the sample size and data saturation. As a concept, data saturation in qualitative research has been subject to several discussions arising from a variety of conceptual understandings [ 54 ]. Although the sample size posed some limitations, the richness in the participants’ descriptions was a strength, thus contributing to enhancing the information power [ 55 ]. Another limitation may be related to the researchers not being able to conduct member checks to improve the credibility of the data. For practical reasons, it was impossible to gather the same sample of students to validate their statements. However, during the focus group interviews, the participants were asked to provide detailed answers and were given the necessary time to reflect and express their experiences, thus confirming and or disagreeing with each other’s perceptions. Furthermore, potential research biases should be acknowledged given that the data collection and analysis were conducted by all researchers who were nurse educators employed at the same university as the students, hence entailing a prior understanding of the research context. However, the researchers were not involved in the students’ inspiration practice period, which may have limited the research bias regarding data collection. Another limitation may be its specific theoretical framework [ 37 ]. We are aware that other researchers, by using another theoretical framework, would probably discuss the findings accordingly and, hence, interpret the findings differently.

To the best of the researchers’ knowledge, this is the first study exploring first-year nursing students’ experiences with one week of inspiration practice at a nursing home by employing peer mentoring as a teaching and learning method. The findings revealed that first-year students were inspired by their senior peers to keep learning and moving forward. By being close to their mentors and having confidence in their professional knowledge and teaching and supervision methods’, learning was easily transferred from the third-year students to first-year students. Moreover, person-related, teaching-related and situation-related factors were perceived as drivers that positively influenced students’ learning in nursing homes.

The findings have indicated that first-year students had both positive and less positive experiences with attending a one-week inspiration practice at nursing homes. The challenges with inspiration practice were related to situation-related learning transfer factors, such as clinical field not providing enough placements; therefore, the third-year students had to improvise and be creative. However, despite some challenges, mentorship during the one-week inspiration practice offered significant advantages to both mentors and mentees. To fully harness these advantages, we recommend that first-year educational programmes implement person-centred care for older people into the educational curriculum. This should include a one-week compulsory inspiration practice placement in settings exclusive to older people, such as nursing homes. Moreover, peer mentoring as a teaching and learning method, with themes especially designed to focus on nursing and caring for and with older people, offers first-year students insights into nurses’ roles and responsibilities at nursing homes. We believe that such a programme can prevent ‘reality shock’, reduce dropout rates, enhance academic achievements and cultivate personal and professional qualities in students at all levels of their education programmes. More research is needed to explore how peer mentoring is experienced by students enrolled at different levels of Bachelor of Nursing Education and may contribute to their preparation to care for older people in nursing homes.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Participant (followed by a number indicating the number of participants in the focus group)

Focus Group (followed by a number indicating the number of the focus group)

Donelan K, Chang Y, Berrett-Abebe J, Spetz J, Auerbach DI, Norman L, et al. Care Management for older adults: the roles of nurses, Social Workers, and Physicians. Health Aff. 2019;38:941–9.

Article   Google Scholar  

United Nations. World Population Ageing 2020. Highlights: Living arrangements of older persons. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division New York., 2020. Available from: https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/news/world-population-ageing-2020-highlights .

Devi R, Goodman C, Dalkin S, Bate A, Wright J, Jones L, et al. Attracting, recruiting and retaining nurses and care workers working in care homes: the need for a nuanced understanding informed by evidence and theory. Age Ageing. 2020;50(1):65–7.

Salin S, Hautsalo K, Vänni K, Seitsamo S, Yli-Koivisto L. Finnish nurse students’ attitudes towards older adults and the teaching of gerontological nursing - A survey study. Nurse Educ Today. 2020;88:104379.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Rathnayake S, Athukorala Y, Siop S. Attitudes toward and willingness to work with older people among undergraduate nursing students in a public university in Sri Lanka: a cross sectional study. Nurse Educ Today. 2016;36:439–44.

Hunt G, Verstappen A, Stewart L, Kool B, Slark J. Career interests of undergraduate nursing students: a ten-year longitudinal study. Nurse Educ Pract. 2020;43:102702.

Attafuah PYA, Amertil N, Sarfo JO, Deegbe DA, Nyonator D, Amponsah-Boama C, et al. I decided to attend to him because it’s my duty’: Student nurses perception and attitude towards care of older adults. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22(1):23.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hampton D, Welsh D. Work values of Generation Z nurses. J Nurs Adm. 2019;49(10):480–6.

Seemiller C, Grace M. Generation Z goes to college. 1st ed. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass; 2016.

Google Scholar  

Seemiller C, Grace M, Generation Z. Educating and engaging the Next Generation of students. About Campus. 2017;22:21–6.

Tohmola A, Elo S, Mikkonen K, Kyngäs H, Lotvonen S, Saarnio R. Nursing students’ competence profiles in gerontological nursing-A cross-sectional study. Nurs Open. 2022;9(1):199–209.

European Union. Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications. OJEU. 2005;255:22–142.

European Union. Directive 2013/55/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 November 2013 amending Directive 2005/36/EC on the recognition of professional qualifications and regulation (EU) no 1024/2012 on administrative cooperation through the Internal Market Information System (‘the IMI Regulation’). OJEU. 2013;354:132–70.

Klemenčič M. 20 years of the Bologna Process in a global setting: the external dimension of the Bologna Process revisited. Eur J High Educ. 2019;9(1):2–6.

The Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research. New Regulation on a common framework for health-and social studies [In Norwegian]. https://lovdata.no/dokument/SF/forskrift/2017-09-06-1353 . Accessed 05 May 2023.

Oslo Metropolitan Univeristy. Bachelor programme in nursing. [In Norwegian ]. https://student.oslomet.no/bachelor-sykepleie-pilestredet . 2022. Accessed 05 March 2023.

Carlson E, Idvall E. Who wants to work with older people? Swedish student nurses’ willingness to work in elderly care–a questionnaire study. Nurse Educ Today. 2015;35(7):849–53.

Topping KJ. Trends in peer learning. Educ Psychol. 2005;25(6):631–45.

Wang S, Tomlinson EC, Noe RA. The role of mentor trust and protégé internal locus of control in formal mentoring relationships. J Appl Psychol. 2010;95(2):358–67.

Williams B, Reddy P. Does peer-assisted learning improve academic performance? A scoping review. Nurse Educ Today. 2016;42:23–9.

Wong C, Stake-Doucet N, Lombardo C, Sanzone L, Tsimicalis A. An Integrative Review of Peer Mentorship Programs for undergraduate nursing students. J Nurs Educ. 2016;55(3):141–49.

Lim S, Xin Min L, Chan CJW, Dong Y, Mikkonen K, Zhou W. Peer mentoring programs for nursing students: a mixed methods systematic review. Nurse Educ Today. 2022;119:105577.

Kramer M, Brewer BB, Maguire P. Impact of healthy work environments on New Graduate nurses’ environmental reality shock. West J Nurs Res. 2011;35(3):348–83.

Kim J-S. Relationships between reality shock, professional self-concept, and nursing students’ perceived trust from nursing educators: a cross-sectional study. Nurse Educ Today. 2020;88:104369.

Miller H, Bosselait L, Venturato L, Irion K, Schmidt N, DiGeronimo J, et al. Benefits of peer mentoring in prelicensure nursing education: a dual perspective. Nurse Educ. 2019;44(3):159–63.

Collings R, Swanson V, Watkins R. The impact of peer mentoring on levels of student wellbeing, integration and retention: a controlled comparative evaluation of residential students in UK higher education. High Educ. 2014;68:927–42.

Zaniewski AM, Reinholz D. Increasing STEM success: a near-peer mentoring program in the physical sciences. Int J STEM Educ. 2016;3(1):1–12.

Jacobs S, Atack L, Ng S, Haghiri-Vijeh R, DellʼElce C. A peer mentorship program boosts student retention. Nursing. 2015;45(9):19–22.

Cornine A. Reducing nursing student anxiety in the clinical setting: an integrative review. Nurs Educ Perspect. 2020;41(4):229–34.

Mumba MN, Horton AG, Cole H, Dickson B, Brown W, Parker K, et al. Development and implementation of a novel peer mentoring program for undergraduate nursing students. Int J Nurs Educ Scholarsh. 2023;20(1):20220013.

Bowling B, Doyle M, Taylor J, Antes A. Professionalizing the role of peer leaders in STEM. J STEM Educ. 2015;16(2):30–9.

Won M-R, Choi Y-J. Undergraduate nursing student mentors’ experiences of peer mentoring in Korea: a qualitative analysis. Nurse Educ Today. 2017;51:8–14.

Zhang Y-p, Huang X, Xu S-y, Xu C-j. Feng X-q, Jin J-f. can a one-on-one mentorship program reduce the turnover rate of new graduate nurses in China? A longitudinal study. Nurse Educ Pract. 2019;40:102616.

Fleming K. Reducing staff turnover through the implementation of a peer mentoring program. Nurs Manag. 2023;54(1):32–9.

Zhang J, Shields L, Ma B, Yin Y, Wang J, Zhang R, et al. The clinical learning environment, supervision and future intention to work as a nurse in nursing students: a cross-sectional and descriptive study. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22(1):548.

Jacobsen T-I, Sandsleth MG, Gonzalez MT. Student nurses’ experiences participating in a peer mentoring program in clinical placement studies: a metasynthesis. Nurse Educ Pract. 2022;61:103328.

Wahlgren B, Aarkrog V. Transfer: kompetence i en professionel sammenhæng -. Danish [Transfer: competence in a professional context]. Aarhus: Universitetsforlag; 2012.

Wahlgren B. Voksnes læreprocesser: kompetenceudvikling i uddannelse og arbejde -. Danish [Learning processes in adults: competence development in education and work]. København: Akademisk forlag; 2010.

Hunter D, McCallum J, Howes D. Defining exploratory-descriptive qualitative (EDQ) research and considering its application to healthcare. J Nurs Healthc. 2019;4:1–8.

Ross D. Challenges for men in a female dominated environment. Links Health Soc Care. 2017;2:4–20.

Cho S, Jang SJ. Do gender role stereotypes and Patriarchal Culture affect nursing students’ major satisfaction? Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18:2607.

Krueger RA, Casey MA. Focus Group Interviewing. In: Newcomer KE, Hatry HP, Wholey JS, editors. Handbook of practical program evaluation. 4th ed. Hoboken: Wiley; 2015. pp. 506–34.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Robinson J. Using focus groups. In: Ward MRM, Delamont S, editors. Handbook of Qualitative Research in Education. 2nd ed. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing; 2020. pp. 338–48.

Kyngäs H. Inductive content analysis. In: Kyngas H, Mikkonen K, Kääriäinen M, editors. The application of content analysis in Nursing Science Research. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland AG; 2020. pp. 13–21.

Lincoln YS, Denzin NK. The landscape of qualitative research. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE; 2013.

Olmos-Vega FM, Stalmeijer RE, Varpio L, Kahlke R. A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research: AMEE Guide No. 149. Med Teach. 2023;45(3):241–51.

World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical principles for Medical Research Involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013;310:2191–4.

Szecsödy I. Supervision should be a mutual learning experience. Scand Psychoanal Rev. 2013;36:126–9.

Marshall M, Dobbs-Oates J, Kunberger T, Greene J. The peer mentor experience: benefits and challenges in undergraduate programs. Mentor Tutoring: Partnersh Learn. 2021;29:89–109.

Pramila-Savukoski S, Juntunen J, Tuomikoski A-M, Kääriäinen M, Tomietto M, Kaučič BM, et al. Mentors’ self-assessed competence in mentoring nursing students in clinical practice: a systematic review of quantitative studies. J Clin Nurs. 2020;29(5–6):684–705.

Cooke J, Greenway K, Schutz S. Learning from nursing students’ experiences and perceptions of their clinical placements in nursing homes: an integrative literature review. Nurse Educ Today. 2021;100:104857.

Inocian EP, Hill MB, Felicilda-Reynaldo RFD, Kelly SH, Paragas ED, Turk MT. Factors in the clinical learning environment that influence caring behaviors of undergraduate nursing students: an integrative review. Nurse Educ Pract. 2022;63:103391.

Nordquist J, Hall J, Caverzagie K, Snell L, Cahn M-K, Thoma B, et al. The clinical learning environment. Med Teach. 2019;41(4):366–72.

Saunders B, Sim J, Kingstone T, Baker S, Waterfield J, Bartlam B, et al. Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Qual Quant. 2018;52(4):1893–907.

Malterud K, Siersma VD, Guassora AD. Sample size in qualitative interview studies: guided by Information Power. Qual Health Res. 2016;26(13):1753–60.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all the students who participated in the focus group interviews, thus contributing to data collection. We further thank the Department of Nursing and Health Promotion at Oslo Metropolitan University and the University Library for giving their approval and for supporting the publication fee of this article.

This study received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Open access funding provided by OsloMet - Oslo Metropolitan University

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Nursing and Health Promotion, Oslo Metropolitan University, PB 4 St. Olavs plass N, 0130, Oslo, Norway

Daniela Lillekroken, Heidi M. Kvalvaag, Katrin Lindeflaten, Tone Nygaard Flølo, Kristine Krogstad & Elisabeth Hessevaagbakke

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

D.L. contributed to study conception, data collection, analysis and wrote the main manuscript text; H.K., K.L., T.N.F., K.K., & E.H. contributed to data collection and analysis. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniela Lillekroken .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval and consent to participate.

The study was approved by the Norwegian Agency for Shared Services in Education and Research (Sikt/Ref. number 334855) and by the leader of the Department of Nursing and Health Promotion at Oslo Metropolitan University. This study does not aim to gain insights into participants’ health status, sexuality, ethnicity and political affiliation (sensitive information); therefore, the study is exempted from ethical approval from the Norwegian Regional Committees for Medical and Health Research Ethics because no health information or patient data are registered. This study was performed according to principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki and in accordance with Oslo Metropolitan University’s guidelines and regulations. The data were kept confidential and used only for this research purpose. To protect the anonymity of the participants, participant characteristics are not elaborated upon in the paper. The researchers provided verbal and written information about the study. Written voluntary informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to data collection.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

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

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Lillekroken, D., Kvalvaag, H.M., Lindeflaten, K. et al. Educating the nurses of tomorrow: exploring first-year nursing students’ reflections on a one-week senior peer-mentor supervised inspiration practice in nursing homes. BMC Nurs 23 , 132 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-01768-5

Download citation

Received : 03 October 2023

Accepted : 28 January 2024

Published : 20 February 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-01768-5

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • Clinical practice
  • Content analysis
  • Focus groups
  • Learning transfer
  • Nursing education
  • Nursing homes
  • Nursing students
  • Peer mentoring

BMC Nursing

ISSN: 1472-6955

theoretical study research questions

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 February 22, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/research-question-examples/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

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, what is your plagiarism score.

Suggestions or feedback?

MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology

  • Machine learning
  • Social justice
  • Black holes
  • Classes and programs

Departments

  • Aeronautics and Astronautics
  • Brain and Cognitive Sciences
  • Architecture
  • Political Science
  • Mechanical Engineering

Centers, Labs, & Programs

  • Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL)
  • Picower Institute for Learning and Memory
  • Lincoln Laboratory
  • School of Architecture + Planning
  • School of Engineering
  • School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences
  • Sloan School of Management
  • School of Science
  • MIT Schwarzman College of Computing

What can super-healing species teach us about regeneration?

Press contact :.

Photo of Albert Almada smiling

Previous image Next image

When Albert E. Almada PhD ’13 embarks on a new project, he always considers two criteria instilled in him during his time as a graduate student in the Department of Biology at MIT.

“If you want to make a big discovery, you have to approach it from a unique perspective — a unique angle,” Almada says. “You also have to be willing to dive into the unknown and go to the leading edge of your field.”

This is not without its challenges — but with an innovative spirit, Almada says, one can find ways to apply technologies and approaches to a new area of research where a roadmap doesn’t yet exist.

Now an assistant professor of orthopedic surgery and stem cell biology and regenerative medicine at the Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California (USC), Almada studies the mechanics of how stem cells rebuild tissues after trauma and how stem cell principles are dysregulated and drive conditions like degenerative disease and aging, exploring these topics through an evolutionary lens. 

He’s also trying to solve a mystery that has intrigued scientists for centuries: Why can some vertebrate species like fish, salamanders, and lizards regenerate entire body parts, but mammals cannot?  Almada’s laboratory  at USC tackles these critical questions in the musculoskeletal system. 

Almada’s fascination with muscle development and regeneration can be traced back to growing up in southern California. Almada’s brother had a degenerative muscle disease called  Duchenne muscular dystrophy — and, while Almada grew stronger and stronger, his brother grew weaker and weaker. Last summer, Almada’s brother, unfortunately, lost his battle with his disorder at the age of 41. 

“Watching his disease progress in those early years is what inspired me to become a scientist,” Almada recalls. “Sometimes science can be personal.” 

Almada went to the University of California at Irvine for his undergraduate degree, majoring in biological sciences. During his summers, he participated in the  Undergraduate Research Program  (URP) at the  Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory and the MIT Summer Research Program-Bio (now the Bernard S. and Sophie G. Gould MIT Summer Research Program in Biology, BSG-MSRP-Bio ), where he saw the passion, rigor, and drive that solidified his desire to pursue a PhD. 

Despite his interest in clinical applications, skeletal muscle, and regenerative biology, Almada was drawn to the Department of Biology at MIT , which is focused on basic fundamental research.

“I was willing to bet that it all came down to understanding basic cellular processes and things going wrong with the cell and how it interacts with its environment,” he says. “The MIT biology program really helped me define an identity for myself and gave me a template for how to tackle clinical problems from a molecular perspective.”

Almada’s PhD thesis work was based on a curious finding that  Phillip Sharp , Institute Professor emeritus, professor emeritus of biology, and intramural faculty at the Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, had made in 2007 — that transcription, the process of copying DNA into a messenger molecule called RNA, can occur in both directions at gene promoters. In one direction, it was long understood that fully formed mRNA is transcribed and can be used as a blueprint to make a protein. The transcription Sharp observed, in the opposite direction, results in a very short RNA that is not used as a gene product blueprint. 

Almada’s project dug into what those short RNA molecules are — their structure and sequence, and why they’re not produced the same way that coding messenger RNA is. In two papers published in  PNAS  and  Nature , Almada and colleagues discovered that a balance between splicing and transcription termination signals controls the length of an RNA. This finding has wider implications because toxic RNAs are produced and can build up in several degenerative diseases; being able to splice out or shorten RNAs to remove the harmful segments could be a potential therapeutic treatment.

“That experience convinced me that if I want to make big discoveries, I have to focus on basic science,” he says. “It also gave me the confidence that if I can succeed at MIT, I can succeed just about anywhere and in any field of biology.” 

At the time Almada was in graduate school, there was a lot of excitement about transcription factor reprogramming. Transcription factors are the proteins responsible for turning on essential genes that tell a cell what to be and how to behave; a subset of them can even theoretically turn one cell type into another. 

Almada began to wonder whether a specialized set of transcription factors instructs stem cells to rebuild tissues after trauma. After MIT, Almada moved on to a postdoctoral position in the lab of  Amy Wagers , a leader in muscle stem cell biology at Harvard University, to immerse himself in this problem.

In many tissues in our bodies, a population of stem cells typically exists in an inactive, non-dividing state called quiescence. Once activated, these stem cells interact with their environment, sense damage signals, and turn on programs of proliferation and differentiation, as well as self-renewal, which is critical to maintaining a pool of stem cells in the tissue.

One of the biggest mysteries in the field of regenerative biology is how stem cells transition from dormancy into that activated, highly regenerative state. The body’s ability to turn on stem cells, including those in the skeletal muscle system, declines as we age and is often dysregulated in degenerative diseases — diseases like the one Almada’s brother suffered from. 

In a study Almada published in Cell Reports  several years ago, he identified a family of transcription factors that work together to turn on a critical regenerative gene program within hours of muscle trauma. This program drives muscle stem cells out of quiescence and speeds up healing. 

“Now my lab is studying this regenerative program and its potential dysregulation in aging and degenerative muscle diseases using mouse and human models,” Almada says. “We’re also drawing parallels with super-healing species like salamanders and lizards.” 

Recently, Almada has been working on characterizing the molecular and functional properties of stem cells in lizards, attempting to understand how the genes and pathways differ from mammalian stem cells. Lizards can regenerate massive amounts of skeletal muscle from scratch — imagine if human muscle tissue could be regrown as seamlessly as a lizard’s tail can. He is also exploring whether the tail is unique, or if stem cells in other tissues in lizards can regenerate faster and better than the tail, by comparing analogous injuries in a mouse model. 

“This is a good example of approaching a problem from a new perspective: We believe we’re going to discover new biology in lizards that we can use to enhance skeletal muscle growth in vulnerable human populations, including those that suffer from deadly muscle disorders,” Almada says.

In just three years of starting his faculty position at USC, his work and approach have already received recognition in academia, with junior faculty awards from the Baxter Foundation and the Glenn Foundation/American Federation of Aging Research. He also received his  first RO1 award  from the National Institutes of Health with nearly $3 million in funding. Almada and his first graduate student, Alma Zuniga Munoz, were also awarded the  HHMI Gilliam Fellowship  last summer. Zuniga Munoz is  the first to be recognized  with this award at USC; fellowship recipients, student and advisor pairs, are selected with the goal of preparing students from underrepresented groups for leadership roles in science.

Almada himself is a second-generation Mexican American and has been involved in mentoring and training throughout his academic career. He was a graduate resident tutor for Spanish House at MIT and currently serves as the chair of the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee in the Department of Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine at USC; more than half of his lab members identify as members of the Hispanic community.

“The focus has to be on developing good scientists,” Almada says. “I learned from my past research mentors the importance of putting the needs of your students first and providing a supportive environment for everyone to excel, no matter where they start.” 

As a mentor and researcher, Almada knows that no question and no challenge is off limits — foundations he built in Cambridge, where his graduate studies focused on teaching him to think, not just do.

“Digging deep into the science is what MIT taught me,” he says. “I’m now taking all of my knowledge in molecular biology and applying it to translationally oriented questions that I hope will benefit human health and longevity.”

Share this news article on:

Related links.

  • Albert Almada
  • Bernard S. and Sophie G. Gould MIT Summer Research Program in Biology (BSG-MSRP-Bio)
  • Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research
  • Department of Biology

Related Topics

  • Koch Institute

Related Articles

liver cell known as Hepatocyte

Tissue model reveals key players in liver regeneration

cellular regeneration

Reversing hearing loss with regenerative therapy

Portrait photo of Kristin Knouse, standing with her arms folded against a blurred outdoor background

3 Questions: Kristin Knouse on the liver’s regenerative capabilities

theoretical study research questions

Reading DNA, backward and forward

Previous item Next item

More MIT News

Group photo of Dean Anantha Chandrakasan with 12 postdocs

2023-25 MIT Postdoctoral Fellowship Program for Engineering Excellence cohort announced

Read full story →

Lydia Brosnahan and an unidentified man stand in front of a window; the man is wearing a virtual reality headset.

Faces of MIT: Lydia Brosnahan

Lily Tsai, along with MIT administration and faculty, proceed through Killian Court on a spring day. All are wearing academic regalia and Tsai holds a wooden staff.

A new shepherd’s staff to lead “the flock” during MIT Commencement

Branden Spitzer smiles while setting on a table inside a lab, with large equipment in background.

Nourishing the mind, hand, and stomach

On top of a quarter sits a disc-like device chopped in half to show the interior: purple plastic is on outside, eight stacks of coiled copper-colored rods; and in the middle is a black substance.

MIT engineers 3D print the electromagnets at the heart of many electronics

Clarence Williams stands on a stage while holding a plaque and smiling, as Karl Reid has his arm around Williams’ back. A greyscale photo of the 1963 March on Washington is in the background.

MLK Celebration Gala pays tribute to Martin Luther King Jr. and his writings on “the goal of true education”

  • More news on MIT News homepage →

Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA, USA

  • Map (opens in new window)
  • Events (opens in new window)
  • People (opens in new window)
  • Careers (opens in new window)
  • Accessibility
  • Social Media Hub
  • MIT on Facebook
  • MIT on YouTube
  • MIT on Instagram

State Of The Union

Biden Admin Pours $1 Million Into Studies Aimed At Denying There Are Only Two Genders

T he National Science Foundation is allocating over $900,000 in taxpayer funds to three universities to conduct a study claiming biology courses inaccurately portray sex and gender as binary, in order to make them more inclusive for transgender and non-binary students.

The study aims to explore how sex and gender topics are taught, their impact on transgender student belonging and interest, and ways to create a more inclusive curriculum acknowledging diversity in sexes and the complex relationship between sex and gender.

While the NSF claims strong theoretical foundations and peer review support the research, critics argue it amounts to denying basic biological realities in order to push an ideological agenda.

“There is a strong theoretical foundation on which the research questions are based,” a National Science Foundation spokesperson said, noting that its “merit review process is recognized as the ‘gold standard’ of scientific review.”

Concerns have been raised over the politicization of federal agencies and wasting of public funds to embed extreme gender ideologies in institutions, as part of broader DEI initiatives, when evidence for related medical interventions remains limited.

Calls have been made to rein in bureaucratic overreach promoting left-wing social policies.

Most Popular:

Cause of Death Released For ‘Rocky’ Movie Star

Supreme Court Audio Suggests Trump Case Is Doomed

Biden Admin Pours $1 Million Into Studies Aimed At Denying There Are Only Two Genders

Topic Guide - Developing Your Research Study

  • Purpose of Guide
  • Flaws to Avoid
  • Independent and Dependent Variables
  • Glossary of Research Terms
  • Reading Research Effectively
  • Narrowing a Topic Idea
  • Broadening a Topic Idea
  • Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
  • Academic Writing Style
  • Choosing a Title
  • Making an Outline
  • Paragraph Development
  • APA 7th Edition
  • Executive Summary
  • The C.A.R.S. Model
  • Background Information
  • The Research Problem/Question
  • Theoretical Framework

Importance of Theory

Strategies for developing the theoretical framework, structure and writing style, writing tip, another writing tip, yet another writing tip, still yet another writing tip.

  • Citation Tracking
  • Content Alert Services
  • Evaluating Sources
  • Primary Sources
  • Secondary Sources
  • Tiertiary Sources
  • What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
  • Qualitative Methods
  • Quantitative Methods
  • Using Non-Textual Elements
  • Limitations of the Study
  • 10. Proofreading Your Paper
  • Writing Concisely
  • Common Grammar Mistakes
  • Avoiding Plagiarism
  • Footnotes or Endnotes?
  • Further Readings
  • Annotated Bibliography
  • Types of Structured Group Activities
  • Group Project Survival Skills
  • Multiple Book Review Essay
  • Reviewing Collected Works
  • Writing a Case Study
  • Writing a Research Proposal
  • Bibliography

Theories are formulated to explain, predict, and understand phenomena and, in many cases, to challenge and extend existing knowledge within the limits of critical bounding assumptions. The theoretical framework is the structure that can hold or support a theory of a research study. The theoretical framework introduces and describes the theory that explains why the research problem under study exists.

Abend, Gabriel. "The Meaning of Theory." Sociological Theory 26 (June 2008): 173–199; Swanson, Richard A. Theory Building in Applied Disciplines . San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers 2013.

A theoretical framework consists of concepts and, together with their definitions and reference to relevant scholarly literature, existing theory that is used for your particular study. The theoretical framework must demonstrate an understanding of theories and concepts that are relevant to the topic of your research paper and that relate to the broader areas of knowledge being considered.

The theoretical framework is most often not something readily found within the literature . You must review course readings and pertinent research studies for theories and analytic models that are relevant to the research problem you are investigating. The selection of a theory should depend on its appropriateness, ease of application, and explanatory power.

The theoretical framework strengthens the study in the following ways :

  • An explicit statement of  theoretical assumptions permits the reader to evaluate them critically.
  • The theoretical framework connects the researcher to existing knowledge. Guided by a relevant theory, you are given a basis for your hypotheses and choice of research methods.
  • Articulating the theoretical assumptions of a research study forces you to address questions of why and how. It permits you to intellectually transition from simply describing a phenomenon you have observed to generalizing about various aspects of that phenomenon.
  • Having a theory helps you identify the limits to those generalizations. A theoretical framework specifies which key variables influence a phenomenon of interest and highlights the need to examine how those key variables might differ and under what circumstances.

By virtue of its applicative nature, good theory in the social sciences is of value precisely because it fulfills one primary purpose: to explain the meaning, nature, and challenges associated with a phenomenon, often experienced but unexplained in the world in which we live, so that we may use that knowledge and understanding to act in more informed and effective ways.

The Conceptual Framework . College of Education. Alabama State University; Corvellec, Hervé, ed. What is Theory?: Answers from the Social and Cultural Sciences . Stockholm: Copenhagen Business School Press, 2013; Asher, Herbert B. Theory-Building and Data Analysis in the Social Sciences . Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Press, 1984; Drafting an Argument . Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Ravitch, Sharon M. and Matthew Riggan. Reason and Rigor: How Conceptual Frameworks Guide Research . Second edition. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2017; Trochim, William M.K. Philosophy of Research . Research Methods Knowledge Base. 2006; Jarvis, Peter. The Practitioner-Researcher. Developing Theory from Practice . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1999.

I.  Developing the Framework

Here are some strategies to develop of an effective theoretical framework:

  • Examine your thesis title and research problem . The research problem anchors your entire study and forms the basis from which you construct your theoretical framework.
  • Brainstorm about what you consider to be the key variables in your research . Answer the question, "What factors contribute to the presumed effect?"
  • Review related literature to find how scholars have addressed your research problem. Identify the assumptions from which the author(s) addressed the problem.
  • List  the constructs and variables that might be relevant to your study. Group these variables into independent and dependent categories.
  • Review key social science theories that are introduced to you in your course readings and choose the theory that can best explain the relationships between the key variables in your study [note the Writing Tip on this page].
  • Discuss the assumptions or propositions of this theory and point out their relevance to your research.

A theoretical framework is used to limit the scope of the relevant data by focusing on specific variables and defining the specific viewpoint [framework] that the researcher will take in analyzing and interpreting the data to be gathered. It also facilitates the understanding of concepts and variables according to given definitions and builds new knowledge by validating or challenging theoretical assumptions.

II.  Purpose

Think of theories as the conceptual basis for understanding, analyzing, and designing ways to investigate relationships within social systems. To that end, the following roles served by a theory can help guide the development of your framework.

  • Means by which new research data can be interpreted and coded for future use,
  • Response to new problems that have no previously identified solutions strategy,
  • Means for identifying and defining research problems,
  • Means for prescribing or evaluating solutions to research problems,
  • Ways of discerning certain facts among the accumulated knowledge that are important and which facts are not,
  • Means of giving old data new interpretations and new meaning,
  • Means by which to identify important new issues and prescribe the most critical research questions that need to be answered to maximize understanding of the issue,
  • Means of providing members of a professional discipline with a common language and a frame of reference for defining the boundaries of their profession, and
  • Means to guide and inform research so that it can, in turn, guide research efforts and improve professional practice.

Adapted from: Torraco, R. J. “Theory-Building Research Methods.” In Swanson R. A. and E. F. Holton III , editors. Human Resource Development Handbook: Linking Research and Practice . (San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler, 1997): pp. 114-137; Jacard, James and Jacob Jacoby. Theory Construction and Model-Building Skills: A Practical Guide for Social Scientists . New York: Guilford, 2010; Ravitch, Sharon M. and Matthew Riggan. Reason and Rigor: How Conceptual Frameworks Guide Research . Second edition. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2017; Sutton, Robert I. and Barry M. Staw. “What Theory is Not.” Administrative Science Quarterly 40 (September 1995): 371-384.

The theoretical framework may be rooted in a specific theory , in which case, your work is expected to test the validity of that existing theory in relation to specific events, issues, or phenomena. Many social science research papers fit into this rubric. For example, Peripheral Realism Theory, which categorizes perceived differences among nation-states as those that give orders, those that obey, and those that rebel, could be used as a means for understanding conflicted relationships among countries in Africa. A test of this theory could be the following: Does Peripheral Realism Theory help explain intra-state actions, such as, the disputed split between southern and northern Sudan that led to the creation of two nations?

However, you may not always be asked by your professor to test a specific theory in your paper, but to develop your own framework from which your analysis of the research problem is derived . Based upon the above example, it is perhaps easiest to understand the nature and function of a theoretical framework if it is viewed as an answer to two basic questions:

  • What is the research problem/question? [e.g., "How should the individual and the state relate during periods of conflict?"]
  • Why is your approach a feasible solution? [i.e., justify the application of your choice of a particular theory and explain why alternative constructs were rejected. I could choose instead to test Instrumentalist or Circumstantialists models developed among ethnic conflict theorists that rely upon socio-economic-political factors to explain individual-state relations and to apply this theoretical model to periods of war between nations].

The answers to these questions come from a thorough review of the literature and your course readings [summarized and analyzed in the next section of your paper] and the gaps in the research that emerge from the review process. With this in mind, a complete theoretical framework will likely not emerge until after you have completed a thorough review of the literature .

Just as a research problem in your paper requires contextualization and background information, a theory requires a framework for understanding its application to the topic being investigated. When writing and revising this part of your research paper, keep in mind the following:

  • Clearly describe the framework, concepts, models, or specific theories that underpin your study . This includes noting who the key theorists are in the field who have conducted research on the problem you are investigating and, when necessary, the historical context that supports the formulation of that theory. This latter element is particularly important if the theory is relatively unknown or it is borrowed from another discipline.
  • Position your theoretical framework within a broader context of related frameworks , concepts, models, or theories . As noted in the example above, there will likely be several concepts, theories, or models that can be used to help develop a framework for understanding the research problem. Therefore, note why the theory you've chosen is the appropriate one.
  • The present tense is used when writing about theory. Although the past tense can be used to describe the history of a theory or the role of key theorists, the construction of your theoretical framework is happening now.
  • You should make your theoretical assumptions as explicit as possible . Later, your discussion of methodology should be linked back to this theoretical framework.
  • Don’t just take what the theory says as a given! Reality is never accurately represented in such a simplistic way; if you imply that it can be, you fundamentally distort a reader's ability to understand the findings that emerge. Given this, always note the limitations of the theoretical framework you've chosen [i.e., what parts of the research problem require further investigation because the theory inadequately explains a certain phenomena].

The Conceptual Framework . College of Education. Alabama State University; Conceptual Framework: What Do You Think is Going On? College of Engineering. University of Michigan; Drafting an Argument . Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Lynham, Susan A. “The General Method of Theory-Building Research in Applied Disciplines.” Advances in Developing Human Resources 4 (August 2002): 221-241; Tavallaei, Mehdi and Mansor Abu Talib. "A General Perspective on the Role of Theory in Qualitative Research." Journal of International Social Research 3 (Spring 2010); Ravitch, Sharon M. and Matthew Riggan. Reason and Rigor: How Conceptual Frameworks Guide Research . Second edition. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, 2017; Reyes, Victoria. Demystifying the Journal Article . Inside Higher Education; Trochim, William M.K. Philosophy of Research . Research Methods Knowledge Base. 2006; Weick, Karl E. “The Work of Theorizing.” In Theorizing in Social Science: The Context of Discovery . Richard Swedberg, editor. (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2014), pp. 177-194.

Borrowing Theoretical Constructs from Elsewhere

An increasingly important trend in the social and behavioral sciences is to think about and attempt to understand research problems from an interdisciplinary perspective. One way to do this is to not rely exclusively on the theories developed within your particular discipline, but to think about how an issue might be informed by theories developed in other disciplines. For example, if you are a political science student studying the rhetorical strategies used by female incumbents in state legislature campaigns, theories about the use of language could be derived, not only from political science, but linguistics, communication studies, philosophy, psychology, and, in this particular case, feminist studies. Building theoretical frameworks based on the postulates and hypotheses developed in other disciplinary contexts can be both enlightening and an effective way to be more engaged in the research topic.

CohenMiller, A. S. and P. Elizabeth Pate. "A Model for Developing Interdisciplinary Research Theoretical Frameworks." The Qualitative Researcher 24 (2019): 1211-1226; Frodeman, Robert. The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity . New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Don't Undertheorize!

Do not leave the theory hanging out there in the introduction never to be mentioned again. Undertheorizing weakens your paper. The theoretical framework you describe should guide your study throughout the paper. Be sure to always connect theory to the review of pertinent literature and to explain in the discussion part of your paper how the theoretical framework you chose supports analysis of the research problem or, if appropriate, how the theoretical framework was found to be inadequate in explaining the phenomenon you were investigating. In that case, don't be afraid to propose your own theory based on your findings.

What's a Theory? What's a Hypothesis?

The terms theory and hypothesis are often used interchangeably in newspapers and popular magazines and in non-academic settings. However, the difference between theory and hypothesis in scholarly research is important, particularly when using an experimental design. A theory is a well-established principle that has been developed to explain some aspect of the natural world. Theories arise from repeated observation and testing and incorporates facts, laws, predictions, and tested assumptions that are widely accepted [e.g., rational choice theory; grounded theory; critical race theory].

A hypothesis is a specific, testable prediction about what you expect to happen in your study. For example, an experiment designed to look at the relationship between study habits and test anxiety might have a hypothesis that states, "We predict that students with better study habits will suffer less test anxiety." Unless your study is exploratory in nature, your hypothesis should always explain what you expect to happen during the course of your research.

The key distinctions are:

  • A theory predicts events in a broad, general context;  a hypothesis makes a specific prediction about a specified set of circumstances.
  • A theory has been extensively tested and is generally accepted among scholars; a hypothesis is a speculative guess that has yet to be tested.

Cherry, Kendra. Introduction to Research Methods: Theory and Hypothesis . About.com Psychology; Gezae, Michael et al. Welcome Presentation on Hypothesis . Slideshare presentation.

Be Prepared to Challenge the Validity of an Existing Theory

Theories are meant to be tested and their underlying assumptions challenged; they are not rigid or intransigent, but are meant to set forth general principles for explaining phenomena or predicting outcomes. Given this, testing theoretical assumptions is an important way that knowledge in any discipline develops and grows. If you're asked to apply an existing theory to a research problem, the analysis may include the expectation by your professor that you should offer modifications to the theory based on your research findings. Indications that theoretical assumptions may need to be modified can include the following:

  • Your findings suggest that the theory does not explain or account for current conditions or circumstances,
  • The study reveals a finding that is significantly incongruent with what the theory attempts to explain or predict, or
  • Your analysis reveals that the theory overly generalizes behaviors or actions without taking into consideration specific factors [e.g., factors related to culture, nationality, history, gender, ethnicity, age, geographic location, legal norms or customs , religion, social class, socioeconomic status, etc.].

Philipsen, Kristian. "Theory Building: Using Abductive Search Strategies." In Collaborative Research Design: Working with Business for Meaningful Findings . Per Vagn Freytag and Louise Young, editors. (Singapore: Springer Nature, 2018), pp. 45-71; Shepherd, Dean A. and Roy Suddaby. "Theory Building: A Review and Integration." Journal of Management 43 (2017): 59-86.

  • << Previous: The Research Problem/Question
  • Next: 5. The Literature Review >>
  • Last Updated: Mar 22, 2022 8:49 AM
  • URL: https://leeuniversity.libguides.com/research_study_guide

IMAGES

  1. What Is An Example Of A Theoretical Framework In Qualitative Research

    theoretical study research questions

  2. PPT

    theoretical study research questions

  3. PPT

    theoretical study research questions

  4. | Theoretical frameworks for research questions. (a) presents the

    theoretical study research questions

  5. Qualitative Research Paper Theoretical Lens Example : (PDF) Theoretical

    theoretical study research questions

  6. 2 Theoretical Research Questions (Extracted from 1)

    theoretical study research questions

VIDEO

  1. Research methodology- exam based crash course

  2. Research methodology- crash course|exam based| unit -7

  3. Research Methodology : Lecture 5

  4. Research Methodology Video for Final Exam

  5. Research methodology- crash course|exam based| unit 5&6 || all theory

  6. Research Process

COMMENTS

  1. What is a Theoretical Framework? How to Write It (with Examples)

    A theoretical framework guides the research process like a roadmap for the study, so you need to get this right. Theoretical framework 1,2 is the structure that supports and describes a theory. A theory is a set of interrelated concepts and definitions that present a systematic view of phenomena by describing the relationship among the variables for explaining these phenomena.

  2. Theoretical Research: Definition, Methods + Examples

    It tries to answer basic questions about people, which is why this kind of research is used in every field of knowledge. ... and concepts that collectively shape the direction of a research study. The theoretical framework is the fundamental principle that will be explored, strengthens the research's credibility by aligning it with ...

  3. What Is a Theoretical Framework?

    A theoretical framework is a foundational review of existing theories that serves as a roadmap for developing the arguments you will use in your own work. Theories are developed by researchers to explain phenomena, draw connections, and make predictions. In a theoretical framework, you explain the existing theories that support your research ...

  4. Theoretical Framework

    Articulating the theoretical assumptions of a research study forces you to address questions of why and how. It permits you to intellectually transition from simply describing a phenomenon you have observed to generalizing about various aspects of that phenomenon. Having a theory helps you identify the limits to those generalizations.

  5. Theoretical Framework Example for a Thesis or Dissertation

    Theoretical Framework Example for a Thesis or Dissertation. Published on October 14, 2015 by Sarah Vinz . Revised on July 18, 2023 by Tegan George. Your theoretical framework defines the key concepts in your research, suggests relationships between them, and discusses relevant theories based on your literature review.

  6. Theoretical Framework

    Guiding the research design: A theoretical framework can guide the selection of research methods, data collection techniques, and data analysis procedures. By outlining the key concepts and assumptions underlying the research questions, the theoretical framework can help researchers to identify the most appropriate research design for their study.

  7. PDF Building a Dissertation Conceptual and Theoretical Framework: A Recent

    Developing Guiding Research Questions I began with the Ravitch and Carl (2021) conceptual framework diagram as a guide, starting with the research questions positioned at the top. It's important to note that the development of research questions is an active and iterative process that evolves and changes over time. Looking

  8. What is a Theoretical Framework?

    A theoretical framework is a foundational review of existing theories that serves as a roadmap for developing the arguments you will use in your own work. Theories are developed by researchers to explain phenomena, draw connections, and make predictions. In a theoretical framework, you explain the existing theories that support your research ...

  9. Theoretical Framework and Research Question (Chapter 9)

    It is now time to turn the preliminary research question into a researchable research question. By developing a theoretical framework that addresses your preliminary research question, you will be able to describe the 'state of the art' in your field of interest, sharpen your ideas, and then formulate a better, more specified research question.

  10. Writing Strong Research Questions

    A good research question is essential to guide your research paper, dissertation, or thesis. All research questions should be: Focused on a single problem or issue. Researchable using primary and/or secondary sources. Feasible to answer within the timeframe and practical constraints. Specific enough to answer thoroughly.

  11. 5.5 Developing a theoretical framework

    5.5 Developing a theoretical framework. Social work researchers develop theoretical frameworks based on social science theories and empirical literature. A study's theory describes the theoretical foundations of the research and consists of the big-T theory (ies) that guide the investigation. It provides overarching perspectives, explanations ...

  12. Theoretical Perspective in Qualitative Research

    Here are some key factors to consider when choosing a theoretical perspective for qualitative research: - Research question and objectives: The research question and objectives should guide the choice of a theoretical perspective. Consider which perspective best aligns with the goals of the study and is most likely to help you address the ...

  13. Theoretical Research

    Theoretical Research. Theoretical research is a logical exploration of a system of beliefs and assumptions. This type of research includes theorizing or defining how a cyber system and its environment behave and then exploring or playing out the implications of how it is defined. This research is very valuable in understanding the bounds, edge ...

  14. The Central Role of Theory in Qualitative Research

    By linking the specific research questions to the larger theoretical constructs or to important policy issues, the writer shows that the particulars of this study serve to illuminate larger issues and therefore hold potential significance for that field" (Marshall & Rossman, 2011, p. 7). Perhaps the best way to display a conceptual framework ...

  15. Organizing Academic Research Papers: Theoretical Framework

    The theoretical framework is the structure that can hold or support a theory of a research study. The theoretical framework introduces and describes the theory which explains why the research problem under study exists. ... Means by which to identify important new issues and prescribe the most critical research questions that need to be ...

  16. Formulation of Research Question

    Formulation of research question (RQ) is an essentiality before starting any research. ... Basically, the research can be classified as action, applied, basic, clinical, empirical, administrative, theoretical, ... RQ determines study design, for example, the question aimed to find the incidence of a disease in population will lead to conducting ...

  17. A Practical Guide to Writing Quantitative and Qualitative Research

    INTRODUCTION. Scientific research is usually initiated by posing evidenced-based research questions which are then explicitly restated as hypotheses.1,2 The hypotheses provide directions to guide the study, solutions, explanations, and expected results.3,4 Both research questions and hypotheses are essentially formulated based on conventional theories and real-world processes, which allow the ...

  18. Significance of a Study: Revisiting the "So What" Question

    The methods of the study create a bridge that connects the introductory material (research questions, theoretical framework, literature review, hypotheses) with the results and interpretations. The role that methods play in scientific inquiry is to ensure that your hypotheses will be tested appropriately so the significance of your study will ...

  19. Designing a Research Question

    Research questions are vital to qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods research. They "narrow the research objective and research purpose" ([]: p 475; [2, 3]) and determine the study methods (e.g., research paradigm, design, sampling method, instruments, and analysis).Despite the essential role the question holds in guiding and focusing research, White [] noted that academic ...

  20. Conceptualizing Research Questions

    Within this diverse theoretical source of research topics and as a result of involvement in theoretical studies and reading in the field, researchers may develop personal areas of interest focusing on a specific set of related topics. Moreover, topics of interest for research may sometimes diverge from the current theoretical trends in the ...

  21. Developing qualitative research questions: a reflective process

    Some researchers, such as Yin (Citation 1994), propose that a theoretical framework should inform the research questions for case study research as the theory will help to define the selection and parameters of cases. As researchers design a study and protocols, theory often shapes the methods in explicit ways.

  22. Educating the nurses of tomorrow: exploring first-year nursing students

    To ensure transferability and dependability, the researchers clearly described the study's theoretical framework, the recruitment and the characteristics of the participants, the research context, data collection and analysis processes so that readers could assess whether findings were applicable to their specific contexts and, if desired ...

  23. 10 Research Question Examples to Guide your Research Project

    The first question asks for a ready-made solution, and is not focused or researchable. The second question is a clearer comparative question, but note that it may not be practically feasible. For a smaller research project or thesis, it could be narrowed down further to focus on the effectiveness of drunk driving laws in just one or two countries.

  24. Applied Sciences

    The coupled seepage-stress action has a significant deterioration effect on the structural face of the hydraulic tunnel enclosure, which intensifies the shear rupture tendency of the deteriorated structural face of the rock mass. The plastic deformation of a typical I-II composite fissure was taken as the research object, the characteristics of the tip plastic zone of the composite fissure ...

  25. What can super-healing species teach us about regeneration?

    MIT alumnus Albert E. Almada studies super-healing species to explore regeneration, ... one can find ways to apply technologies and approaches to a new area of research where a roadmap doesn't yet exist. ... Almada's laboratory at USC tackles these critical questions in the musculoskeletal system.

  26. Health & Environmental Research Online (HERO)

    Environmental Topics; Laws & Regulations; About EPA; Health & Environmental Research Online (HERO) ... A theoretical study Author(s) Saberinasab, M; Salehzadeh, S; Maghsoud, Y; Bayat, M Year. 2016 Is Peer Reviewed? 1 Journal. Computational and Theoretical Chemistry ISSN: 2210-271X EISSN: 2210-2728 Volume. 1078 Page Numbers. 9-15 DOI. 10.1016/j ...

  27. Biden Admin Pours $1 Million Into Studies Aimed At Denying There ...

    "There is a strong theoretical foundation on which the research questions are based," a National Science Foundation spokesperson said, noting that its "merit review process is recognized as ...

  28. Study aims to better understand reasons behind common type of heart failure

    HeartShare study Researchers in the HeartShare Study are recruiting participants with and without heart failure. For the HeartShare Study, researchers are recruiting participants with and without heart failure. Participants will be monitored for a four-year period, starting with a survey upon enrollment to learn about their demographics, health ...

  29. Theoretical Framework

    The theoretical framework strengthens the study in the following ways: An explicit statement of theoretical assumptions permits the reader to evaluate them critically. The theoretical framework connects the researcher to existing knowledge. Guided by a relevant theory, you are given a basis for your hypotheses and choice of research methods.