historical critical research method

David R. Law. The Historical-Critical Method: A Guide for the Perplexed.

• UNIO CUM CHRISTO 2(1):127
• CC BY-NC 4.0
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Community in Mission

Blog of the Archdiocese of Washington

The Pope’s View of the Historical-Critical Method of Biblical Interpretation

The historical-critical method investigates the origins of a text and compares them to other texts written at the same time, before, or recently after the text in question. Did other ancient texts, whether biblical or non-biblical, adopt similar forms, use similar ingredients, story-lines, allegories, metaphors and the like. The Historical Critical method focuses on the sources of a document to determine who wrote it, when it was written, and where. What do we know of the author and his times? How was he influenced by them? What was his personal story? What other texts did he write and how do they compare what is before us? How does the writing we are studying compare to similar documents of the time? For example, Matthew, Mark, and Luke are all very similar in terms of their basic content of what Jesus said and did. However they also have significant differences. How do we understand and explain the differences? Is one of the three “synoptic” (called this because of their similarity to each other) Gospels more historically reliable than the others as to detail? Why is the Gospel of John so different in tone and content that the other three and what are we to make of this? And so forth.

As such though, the historical critical method focuses primarily, almost exclusively, on the human origins of a text . Of itself this is not wrong, but it is incomplete. The Scriptures are a document of faith, more specifically of the believing community of the Church. They are inspired texts, with God the Holy Spirit as their ultimate author. Further, the role faith in the communities from which the biblical texts emerged is also a significant factor. Hence the biblical text is not merely understood as an historical utterance, but one that was understood and interpreted by those who believed and who also influenced the process of collecting the sacred writings and discerning what was of God. But this process was guided by the Holy Spirit.

The human dimension in all these things is important and essential and the historical critical method is right to explore this dimension, for God the Holy Spirit did not choose to act independently of the human personalities involved or of the believing community of the early Church. But neither was God wholly bound by these things or limited by them. Thus the historical critical method can only be one dimension of proper biblical understanding.

Regarding Sacred Scripture’s human dimension the Catechism has this to say:

In order to discover the sacred authors’ intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression . (CCC # 110)

My own struggle – As I have already admitted, I have struggled to be enthusiastic about the historical-critical method. This begins for personal reasons. When I was in Seminary the method was insisted on by some, (not all), of my professors as the only real and valid method of Scripture study. They were zealots of a sort and any suggestion of a world outside this method was dismissed by them. They also isolated themselves historically, since this method is rather a new one. Hence, just about anything written on scripture prior to 1900 was not considered very tenable by them. I remember once turning in a paper wherein I quoted a scriptural commentary from the 1870s. The Teacher simply circled the date in red and had nothing further to say of the point.

I was also troubled by the strong tendency of the historical-critical method to doubt the existence of the miracles recorded in scripture. Not all scholars do this, but the more usual explanation of the miracles were that they were either literary devices, or just epic legends that were common of ancient near eastern and middle eastern texts. Further, claims that Jesus made of his divinity were somehow to be understood as later additions, not something Jesus actually said. Many adherents of the historical critical method were also dismissive of John’s Gospel and tended to sniff at most details there. They considered what they called “the fourth Gospel” to be more theological reflection than actual history, hence it had little offer that they were not quite skeptical of. It did little good to quote John’s Gospel to some of my professors.

De-mystified – Generally speaking then, my experience of the historical-critical method was that it de-mystified the scriptures and saw them only in human terms. The over-arching role of the Holy Spirit as the true and primary author was set aside and, thus, Mark’s gospel was favored over say, John’s and so forth. Since some of my professors were zealots for the method. Asking questions, even in good faith, was considered a veiled rejection of the method and was not usually received well.

And yet I also knew the human dimensions and historical context of the Scripture were important. But getting past the odious qualities of zealots, and the over-emphasis they placed on the human, made it harder for me to learn from them or the method they proposed.

I write all this to introduce the Pope’s reflections on the historical critical method. At heart he is a professor and is thus very careful to distinguish and to realize that the truth is often found in dialogue with various disciplines. He is able therefore to take what is good in the method and describe what is lacking or in need of balance and correction. He does this gently yet clearly. I find his distinctions helpful, especially due to my personal history. I trust the Pope and need someone I trust to say to me, “There is something good here and worthy of acceptance, and there are also some tendencies to avoid.”

This excerpt is from the Pope’s recent book Light of the World . It begins with a question by Peter Seewald which articulates many of the concerns I just expressed and then there is the Pope’s answer.

SEEWALD: The historical-critical method had its merits, but it also led fatefully to an erroneous development. Its attempt to “demythologize” the Bible produced a terrible superficiality and a blindness toward the deeper layers and profound message of Scripture. What is more, looking back, we realize that the alleged facts cited for the last two hundred years by the skeptics intent on relativizing pretty much every statement of the Bible were in many cases nothing more than mere hypotheses. Shouldn’t we be much clearer than we have been that the exegetes have to some extent been practicing a pseudo-science whose operative principle is not Christian, but an antiChristian animus, and that it has led millions of people astray?

POPE BENEDICT: I wouldn’t subscribe to so harsh a judgment. The application of the historical method to the Bible as a historical text was a path that had to be taken. If we believe that Christ is real history, and not myth, then the testimony concerning him has to be historically accessible as well. In this sense, the historical method has also given us many gifts. It has brought us back closer to the text and its originality, it has shown us more precisely how it grew, and much more besides. The historical-critical method will always remain one dimension of interpretation. Vatican II made this clear. On the one hand, it presents the essential elements of the historical method as a necessary part of access to the Bible. At the same time, though, it adds that the Bible has to be read in the same Spirit in which it was written. It has to be read in its wholeness, in its unity. And that can be done only when we approach it as a book of the People of God progressively advancing toward Christ. What is needed is not simply a break with the historical method, but a self-critique of the historical method; a self-critique of historical reason that takes cognizance of its limits and recognizes the compatibility of a type of knowledge that derives from faith; in short, we need a synthesis between an exegesis that operates with historical reason and an exegesis that is guided by faith. We have to bring the two things into a proper relationship to each other. That is also a requirement of the basic relationship between faith and reason.

Just a final word of thanks to the Holy Father for the encouragement he gives me here. His charism is to strengthen and unify us ( cf  Lk 22:31). His capacity to do this with clarity and gentleness is evident here. There are values to the historical critical method. And yet excesses must be avoided, distinctions made. I find this succinct answer, which he has elaborated in greater detail elsewhere,  of immense help.

47 Replies to “The Pope’s View of the Historical-Critical Method of Biblical Interpretation”

Very interesting post. With religion, I am most curious when I can see all different views – real world, scripture, etc. Our Holy Father was quite right – the historical-critical method is ONE dimension of our faith. With any subject, faith has many dimensions. I took a class for my degree called the Psychology of Religion. It offered me a new perspective on religion, through the psych world, and many of my classmates were Catholic. I would highly recommend the class and/or the textbook for it.

Yes, it’s like the many facets of a diamond.

Thanks for sharing this quote. Despite my many disagreements with the Jesus Seminar and even faithful Catholic scholars who have employed the historical-critical method (e.g. Raymond Brown), I still get nervous when I see see people criticizing it. Too often, people look at some of the far-fetched and unwarranted conclusions that have been reached by historical-critical scholars and conclude that the whole attempt to read the bible historically is worthless. As the pope points out, for a religion that believes in the incarnation, we can’t run from historical questions. The truths we believe in are eternal, but their expression in our world has been historically conditioned. If we want to understand them, we are going to have to grapple with history.

What we need is not a whole sale rejection of the historical critical method, but rather an evaluation and reform of that method. The scholar who I think best embodies this is N. T. Wright. In the first volume of his ongoing magnum opus, Christian Origins and the Question of God, Wright distinguishes the critical realist approach that he uses from the historical approaches that emerged form the Enlightenment. One of the hallmark features of his approach is his insistence on trying to find the historical theories that “get the evidence in.” Rather than using historical criticism to shave away bits and pieces of the biblical stories until we get down to some minimal historical core that we feel confident actually happened, he turns the question around and tries to find a plausible historical theory that could account for as much of the biblical material as possible as it stands. The results of this approach are exciting, as anyone who has read one of his books will tell you. He is able to affirm traditional Christian teaching while still shedding new light on the scriptures that allow us to see significant new things in them. (For anyone looking for one of his shorter, more readable books I would recommend “The Challenge of Jesus”. There are also lots of his talks that you can watch or listen to for free linked at his webpage.) Wright very much embodies the kind of faith + history approach that the pope recommends here. I think that is one of the reasons that so many Christians have found his work such a breath of fresh air, and also one of the reasons he was invited as an observer to the recent Synod of Bishops on the Word of God.

Well said and thanks for the recommendation. I will look into it.

“the whole attempt to read the bible historically”

Is it true that the “historical-critical method” is the whole and only attempt to read the bible historically? I don’t buy that, as if you are saying no one prior to the 1900’s referenced historical sources to understand scripture. I’ll keep the “historical part,” you can keep the “critical” part.

That’s one of the things that annoys me about The New American Bible, that its commentary and footnotes often place more importance on “Q” rather than on Jesus, or on Yahwist vs. Elohist vs. Priestly sources rather than on what God actually wants to reveal to us. They mistake the vehicle for the journey, all while totally ignoring the destination.

Amen, I think that is the kind of correction that the Pope insists is also necessary for the HC method. It must see outside itself to a greater degree and realize that faith and the Holy Spirit are key compentents of the text that cannot be minimized. The destination is Christ. I am mindful of the first conclusion of John’s Gospel: THere are many other things that Jesus did…..But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name (jn 20)

Verbum Domini is a good compliment to the Pope’s new book. It sheds some light on his words.

Here it is: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_ben-xvi_exh_20100930_verbum-domini_en.pdf

Also, here is some excerpts from VD in the form of responses to the main atheist arguments against the Bible: http://blogsofasoul.blogspot.com/2010/12/verbum-domini-and-atheism.html

Happy Advent!

THanks for these links. I too have been excerpting Verbum Domini here. It is a great resource as well.

I am currently reading Scott Hahn’s “Communion & Covenant~~The Biblical Theology of Pope Benedict XVI.” And in the meantime, of course, the Holy Father himself has given us his Apostolic Exhortation “Verbum Domini.” These types of resources (esp. “Verbum Domini,” as Pope Benedict’s writing is very accessible) seem invaluable in the wake of this veritable stripping of divinity that has occurred in Biblical criticism of late. I also love how you write about his charism. I’ve never thought of the Pope as having a charism but yes, you are right! So thankful for our Holy Father!

Yes, these are great resources. May God be praised!

I remain profoundly skeptical of what is called “the historical-critical method”. Of course the historical setting and language of the day must be taken into account to understand at least part of the meaning of Scripture, but too often it is just a way of smuggling in the preconceptions of academics. For example, there is an assumption that where there are noticeable changes in the style or use of language in a work, they indicate that different authors are speaking. Even for works of merely human origin I find this assertion doubtful, and I see no reason whatsoever to believe it about divinely inspired works. Above all, I see such speculations providing no help whatsoever to answering the question, “What is the Holy Spirit telling us here?” Instead, the point more often seems to be to disregard the Holy Spirit and to deny or at least question the truthfulness of Sacred Scripture, and when that happens

“Heretics all, whoever you may be, In Tarbes or Nimes, or over the sea, You never shall have good words from me. Caritas non conturbat me.”

I do understand your difficulty. However in stating Of course the historical setting and language of the day must be taken into account to understand at least part of the meaning of Scripture I think you and the Pope are ultimately on common ground. He is probably a little less negative in his overall assessment but does insist on limits and a slef-criticism of the HC method.

Whenever I read your posts, Msgr. Pope, I hear a voice from my long-ago childhood saying, “Correct as usual, King Friday.” Thanks for your priesthood — and especially for this expression of it!

Thanks for your encouragement.

It endlessly fascinates me that anything written by or regarding John, the only disciple left at the foot of the Cross standing next to the Mother of God and our Church, at the pinnacle of our Savior Jesus Christ’s life and mission on earth could be dismissed or minimized?

“Many adherents of the historical critical method were also dismissive of John’s Gospel and tended to sniff at most details there. They considered what they called “the fourth Gospel” to be more theological reflection than actual history, hence it had little offer that they were not quite skeptical of. It did little good to quote John’s Gospel to some of my professors.”

I wonder if this couldn’t be a root, partially responsible for the many problems and crises witnessed in our Church today?

Msgr Pope – The glimpse into your struggles as a seminarian are profound. This insight makes clearer to me why your scripture reflections never fail to resonate such deeper truth and meaning.as never before.

May we always be led by you and continue to find you at the foot of the Cross standing along side John, the beloved disciple and Mary, the mother of God.

Dear Dismas,

It is plausible, though not certain, that the Gospel of John was not written by the apostle who stood at the foot of the cross. This is often the reason for dismissing John (the text) as unhistorical.

Of course, this is not a good reason to suppose that John (the text) is not substantially the testimony of John the person, even if delivered by his disciples. But it is a good reason to question its historicity. I’m not saying it’s enough on its own, but it is consistent with a fair historical-critical method.

I personally think it immaterial whether John himself or John’s disciples wrote John the text. It is consistent with the milieu in which the faith described in it arose.

The historical-critical approach, which accepts the problem of authorship, also vindicates the theological, moral, ecclesiological, and other aspects of John’s Gospel.

Indeed, the inclusion of historicity regarding John’s Gospel, or any inspired work, as our Holy Father has pointed out, is a necessary aspect of interpretation. However, I find it interesting that fallen away Catholics, or even faithful Catholics for that matter, are often heard grieved by a perceived experience of the loss of the transcendent in our liturgy and Church today? I often wonder if an overly emphatic historical-critical approach isn’t responsible? … endlessly fascinating!

I feel like I have a vested professional interest in this topic. I apologize in advance if I sound jargony.

“It has brought us back closer to the text and its originality.” -Benedict

This has until the revolution, present in many parts of society, in academia in the 70s and since, been the modus operandi of classical Greek and Latin philology, and continues to be the scheme according to which philologists make scientific progress toward understanding the propositions, and their corollaries, of the world and texts of antiquity.

These are the propositions which the philologist has traditionally exposed to view.

They must continue to inform any understanding of the reality with which we are presented, which is phenomenological, together with our attempt to understand the differently phenomenological propositions of an ecstatic faith.

Without historical-critical scholarship, we must surrender to the doctrine of Sola Scriptura.

Without historical-critical scholarship, we abdicate the authority by which we claim that the Church created the Bible, not the Bible the Church.

Without historical-critical scholarship, we surrender the accumulated traditional understanding of divine worship.

Without historical-critical scholarship, though we needn’t deny it, we may not assert the primacy of the Pope.

Without historical-critical scholarship, the Church as an institution must be defined by popular assent.

Dear Reginaldus,

I am commenting on a blog, not writing a paper for publication. I considered it better to make claims I felt I could substantiate than to leave them unsaid, especially as I felt they would be considered important to Msgr. Pope’s readers.

I should have been happy to explain one or more of them if someone indicated to me that he was willing to give me the benefit of the doubt and that he was earnestly seeking the truth, rather than gleefully and sarcastically undermining what I said by innuendo when he could have addressed specific problems in a collegial way that invited discourse.

Have a splendid evening sir!

But you do make a good point, in that my conciseness leaves the door open for willful misinterpretation and misrepresentation of what I think, if not ignorant misunderstanding (I take you for the former, in my own attempt to remain collegial).

Succinct. Thanks. Faith sounds a certain way sometimes. Right on.

As one who finds comfort and strength for faith in the scriptures I love 2Timothy ch3 v14 to 17 (knox) Understanding and knowledge adds to the wonder of God’s love

The principle nexus of this classic debate lies with the nature of faith itself, or about that which we have complete confidence and by which we will our actions, with our affections of feelings following. The material world is so palpable to humankind by the immediacy of sense perception, and therefore so facile to have faith in and to feel right about consequently. It’s not so easy with the supernatural which so often lies beyond our sense perceptions. (cf. Jn 20:29 of course) Therein lies the rub, and the Cross, the consequence of this beauiful though fallen world or nature in which we live. It lacks immediacy, and no doubt requires God’s initiative, or his Grace. By God’s Grace, we are left with but the power to persevere or co-operate with His stirrings, which again comes down to faith in something not very palpable to sense experience. Unless of course, one is graced perceptibly by the Divine punching through the veil of reality. Seems one really must have faith in that supernatural state of being, which is known as Love (cf. 1 Jn 4:8b)?

Whats wrong with sola scriptura? Its the only book i know of that has gods words in it

The problem is “sola” for the Bible is not alone but emerged from the Church and is in need of the Church to interpret it. Beware of all the “solas” of classical Protestantism. Faith is not alone (sola fide) but is received from God through the community and lived in community. Sola Fide (Faith alone) is an abstraction for faith gives evdience of itself in its works. “Sola” anything immediately signals that we are dealing dealing with over-simplification.

Thank you so much for sharing your own struggle with reading the Sacred Texts. I think our Holy Father has quite a gift with words. But so do you … God bless you both.

As a very, very neophyte Catholic, I would say that knowing some history and customs of the times helps to understand the text a little bit better. Even the children’s Bible we have (by DK) has sidebars explaining these things and it is helpful. But in the end, it is the Holy Spirit that guides the person to write, no? I’m reading all these Words that were written by prophets and after a short intro many begin with: Thus says the Lord …

I find that understanding the social, political and economic context under which the authors and their intended audience operated adds depth and meaning to scripture that many miss.

As an example, understanding the “Keys to the kingdom” in terms of how kings appointed prime ministers brings to light the absolute truth in the primacy of Peter. Understanding that this event would have been viewed by the authorities as the establishment of a kingdom in the political sense and that all Roman subjects were required to swear an oath to the emperor which they broke only under the penalty of death helps us understand why Jesus, after having told Peter that he would get the keys to the kingdom, strictly forbade them to tell anyone he was the Messiah.

For me, this understanding does not diminish the spiritual message about Jesus creating a kingdom on earth with authority to interpret scripture and teach on matters of faith and morals but helps me to understand the absolute truth that the Catholic Church with the pope at it’s head is everything that it claims to be. It puts me in awe of every Mass and every priest.

To me, historical knowledge of biblical times always augmented my understanding. Until I read this post, I never y knew that there was a controversy over it

Well, the controversy isn’t knowing the historical but tending to reduce it only to that. On account of of overly strict notions of what history is, much was excluded and by focusing on only the human and the historical we risk missing the Divine and the trans-historical/meta-historical.

Acknowledged and understood.

Perhaps I am a little naive but I would have never thought that Catholic scholars or professors in seminary would use the historical-critical method to the exclusion of anything divine or spiritual ie., that miracles in Scripture were simple literary devices. Even as you put it, “…the tendancy toward…” leaves me shaking my head.

Faith is not only a theological virtue but truly a gift…. as is your blog.

“The human dimension in all these things is important and essential and the historical critical method is right to explore this dimension, for God the Holy Spirit did not choose to act independently of the human personalities involved or of the believing community of the early Church. But neither was God wholly bound by these things or limited by them. Thus the historical critical method can only be one dimension of proper biblical understanding.”

I’m afraid I completely disagree with you. If you think about it, God is wholly bound and limited by these things. The analogy for sacred scripture is the incarnation itself.

Thank you, Monsignor! Eagerly looking forward to your next post related to “Light of the World”. God bless and Happy Fourth Advent!

The presupposition of many of the academics who apply the historical-critical method is that miracles do not exist, therefore narratives mentioning or describing miracles have some other explanation. A strong counter-weight to this would be First Corinthians, ch. 15, esp. verses 14-19. “If our hopes in Christ are limited to this life only, we ar the most pitiable of men.” IMO Paul is writing sincerely [about what he believes] as factual, not metaphorical. What is “the other explanation” for Paul’s statements about Jesus having risen from the dead? TeaPot562

What interests me is how the HC method was used as a Trojan horse for dragging in ahistorical assumptions, particularly about oral tradition and its role in the development of the New Testament. Too many liberal/secularist critics operate under the false parallel of oral tradition to the parlor game of “Telephone”, which bears as much resemblance to it as an Estes rocket does to the Space Shuttle. Moreover, the ministry of Christ and the beginning of the Church took place within a culture that was remarkably literate in comparison with its neighbors, when Jesus could ask his opponents and questioners what they read in the scriptures in the confidence that they had indeed read them and not just learned them by rote, when Paul in speaking to the Athenians could quote Epimenides and Aratus. Too often it’s been assumed that the first Christians were unlettered rubes, and that none were educated enough to write anything down until at least a half-century passed.

In Those Terrible Middle Ages! Debunking the Myths , French medieval scholar Régine Pernoud argues that much of our ignorance and misconceptions of the Middle Ages is due to the post-Reformation adoption of neo-classicism, which viewed the Greco-Roman period as the acme of civilization and the following millennium as a descent into savage barbarism, as the preferred interpretation of Western history. Theologians Scott Hahn, Benjamin Wiker and Jonathan Witt have noted how much atheism and humanism are indebted to classic materialist reductionism, especially as articulated by Epicurus. I wonder now how much Biblical scholarship has been similarly poisoned by viewing first-century Judea through the lens of neo-classicism.

I doubt Jesus based His teachings soley on historical reasonof the prophets when preparing his followers for the experience of a transcendent experience such as following the will of the Father in one’s life, dying and salvation. I agree with Pope Benedict’s logic but the zealot approach of your professors to historical reason being the acid test for scriptural interpretation seems to remove the mystical experience of the Holy Spirit intervention through grace. Of course I wasn’t there and perhapse I misunderstood but those who hold to such a ridged historic reasoning standard obviously lack spiritual experience in Christ.

Dear Msgr. Pope, Haven’t said anything in a while but this was a wonderful input of yours. We are really blessed with Pope Benedict, and that he is such a help to you and many of us. Loved the Tu es Petrus video. Thank you. And a most blessed Christmas to you.

God Bless Pope Benedict…never have I heard such wisdom, compassion, love, involvement in political problems, worldwide. I am not saying that all our popes have not been, holy men…but Pope Benedict, I marvel at your simplistic explanations of deep religious concerns, instruction, and guidance. You are a gem…my relligious diamond and have given me new faith in my CATHOLIC journey. I am proud to be a CATHOLIC and love sitting at your feet, as in the text of Mary and Martha. For readers, I am not idolizing the Holy See, but he is a powerful influence on the world…and that makes me proud. No other religious-heads are stepping up to the plate-defending the faith- in this ungodly world. Thank you Pope Benedict. I pray God gives you years to chart our religious course over the rough seas of political, media, and individualized persecution, verbally and physically in some sections of the world.

Truth is both analyitic and synthetic, Aristotelian and Platnoic, sense awareness and awareness of the self. You could say that you can learn much from the Mona Lisa by studying its colors, etc. But it is an awesome painting because it fuels our sense of awe. It has been said that God is in the detail and also in the awesomeness of creation and ours. But to paraphrase the poet, ” to pluck thee from the crannied wall and to know thee all in all.” Is this not what is meant in “seek and ye shall find?”

Thank you for your most stimulating reflections and I stumbled on it in the internet..”the unasked for gift from Heaven.”

Another plus for the historical-critical method: a sidelight.

The so-called “cutting edge” historians (so-called by the talking heads of television comment) argue that the gnostic texts we now have should be considered pretty equally with the biblical texts as historical records of the “real” Jesus. Without a strong sense of the value of the chronologies involved (which push them much closer to the time of Irenaeus than to Jesus’ time), how could this Jesus Seminar rejection of historical common sense be held up to ridicule? Without that strong sense of the genuine value of historical method conservative scholars would be left with Faith and the Authority of the Church for arguments in this secular age. As it stands, if the Crossan types are serious about rejecting established historical method the argument will soon lose what TV news execs would call sexiness and the Jesus Seminar will be mired in a convoluted argument they cannot win on TV. Another possible plus: a return to common sense about the limitatations of the historical-critical method. Q is a hypothesis, not a manuscript with a history to investigate. The overstatements of the historical-critical method by professorial solipsists who see nothing else, at least professionally do damage. They lend mistaken credibility to an effort to reach back to an Ur-text of say, the Gospel of Thomas, when simple chronological criticism will make Irenaeus and what he has to say about the nature of gnostic private revelations relevant to the question as an arguable source of primary value. Voila! Historical method could be valuable for apologetic purposes.

As one commenter has pointed out there is already a development in academia that the Pope is advocating – although most of this movement is by Protestants (sad fact) – N.T. Wright being a prime example as noted. I also highly recommend Richard Bauckham – especially “Jesus and the Eyewitnesses”. Another good example is Larry Hurtado – I would reocmmend either “Lord Jesus Christ” or his shorter book (don’t remember the name) in which he analyzes the development of Christology. A much overlooked Catholic scholar (ahead of his time in a way) was William Most. His “The Consciousness of Christ” is a very interesting book and has chapters and appendices addressing HC; form criticism, and source criticism. He also indicates how these could have been used in a more helpful way (and he is also devasting in his criticism – the harshness probably didn’t help him in the world of scholarship).

Since someone mentioned Raymond Brown, my assessment he is a good “centrist” scholar although overdependent on the HC methodology (or rather its weaknesses). I found he “evolved” and his writing after the 1970’s was increasingly less prone to the HC weaknesses.

Yes, the Bible is one book with one with one principal author, the Holy Spirit, It has one subject, Jesus the Christ as seen twice in Luke 24 and again in John 1. It is a spiritual book and must be read spiritually as in 1 Cor.

Over the years I have found books looking at the Bible from the historical-critical perspective usually dry as sawdust, dull, frequently filled with the author’s individualistic ego, or written to make one’s academic reputation (which these days seems to always mean tearing things apart to get a new “WOW” reaction). However, I have found very many writings of the Church Fathers and saints full of life, verve, enthusiasm, deep faith, humility, orthodox teaching etc. I only wish that we had spent more time in our training as deacons reading and studying the writings of the great pillars of our Catholic Faith instead of virtually all our time on works “hot off the presses” with the latest of doctrinal iconoclasm designed to make our faith “modern.” I can still remember being ordered to read, study, digest, and absorb all the works of modern writers (like the constantly sneering Hans Kung) and make them an integral part of our faith.

I am deeply struggling with my class in Christology on the section of miracles. I have teacher who is saying that pertaining to the raising of Lazarus from the dead that he was really not dead. In a book that I am reading it states he was just in a coma. I am not quite sure how one can say that. For if it was true than we can not rightfully say that it was a miracle. In a textbook that I am reading for the class, “Who do you say that I am?, An Introduction to Christology'”. by Gerard Luttenberger, he states that,” Jesus therefore, in raising persons from the dead does not call them back to life. Rather he revives them.” I just don’t understand this at all. He also states that the Gospel accounts offer clear indications that the Church had embellished if not created these narratives out of its post-resurrection experience of Jesus.

Again, it seems that he is accusing the Church of creating things up. I find this very disheartening

It’s very interesting what you wrote about your professors, Father, and their disbelief in miracles and St. John’s gospel. This is precisely what St. Pius X associates with Modernist exegesis of the Bible condemned in his encyclical “Pascendi” (1907).

The wise words of the Holy Father bring peace to my soul. As with all things in this world, extremism is a vice, temperance is a virtue. All things must be done in moderation, and the big picture must be kept in mind. God bless the Holy Father Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI and God bless the Holy Father Pope Francis. Thank you Lord Jesus for the wise Popes you have given us in the 21st century so far. St. Pope John Paul the Great, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI and Pope Francis, three absolutely wonderful, brilliant, saintly Popes to kick off the 21st century.

Higher Criticism is the greatest threat today to conservative Christianity. If not stamped out, it will decimate the Christian Faith.

Comments are closed.

Last updated 2nd August 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. As we resolve the issues resulting from this, we are also experiencing some delays to publication. We are working hard to restore services as soon as possible and apologise for the inconvenience. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings .

Login Alert

• > The Cambridge Companion to the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament
• > Historical-critical methods

Book contents

• Frontmatter
• List of Tables, Maps, and Figures
• List of Contributors
• List of Abbreviations
• Introduction
• Part I Text and canon
• Part II Historical background
• Part III Methods and approaches
• 6 Historical-critical methods
• 7 Social science models
• 8 Literary approaches to the Hebrew Bible
• Part IV Subcollections and genres
• Part V Reception and use
• Cambridge Companions to Religion ( continued from page iii )

6 - Historical-critical methods

from Part III - Methods and approaches

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2016

• Cambridge Companions to Religion (continued from page iii)

“Historical criticism” is the name usually given to what may be termed “mainline” biblical criticism over the last three centuries or so, although it is increasingly in dispute in recent years. James Barr has rightly insisted that it is misleading to speak of “the historical-critical method”: “there are methods used by historical-criticism, but there is no such thing as the historical critical method.” Whether the adjective “historical” is always appropriate also may be questioned. For purposes of this chapter, historical-critical methods are those which take account of the fact that the biblical texts were written long ago, in a cultural matrix very different from our own, and that attempt to understand the texts first of all in the context of that ancient setting. Historical considerations are a necessary part of that discussion because it requires at least an approximate idea of the time, place, and circumstances of composition. The goal of this inquiry, however, is not necessarily historical in a narrow sense. It might just as well be the theology or rhetoric of the text, seen in light of its historical context.

To say that texts are written in specific times and places and that historical context is germane to interpretation may seem to be stating the obvious. One need only look, however, at an ancient interpreter such as Philo of Alexandria to see that the point has not always been appreciated. The historian Peter Burke has argued that “medieval men lacked a sense of the past being different in quality from the present.” In the case of the Bible, there was no point in differentiating the time when the different books were written because they were all supposed to come from God. The rise of biblical criticism is sometimes traced back to the recovery of classical antiquity and ancient manuscripts in the Renaissance. German Protestants have tended to see its origin rather in the Reformation, which set the authority of the sola scriptura over against that of the Church. There can be little doubt that the Reformation contributed to the importance attached to the biblical text in its original context, but it certainly did not lead immediately to a wholesale adoption of historical exegesis. Another impetus came from the Enlightenment and the writings of Spinoza and the English Deists.

Access options

Save book to kindle.

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle .

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service .

• Historical-critical methods
• By John J. Collins , Yale Divinity School
• Edited by Stephen B. Chapman , Duke University, North Carolina , Marvin A. Sweeney , Claremont School of Theology, California
• Book: The Cambridge Companion to the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament
• Online publication: 05 July 2016
• Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511843365.007

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox .

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive .

• Privacy Policy

Home » Historical Research – Types, Methods and Examples

Historical Research – Types, Methods and Examples

Table of Contents

Historical Research

Definition:

Historical research is the process of investigating and studying past events, people, and societies using a variety of sources and methods. This type of research aims to reconstruct and interpret the past based on the available evidence.

Types of Historical Research

There are several types of historical research, including:

Descriptive Research

This type of historical research focuses on describing events, people, or cultures in detail. It can involve examining artifacts, documents, or other sources of information to create a detailed account of what happened or existed.

Analytical Research

This type of historical research aims to explain why events, people, or cultures occurred in a certain way. It involves analyzing data to identify patterns, causes, and effects, and making interpretations based on this analysis.

Comparative Research

This type of historical research involves comparing two or more events, people, or cultures to identify similarities and differences. This can help researchers understand the unique characteristics of each and how they interacted with each other.

Interpretive Research

This type of historical research focuses on interpreting the meaning of past events, people, or cultures. It can involve analyzing cultural symbols, beliefs, and practices to understand their significance in a particular historical context.

Quantitative Research

This type of historical research involves using statistical methods to analyze historical data. It can involve examining demographic information, economic indicators, or other quantitative data to identify patterns and trends.

Qualitative Research

This type of historical research involves examining non-numerical data such as personal accounts, letters, or diaries. It can provide insights into the experiences and perspectives of individuals during a particular historical period.

Data Collection Methods

Data Collection Methods are as follows:

• Archival research : This involves analyzing documents and records that have been preserved over time, such as government records, diaries, letters, newspapers, and photographs. Archival research is often conducted in libraries, archives, and museums.
• Oral history : This involves conducting interviews with individuals who have lived through a particular historical period or event. Oral history can provide a unique perspective on past events and can help to fill gaps in the historical record.
• Artifact analysis: This involves examining physical objects from the past, such as tools, clothing, and artwork, to gain insights into past cultures and practices.
• Secondary sources: This involves analyzing published works, such as books, articles, and academic papers, that discuss past events and cultures. Secondary sources can provide context and insights into the historical period being studied.
• Statistical analysis : This involves analyzing numerical data from the past, such as census records or economic data, to identify patterns and trends.
• Fieldwork : This involves conducting on-site research in a particular location, such as visiting a historical site or conducting ethnographic research in a particular community. Fieldwork can provide a firsthand understanding of the culture and environment being studied.
• Content analysis: This involves analyzing the content of media from the past, such as films, television programs, and advertisements, to gain insights into cultural attitudes and beliefs.

Data Analysis Methods

• Content analysis : This involves analyzing the content of written or visual material, such as books, newspapers, or photographs, to identify patterns and themes. Content analysis can be used to identify changes in cultural values and beliefs over time.
• Textual analysis : This involves analyzing written texts, such as letters or diaries, to understand the experiences and perspectives of individuals during a particular historical period. Textual analysis can provide insights into how people lived and thought in the past.
• Discourse analysis : This involves analyzing how language is used to construct meaning and power relations in a particular historical period. Discourse analysis can help to identify how social and political ideologies were constructed and maintained over time.
• Statistical analysis: This involves using statistical methods to analyze numerical data, such as census records or economic data, to identify patterns and trends. Statistical analysis can help to identify changes in population demographics, economic conditions, and other factors over time.
• Comparative analysis : This involves comparing data from two or more historical periods or events to identify similarities and differences. Comparative analysis can help to identify patterns and trends that may not be apparent from analyzing data from a single historical period.
• Qualitative analysis: This involves analyzing non-numerical data, such as oral history interviews or ethnographic field notes, to identify themes and patterns. Qualitative analysis can provide a rich understanding of the experiences and perspectives of individuals in the past.

Historical Research Methodology

Here are the general steps involved in historical research methodology:

• Define the research question: Start by identifying a research question that you want to answer through your historical research. This question should be focused, specific, and relevant to your research goals.
• Review the literature: Conduct a review of the existing literature on the topic of your research question. This can involve reading books, articles, and academic papers to gain a thorough understanding of the existing research.
• Develop a research design : Develop a research design that outlines the methods you will use to collect and analyze data. This design should be based on the research question and should be feasible given the resources and time available.
• Collect data: Use the methods outlined in your research design to collect data on past events, people, and cultures. This can involve archival research, oral history interviews, artifact analysis, and other data collection methods.
• Analyze data : Analyze the data you have collected using the methods outlined in your research design. This can involve content analysis, textual analysis, statistical analysis, and other data analysis methods.
• Interpret findings : Use the results of your data analysis to draw meaningful insights and conclusions related to your research question. These insights should be grounded in the data and should be relevant to the research goals.
• Communicate results: Communicate your findings through a research report, academic paper, or other means. This should be done in a clear, concise, and well-organized manner, with appropriate citations and references to the literature.

Applications of Historical Research

Historical research has a wide range of applications in various fields, including:

• Education : Historical research can be used to develop curriculum materials that reflect a more accurate and inclusive representation of history. It can also be used to provide students with a deeper understanding of past events and cultures.
• Museums : Historical research is used to develop exhibits, programs, and other materials for museums. It can provide a more accurate and engaging presentation of historical events and artifacts.
• Public policy : Historical research is used to inform public policy decisions by providing insights into the historical context of current issues. It can also be used to evaluate the effectiveness of past policies and programs.
• Business : Historical research can be used by businesses to understand the evolution of their industry and to identify trends that may affect their future success. It can also be used to develop marketing strategies that resonate with customers’ historical interests and values.
• Law : Historical research is used in legal proceedings to provide evidence and context for cases involving historical events or practices. It can also be used to inform the development of new laws and policies.
• Genealogy : Historical research can be used by individuals to trace their family history and to understand their ancestral roots.
• Cultural preservation : Historical research is used to preserve cultural heritage by documenting and interpreting past events, practices, and traditions. It can also be used to identify and preserve historical landmarks and artifacts.

Examples of Historical Research

Examples of Historical Research are as follows:

• Examining the history of race relations in the United States: Historical research could be used to explore the historical roots of racial inequality and injustice in the United States. This could help inform current efforts to address systemic racism and promote social justice.
• Tracing the evolution of political ideologies: Historical research could be used to study the development of political ideologies over time. This could help to contextualize current political debates and provide insights into the origins and evolution of political beliefs and values.
• Analyzing the impact of technology on society : Historical research could be used to explore the impact of technology on society over time. This could include examining the impact of previous technological revolutions (such as the industrial revolution) on society, as well as studying the current impact of emerging technologies on society and the environment.
• Documenting the history of marginalized communities : Historical research could be used to document the history of marginalized communities (such as LGBTQ+ communities or indigenous communities). This could help to preserve cultural heritage, promote social justice, and promote a more inclusive understanding of history.

Purpose of Historical Research

The purpose of historical research is to study the past in order to gain a better understanding of the present and to inform future decision-making. Some specific purposes of historical research include:

• To understand the origins of current events, practices, and institutions : Historical research can be used to explore the historical roots of current events, practices, and institutions. By understanding how things developed over time, we can gain a better understanding of the present.
• To develop a more accurate and inclusive understanding of history : Historical research can be used to correct inaccuracies and biases in historical narratives. By exploring different perspectives and sources of information, we can develop a more complete and nuanced understanding of history.
• To inform decision-making: Historical research can be used to inform decision-making in various fields, including education, public policy, business, and law. By understanding the historical context of current issues, we can make more informed decisions about how to address them.
• To preserve cultural heritage : Historical research can be used to document and preserve cultural heritage, including traditions, practices, and artifacts. By understanding the historical significance of these cultural elements, we can work to preserve them for future generations.
• To stimulate curiosity and critical thinking: Historical research can be used to stimulate curiosity and critical thinking about the past. By exploring different historical perspectives and interpretations, we can develop a more critical and reflective approach to understanding history and its relevance to the present.

When to use Historical Research

Historical research can be useful in a variety of contexts. Here are some examples of when historical research might be particularly appropriate:

• When examining the historical roots of current events: Historical research can be used to explore the historical roots of current events, practices, and institutions. By understanding how things developed over time, we can gain a better understanding of the present.
• When examining the historical context of a particular topic : Historical research can be used to explore the historical context of a particular topic, such as a social issue, political debate, or scientific development. By understanding the historical context, we can gain a more nuanced understanding of the topic and its significance.
• When exploring the evolution of a particular field or discipline : Historical research can be used to explore the evolution of a particular field or discipline, such as medicine, law, or art. By understanding the historical development of the field, we can gain a better understanding of its current state and future directions.
• When examining the impact of past events on current society : Historical research can be used to examine the impact of past events (such as wars, revolutions, or social movements) on current society. By understanding the historical context and impact of these events, we can gain insights into current social and political issues.
• When studying the cultural heritage of a particular community or group : Historical research can be used to document and preserve the cultural heritage of a particular community or group. By understanding the historical significance of cultural practices, traditions, and artifacts, we can work to preserve them for future generations.

Characteristics of Historical Research

The following are some characteristics of historical research:

• Focus on the past : Historical research focuses on events, people, and phenomena of the past. It seeks to understand how things developed over time and how they relate to current events.
• Reliance on primary sources: Historical research relies on primary sources such as letters, diaries, newspapers, government documents, and other artifacts from the period being studied. These sources provide firsthand accounts of events and can help researchers gain a more accurate understanding of the past.
• Interpretation of data : Historical research involves interpretation of data from primary sources. Researchers analyze and interpret data to draw conclusions about the past.
• Use of multiple sources: Historical research often involves using multiple sources of data to gain a more complete understanding of the past. By examining a range of sources, researchers can cross-reference information and validate their findings.
• Importance of context: Historical research emphasizes the importance of context. Researchers analyze the historical context in which events occurred and consider how that context influenced people’s actions and decisions.
• Subjectivity : Historical research is inherently subjective, as researchers interpret data and draw conclusions based on their own perspectives and biases. Researchers must be aware of their own biases and strive for objectivity in their analysis.
• Importance of historical significance: Historical research emphasizes the importance of historical significance. Researchers consider the historical significance of events, people, and phenomena and their impact on the present and future.
• Use of qualitative methods : Historical research often uses qualitative methods such as content analysis, discourse analysis, and narrative analysis to analyze data and draw conclusions about the past.

Advantages of Historical Research

There are several advantages to historical research:

• Provides a deeper understanding of the past : Historical research can provide a more comprehensive understanding of past events and how they have shaped current social, political, and economic conditions. This can help individuals and organizations make informed decisions about the future.
• Helps preserve cultural heritage: Historical research can be used to document and preserve cultural heritage. By studying the history of a particular culture, researchers can gain insights into the cultural practices and beliefs that have shaped that culture over time.
• Provides insights into long-term trends : Historical research can provide insights into long-term trends and patterns. By studying historical data over time, researchers can identify patterns and trends that may be difficult to discern from short-term data.
• Facilitates the development of hypotheses: Historical research can facilitate the development of hypotheses about how past events have influenced current conditions. These hypotheses can be tested using other research methods, such as experiments or surveys.
• Helps identify root causes of social problems : Historical research can help identify the root causes of social problems. By studying the historical context in which these problems developed, researchers can gain a better understanding of how they emerged and what factors may have contributed to their development.
• Provides a source of inspiration: Historical research can provide a source of inspiration for individuals and organizations seeking to address current social, political, and economic challenges. By studying the accomplishments and struggles of past generations, researchers can gain insights into how to address current challenges.

Limitations of Historical Research

Some Limitations of Historical Research are as follows:

• Reliance on incomplete or biased data: Historical research is often limited by the availability and quality of data. Many primary sources have been lost, destroyed, or are inaccessible, making it difficult to get a complete picture of historical events. Additionally, some primary sources may be biased or represent only one perspective on an event.
• Difficulty in generalizing findings: Historical research is often specific to a particular time and place and may not be easily generalized to other contexts. This makes it difficult to draw broad conclusions about human behavior or social phenomena.
• Lack of control over variables : Historical research often lacks control over variables. Researchers cannot manipulate or control historical events, making it difficult to establish cause-and-effect relationships.
• Subjectivity of interpretation : Historical research is often subjective because researchers must interpret data and draw conclusions based on their own biases and perspectives. Different researchers may interpret the same data differently, leading to different conclusions.
• Limited ability to test hypotheses: Historical research is often limited in its ability to test hypotheses. Because the events being studied have already occurred, researchers cannot manipulate variables or conduct experiments to test their hypotheses.
• Lack of objectivity: Historical research is often subjective, and researchers must be aware of their own biases and strive for objectivity in their analysis. However, it can be difficult to maintain objectivity when studying events that are emotionally charged or controversial.
• Limited generalizability: Historical research is often limited in its generalizability, as the events and conditions being studied may be specific to a particular time and place. This makes it difficult to draw broad conclusions that apply to other contexts or time periods.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Documentary Research – Types, Methods and...

Original Research – Definition, Examples, Guide

Scientific Research – Types, Purpose and Guide

Humanities Research – Types, Methods and Examples

Artistic Research – Methods, Types and Examples

Study at Cambridge

About the university, research at cambridge.

• Undergraduate courses
• Events and open days
• Fees and finance
• Postgraduate courses
• How to apply
• Postgraduate events
• Fees and funding
• International students
• Continuing education
• Executive and professional education
• Courses in education
• How the University and Colleges work
• Term dates and calendars
• Visiting the University
• Annual reports
• Equality and diversity
• A global university
• Public engagement
• Give to Cambridge
• For Cambridge students
• For our researchers
• Business and enterprise
• Colleges & departments
• Email & phone search
• Museums & collections
• Student information

Department of History and Philosophy of Science

• About the Department overview
• How to find the Department
• Annual Report
• HPS Discussion email list
• Becoming a Visiting Scholar or Visiting Student overview
• Visitor fee payment
• Becoming an Affiliate
• Applying for research grants and post-doctoral fellowships
• Administration overview
• Information for new staff
• Information for examiners and assessors overview
• Operation of the HPS plagiarism policy
• Information for supervisors overview
• Supervising Part IB and Part II students
• Supervising MPhil and Part III students
• Supervising PhD students
• People overview
• Teaching Officers
• Research Fellows and Teaching Associates
• Professional Services Staff
• PhD Students
• Research overview
• Research projects overview
• Digitising Philippine Flora
• Colonial Natures overview
• The Challenge of Conservation
• Natural History in the Age of Revolutions, 1776–1848
• In the Shadow of the Tree: The Diagrammatics of Relatedness as Scientific, Scholarly and Popular Practice
• The Many Births of the Test-Tube Baby
• Culture at the Macro-Scale: Boundaries, Barriers and Endogenous Change
• Making Climate History overview
• Project summary
• Workstreams
• Works cited and project literature
• Histories of Artificial Intelligence: A Genealogy of Power overview
• From Collection to Cultivation: Historical Perspectives on Crop Diversity and Food Security overview
• Call for papers
• How Collections End: Objects, Meaning and Loss in Laboratories and Museums
• Tools in Materials Research
• Epsilon: A Collaborative Digital Framework for Nineteenth-Century Letters of Science
• Contingency in the History and Philosophy of Science
• Industrial Patronage and the Cold War University
• FlyBase: Communicating Drosophila Genetics on Paper and Online, 1970–2000
• The Lost Museums of Cambridge Science, 1865–1936
• From Hansa to Lufthansa: Transportation Technologies and the Mobility of Knowledge in Germanic Lands and Beyond, 1300–2018
• Medical Publishers, Obscenity Law and the Business of Sexual Knowledge in Victorian Britain
• Kinds of Intelligence
• Varieties of Social Knowledge
• The Vesalius Census
• Histories of Biodiversity and Agriculture
• Investigating Fake Scientific Instruments in the Whipple Museum Collection
• Before HIV: Homosex and Venereal Disease, c.1939–1984
• The Casebooks Project
• Generation to Reproduction
• The Darwin Correspondence Project
• History of Medicine overview
• Events overview
• Past events
• Philosophy of Science overview
• Study HPS overview
• Undergraduate study overview
• Introducing History and Philosophy of Science
• Frequently asked questions
• Routes into History and Philosophy of Science
• Part II overview
• Distribution of Part II marks
• BBS options
• Postgraduate study overview
• Why study HPS at Cambridge?
• MPhil in History and Philosophy of Science and Medicine overview
• A typical day for an MPhil student
• MPhil in Health, Medicine and Society
• PhD in History and Philosophy of Science overview
• Part-time PhD

PhD placement record

• Funding for postgraduate students
• Student information overview
• Timetable overview
• Primary source seminars
• Research methods seminars
• Writing support seminars
• Dissertation seminars
• BBS Part II overview
• Early Medicine
• Modern Medicine and Biomedical Sciences
• Philosophy of Science and Medicine
• Ethics of Medicine
• Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine
• Part III and MPhil
• Single-paper options
• Part IB students' guide overview
• About the course
• Supervisions
• Libraries and readings
• Scheme of examination
• Part II students' guide overview
• Primary sources
• Dissertation
• Key dates and deadlines
• Advice overview
• Examination advice
• Learning strategies and exam skills
• Advice from students
• Part III students' guide overview
• Essays and dissertation
• Subject areas
• MPhil students' guide overview
• Essays and dissertation overview
• How to choose the topic of your essays and dissertation
• PhD students' guide overview
• Welcome to new PhDs
• Registration exercise and annual reviews
• Your supervisor and advisor
• Progress log
• Intermission and working away from Cambridge
• The PhD thesis
• Submitting your thesis
• Examination
• News and events overview
• Seminars and reading groups overview
• Departmental Seminars
• Coffee with Scientists
• Cabinet of Natural History overview
• Publications

History of Medicine

• Purpose and Progress in Science
• The Anthropocene
• Measurement Reading Group
• Teaching Global HPSTM
• Pragmatism Reading Group
• History of Science and Medicine in Southeast Asia
• Atmospheric Humanities Reading Group
• Science Fiction & HPS Reading Group
• Values in Science Reading Group
• Cambridge Reading Group on Reproduction
• HPS Workshop
• Postgraduate Seminars overview
• Images of Science
• Language Groups overview
• Latin Therapy overview
• Bibliography of Latin language resources
• Fun with Latin
• Archive overview
• Easter Term 2024
• Lent Term 2024
• Michaelmas Term 2023
• Easter Term 2023
• Lent Term 2023
• Michaelmas Term 2022
• Easter Term 2022
• Lent Term 2022
• Michaelmas Term 2021
• Easter Term 2021
• Lent Term 2021
• Michaelmas Term 2020
• Easter Term 2020
• Lent Term 2020
• Michaelmas Term 2019
• Easter Term 2019
• Lent Term 2019
• Michaelmas Term 2018
• Easter Term 2018
• Lent Term 2018
• Michaelmas Term 2017
• Easter Term 2017
• Lent Term 2017
• Michaelmas Term 2016
• Easter Term 2016
• Lent Term 2016
• Michaelmas Term 2015
• Postgraduate and postdoc training overview
• Induction sessions
• Academic skills and career development
• Print & Material Sources
• Other events and resources

Tools and techniques for historical research

• About the Department
• News and events

If you are just starting out in HPS, this will be the first time for many years – perhaps ever – that you have done substantial library or museum based research. The number of general studies may seem overwhelming, yet digging out specific material relevant to your topic may seem like finding needles in a haystack. Before turning to the specific entries that make up this guide, there are a few general points that apply more widely.

Planning your research

Because good research and good writing go hand in hand, probably the single most important key to successful research is having a good topic. For that, all you need at the beginning are two things: (a) a problem that you are genuinely interested in and (b) a specific issue, controversy, technique, instrument, person, etc. that is likely to offer a fruitful way forward for exploring your problem. In the early stages, it's often a good idea to be general about (a) and very specific about (b). So you might be interested in why people decide to become doctors, and decide to look at the early career of a single practitioner from the early nineteenth century, when the evidence for this kind of question happens to be unusually good. You can get lots of advice from people in the Department about places to look for topics, especially if you combine this with reading in areas of potential interest. Remember that you're more likely to get good advice if you're able to mesh your interests with something that a potential supervisor knows about. HPS is such a broad field that it's impossible for any department to cover all aspects of it with an equal degree of expertise. It can be reassuring to know that your topic will evolve as your research develops, although it is vital that you establish some basic parameters relatively quickly. Otherwise you will end up doing the research for two, three or even four research papers or dissertations, when all you need is the material for one.

Before beginning detailed work, it's obviously a good idea to read some of the secondary literature surrounding your subject. The more general books are listed on the reading lists for the Part II lecture courses, and some of the specialist literature is listed in these research guides. This doesn't need to involve an exhaustive search, at least not at this stage, but you do need to master the fundamentals of what's been done if you're going to be in a position to judge the relevance of anything you find. If there are lectures being offered in your topic, make sure to attend them; and if they are offered later in the year, try to see if you can obtain a preliminary bibliography from the lecturer.

After that, it's usually a good idea to immerse yourself in your main primary sources as soon as possible. If you are studying a museum object, this is the time to look at it closely; if you're writing about a debate, get together the main papers relevant to it and give them a close read; if you're writing about a specific experiment, look at the published papers, the laboratory notebook, and the relevant letters. Don't spend hours in the early stages of research ferreting out hard-to-find details, unless you're absolutely positive that they are of central importance to the viability of your topic. Start to get a feel for the material you have, and the questions that might be explored further. Make an outline of the main topics that you hope to cover, organized along what you see as the most interesting themes (and remember, 'background' is not usually an interesting theme on its own).

At this stage, research can go in many different directions. At some point, you'll want to read more about the techniques other historians have used for exploring similar questions. Most fields have an established repertoire of ways of approaching problems, and you need to know what these are, especially if you decide to reject them. One of the advantages of an interdisciplinary field like HPS is that you are exposed to different and often conflicting ways of tackling similar questions. Remember that this is true within history itself, and you need to be aware of alternatives. This may well involve looking further afield, at classic books or articles that are not specifically on 'your' subject. For example, it may be that you could find some helpful ideas for a study of modern scientific portraiture in a book on the eighteenth century. The best books dealing with educational maps may not be on the astronomical ones you are studying, but on ones used for teaching classical geography. See where the inspiration for works you admire comes from, and have a look at the sources they have used. This will help you develop the kind of focussed questions that make for a successful piece of work.

As you develop an outline and begin to think through your topic in more detail, you'll be in good position to plan possible lines of research. Don't try to find out everything about your topic: pick those aspects that are likely to prove most fruitful for the direction your essay seems to be heading. For example, it may be worth spending a long time searching for biographical details about a person if their career and life are central to your analysis; but in many other cases, such issues may not be very important. If your interest is in the reception of a work, it is likely to be more fruitful to learn a lot about a few commentaries or reviews (where they appeared, who wrote them, and so forth) than to gather in randomly all the comments you can find.

Follow up hints in other people's footnotes. Works that are otherwise dull or outdated in approach are sometimes based on very solid research. One secondary reference to a crucial letter or newspaper article can save you hours of mindless trawling, and lead you straight to the information you need. Moreover, good historians often signal questions or sources that they think would be worth investigating further.

Remember that the best history almost always depends on developing new approaches and interpretations, not on knowing about a secret archive no one has used before. If you give your work time to develop, and combine research with writing, you will discover new sources, and (better still) a fresh importance for material that has supposedly been known for a long time. As you become familiar with your topic, you are likely to find that evidence you dug out at the beginning of your project is much more significant than you thought it was. In historical research, the most important evidence often isn't sitting there on the surface – it's something you need to dig out through close reading and an understanding of the situation in which the document you are studying was written, or in which the object was produced. This is especially true of instruments, paintings and other non-textual sources.

Some standard reference works

Your research should become more focussed as time goes on. Don't just gather randomly: you should always have at least some idea of why you are looking for something, and what you might hope to find. Make guesses, follow up hunches, see if an idea you have has the possibility to work out. At the beginning, it can be valuable to learn the full range of what is available, but eventually you should be following up specific issues, a bit like a detective tracing the clues to a mystery. It is at this stage of research, which is often best done in conjunction with writing up sections of your project, that knowing where to find answers to specific questions is most useful. There is nothing more disheartening than spending a week to find a crucial fact, only to discover that it's been sitting on the shelf next to you all term. The Whipple has a wide variety of guides, biographical dictionaries and bibliographies, so spend a few minutes early on looking at the reference shelves.

Every major country has a national biographical dictionary (the new version of the British one is the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography , available 2004 online). For better-known scientists, a good place to start is Charles C. Gillispie (ed.) Dictionary of Scientific Biography (1970–1980). There are more specialized dictionaries for every scientific field, from entomology to astronomy. The University Library has a huge selection of biographical sources; ask your supervisor about the best ones for your purpose.

Preliminary searching for book titles and other bibliographical information is now often best done online, and every historian should know how to use the British Library's online search facility; COPAC (the UK national library database); and WorldCat (an international database). All of these are accessible through the HPS Whipple Library website (under 'other catalogues'). At the time of writing, the University Library is remains one of the few libraries of its size to have many of its records not available online, so remember that you have to check the green guard-book catalogues (and the supplementary catalogues) for most items published before 1977. It is hoped that this situation will be rectified soon. There are also numerous bibliographies for individual sciences and subjects, together with catalogues of relevant manuscripts. Most of these are listed elsewhere in this guide.

As questions arise, you will want to be able to access books and articles by other historians that touch upon your subject. There are many sources for this listed elsewhere in this guide, but you should definitely know about the Isis Current Bibliography and The Wellcome Bibliography for the History of Medicine . Both are available online, the former through the RLG History of Science, Technology and Medicine database, the latter through the website of the Wellcome Library.

Libraries and museums

Finally, a word in praise of libraries and museums. As the comments above make clear, the internet is invaluable for searching for specific pieces of information. If you need a bibliographical reference or a general reading list from a course at another university, it is an excellent place to begin. If you are looking for the source of an unidentified quotation, typing it into Google (or an appropriate database held by the University Library) will often turn up the source in seconds. Many academic journals are now online, as are the texts of many books, though not always in a paginated or citable form.

For almost all historical topics, however, libraries filled with printed books and journals will remain the principal tools for research, just as museums will continue to be essential to any work dealing with the material culture of past science. The reason for this is simple: what is on the internet is the result of decisions by people in the past decade, while libraries and museums are the product of a continuous history of collecting over several thousand years. Cambridge has some of the best collections for the history of science anywhere. Despite what is often said, this is not because of the famous manuscripts or showpiece books (these are mostly available in other ways), but because of the depth and range of its collections across the whole field. The Whipple Library is small and friendly, and has an unparalleled selection of secondary works selected over many years – don't just go for specific titles you've found in the catalogue, try browsing around, and ask the librarians for help if you can't see what you are looking for. Explore the Whipple Museum and talk to the curator and the staff. There are rich troves of material in these departmental collections, on topics ranging from phrenology and microscopy to the early development of pocket calculators. Become familiar with what the University Library has to offer: it is large and sometimes idiosyncratic, but worth getting to know well if you are at all serious about research. It is a fantastic instrument for studying the human past – the historian's equivalent of CERN or the Hubble Telescope. And all you need to get in is a student ID.

Further reading

Wayne C. Booth, Gregory G. Colomb, and Joseph M. William, The Craft of Research , 2nd ed. (University of Chicago Press, 2003).

Email search

Privacy and cookie policies

Study History and Philosophy of Science

Undergraduate study

Postgraduate study

Library and Museum

Whipple Library

Whipple Museum

Museum Collections Portal

Research projects

Philosophy of Science

© 2024 University of Cambridge

• Contact the University
• Accessibility
• Freedom of information
• Privacy policy and cookies
• Statement on Modern Slavery
• Terms and conditions
• University A-Z
• Undergraduate
• Postgraduate
• Research news
• About research at Cambridge
• Spotlight on...

• Architecture and Design
• Asian and Pacific Studies
• Business and Economics
• Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
• Computer Sciences
• Cultural Studies
• Engineering
• General Interest
• Geosciences
• Industrial Chemistry
• Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Library and Information Science, Book Studies
• Life Sciences
• Linguistics and Semiotics
• Literary Studies
• Materials Sciences
• Mathematics
• Social Sciences
• Sports and Recreation
• Theology and Religion
• Publish your article
• The role of authors
• Promoting your article
• Abstracting & indexing
• Publishing Ethics
• Why publish with De Gruyter
• How to publish with De Gruyter
• Our book series
• Our subject areas
• Your digital product at De Gruyter
• Contribute to our reference works
• Product information
• Tools & resources
• Product Information
• Promotional Materials
• Orders and Inquiries
• FAQ for Library Suppliers and Book Sellers
• Repository Policy
• Free access policy
• Open Access agreements
• Database portals
• For Authors
• Customer service
• People + Culture
• Journal Management
• How to join us
• Working at De Gruyter
• Mission & Vision
• De Gruyter Foundation
• De Gruyter Ebound
• Our Responsibility
• Partner publishers

Your purchase has been completed. Your documents are now available to view.

Research Methods for History

• Lucy Faire and Simon Gunn
• X / Twitter

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Edinburgh University Press
• Copyright year: 2016
• Audience: College/higher education;
• Main content: 288
• Other: 24 B/W illustrations
• Keywords: History
• Published: July 8, 2016
• ISBN: 9781474408745

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

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

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

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

The Historical- Critical Method

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

Cultural-Historical Digital Methodologies: The Dialectics of Crisis and Research Innovation

• Open Access
• First Online: 11 July 2024

Cite this chapter

You have full access to this open access chapter

• Elin Eriksen Ødegaard   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7784-658X 10 ,
• Marilyn Fleer   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1224-5510 11 ,
• Glykeria Fragkiadaki   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7280-783X 12 ,
• Alicja Sadownik   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1198-8873 10 &
• Prabhat Rai   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9344-2614 11  

Part of the book series: Perspectives in Cultural-Historical Research ((PCHR,volume 13))

347 Accesses

This book brings forward concepts to support a cultural-historical digital methodology. Specifically, this chapter draws on the dialectics of crisis to articulate a series of research innovations that are presented throughout the book. The chapter outlines the theorising of the methods, and discusses the concepts of e-motion, cultural-historical loop model and builds on the legacy of a wholeness approach to elaborate how the original concepts introduced by Mariane Hedegaard work in digital contexts. Crisis as a dialectical relation between an everyday and scientific reading are foregrounded in this chapter, and through this lens the chapter presents a scholarly contribution across the three broad principles of dialectics, historicity, and cultural-historical practice-centred science in times of crisis.

You have full access to this open access chapter,  Download chapter PDF

• Cultural-historical loop model
• Wholeness approach

1.1 Introduction

This book aims to bring forward new methods and methodologies to support researchers working in a cultural-historical tradition. We suggest that it is not the ‘method’ per se, but rather the focus is on how to create the conditions that allow researchers to better understand dynamic and changing realities being faced in times of crisis. Vygotsky ( 1997 ) suggested:

The method must be adequate to the subject studied … Knowing the uniqueness and deliberately beginning the research from this point is the first condition for adequacy of the method and the problem; for this reason, the problem of method is the beginning and the foundation, the alpha and the omega of the whole history of the cultural development of the child. (p. 27)

To achieve the goal of this book, we show how new methods have acted in the service of new research needs brought about by a global pandemic. However, this is not the only kind of crisis to bring new concepts into our research tradition. We suggest that many kinds of crises co-exist, such as the globally felt conflicts and devastation of war and the climate emergency, where extremes in weather are creating localised flooding, drought, and economic deprivation. We also acknowledge the predicted crises of future pandemics that remain on the horizon and that will impact the work of researchers.

In this book, the scientific concept of crisis and the everyday lived experience of crisis are in dialectical relations with each other. This dynamic has been grouped in this book under five sections, showing how the work of researchers across the community, families, and the profession has to be realised in new ways. By making the relations between the scientific and everyday readings of crises visible, the researchers have been able to consciously realise new research conditions and to theorise a new dynamic interplay when solving problems associated with human needs.

As editors, we recognise that a crisis is viewed scientifically as a source of development for the researcher. However, it is also a painful time for the research participants and the everyday life circumstances of families and communities, more broadly, who are engaged in the field of early childhood. Therefore, this book also brings forward the new concept of dis-situation of development (Sect. 1.4 ). This concept seeks to capture the idea that whilst it is known that not all crises are developmental, in the context of this book, researchers and research participants in times of crisis experience new social situations. Therefore, their existing social situation of development must be conceptualised differently.

In this book, the collective efforts of the researchers are introduced and theorised under five themes as new concepts to inform researchers, and these are symbolic of the disrupted practices that generated new ways of researching. The chapter concludes with a digital research model that brings together the theorising of the methods in the chapters of case studies that follow across the five sections of the book and which support our dialectical model of research.

1.2 Concepts to Inform Research in Times of Crisis

In this section, we introduce each of the five concepts that have emerged from a synthesis of the content of this book.

Theme 1: Dialectics

Crisis is not a contemporary concept or an unprecedented experience in the history of the development of human personality. It is the sine qua non of being and becoming. Historically, ‘People in various parts of the globe in different moments of their life have to deal with various forms of crises (environmental crisis, public health crisis, socio-economic crisis, psychological crisis, educational crisis, etc.)’ (Dafermos, 2022 , pp. 1–2). The transformative nature of the COVID-19 pandemic brought this realisation forward in our everyday lives as an everyday phenomenon in a tangible and catalytic way. In parallel, the scientific concept of crisis became central in our research trajectories as a means to reflect on, understand, and change the new reality.

This book is not about the pandemic. It is a book that discusses how researchers reflect on their ever-changing and contradictory worlds and develop concepts and methods to respond to new societal needs, meet emerging demands, and understand reality in motion. One of the anchoring principles that we work with as part of bringing out new methods and methodologies for researching early childhood is how theory must change and develop in relation to the context, conditions, and the historical moment in which researchers are working. With the critical experience of the global pandemic behind us, we intend to employ the dialectical understanding of crisis in cultural-historical theory (Dafermos, 2022 ) to reflect on diverse contexts of early childhood education. With a global pandemic as an illustration, this book captures a historical moment in time that brings forward the dialectical aspect of the concept of crisis and shows how theory and methodologies can inspire and change in relation to new demands and conditions in an unprecedented time. Historically, the global pandemic is one moment in a long line of many in which our theoretical reflections were challenged and developed. Historical examples, such as the development of Vygotsky’s theorisations during the times of the Russian empire collapse, the October revolution, and the emergence of the Soviet Union, as well as contemporary examples, such as the development of Mariane Hedegaard’s model ( 1999 , 20,014) about a wholeness model to children’s development, where she acknowledge that focusing on the child’s perspective gave a too narrow conception of children’s development and therefore introduces societal conditions, and institutional practices giving demands that propelled a child’s developemnt in her/his own learning and development, are indicative of socially and culturally determined turning points in history and in theory.

As Dafermos argues ( 2015 ), ‘Dialectics as a way of thinking focuses on the study of each concrete object in its mutual connections with other objects, in its internal contradictions and in its process of change.’ However, in the historical moment that we, as researchers and as whole personalities, live through, the mutual connections in most cases have been loosened, interrupted, and reconnected in new ways; contradictions have taken over and changes are rapid and come in quick succession. The ideal form of research as we know it has been disrupted and challenged. For example, the mature form of an educational experiment, as originally enacted in practice and theorised as a collaboration on a theoretical problem, has had to be re-imagined (see Sect. 1.1 ). Within this framework, our understanding of the child’s world had been dis-situated and decontextualised. Using a dialectical lens allows us to search for new and complex connections and catch a new thread of interrelations, synthesise, and theorise them in a meaningful new way (see Sect. 1.2 ). Here, dialectics capture the unity between the personal and interpersonal, the intra- psychological and inter-phycological, materialism and idealism, continuity and discontinuity in times of crisis leading us to ‘islands of safety in the Heraclitean stream’ (Vygotsky, Vol. 3, p. 274). Through the model presented at the end of this introductory chapter and the five sections of this book, we map the current ‘islands of safety’ that dialectics have raised for us in terms of theory, methodology, and practice.

Theme 2: Navigating the Crisis Through New Knowledge Production

Like many cultural studies born from dialectics, models of research into children’s development, such as that of Hedegaard, are being challenged as researchers work under the new conditions of not being able to be in person at the research site. We find through our synthesis of the practices of the researchers described in the different chapters of this book that Hedgaard’s model is sensitive to historical change.

We are inspired by the model that Hedegaard developed and re-developed over time. This is indicative of how theory continues to evolve as societal conditions and research needs change. The qualitative methodology is constantly evolving, and crisis situations can easily propel a change in approach as new conditions set off or accelerate new demands and motives. This can be better understood in the context of the powerful critique of Vygotsky ( 1997 ) on traditional methods of research, which he said were static, captured only solidified development, and were not subject to historical transformation:

These techniques or methods of behavior, arising stereotypically in given situations represent virtual solidified, petrified, crystallized psychological forms that arose in remote times. (p. 39)

Traditional methods become expected by journal editors and reviewers, in presentations and in the justifications of researchers. They are survivors of latent approaches for the study of human needs and practices, which Vygotsky ( 1997 ) suggested were ‘weathered, historical scraps which have lost their [original] meaning, these psychological survivors of a remote past enter into the common tissue of [researcher] behavior in an alien body, so atypical, impersonal, having lost almost all meaning’ (p. 40). It is an important legacy of Vygotsky that concepts and theory are tools for thinking, as also recognised in Wartofsky’s work on artefacts and models (Wartofsky, 1979/1966 ). Wartofsky warns about a crude and naive realism when it comes to the concept of representation or to copy theory: ‘The tactic then is to enrich the concept of representation in such a way that it can accommodate a fairly sophisticated range of scientific models’ (Wartofsky, 1979/1966 , p. 1). Concepts are tested and refined in their use, which in turn adds to new ways of approaching participants. In this way, research innovation evolves and changes methodology and knowledge.

Whilst there exists a critique of research methodologies based on Vygotsky, namely that the emphasis on the collective can put the research design at risk of ignoring the voice of the individuals involved, contemporary researchers and methods, such as Hedegaard’s innovative and renowned model of child development, encompass institutional practices from a cultural-historical perspective and give attention to individuals as well as the collective. Culture, development, and how we communicate are inextricably linked, just as a person’s understanding of a given activity, event, or utterance is conditional upon the situational cultural history.

Hedegaard theorised child development at a time when the field of developmental psychology was driven by ambitions of creating universal models and indicators of cognitive and behavioural development. By challenging the hegemony of laboratory-based experiments with observations conducted in the children’s daily settings, she became a new and radical voice in developmental psychology. Building on Vygotsky’s dialectical ontology stemming from the Marxist perspective that explains development as happening in a meshing of an ideal and material form, she developed a theory that contextualised the child’s development in interpersonal, institutional, and socio-cultural settings.

Significantly, these new theorisations and ways of bringing forward societal, institutional, and personal perspectives as realised through the dominating demands and motives were developed in contemporary times. Hedegaard’s model was originally developed in 1999. It was first published in relation to the problem of immigrants having to relate to different values in different institutions, such as those of family and school (Hedegaard, 1999 ).

Hedegaard’s work can evidently be traced to a Vygotskian, cultural-historical approach to learning and development (Edwards et al., 2019 ). However, she also engages in dialogues with contemporary scholars who study children and childhoods in social life conditions. She contextualises varies conditions for understanding children, childhood, and the impact of everyday lives, such as studies of children’s developmental trajectories and transitions in relation to families and professionals (Hedegaard et al., 2012 ). She develops her designs and modelling in dialogue with contemporary theorisations. As an alternative to the dominant school readiness approach across the globe, she points to the new tendencies found in the Nordic countries, where especially the governments in Denmark and Norway have recently formulated frameworks that conceptualise person formation in a wholeness approach and where children’s explorative activities are highlighted (Hedegaard & Ødegaard, 2020 ).

The cultural-historical premise in Hedegaard’s original 2008 model, used to analyse children’s development, assumes relatively stable activity settings. When crises occur, we are reminded of the disruption that emerges or clashes within activity settings and between them, which calls for bringing crises into theorisation.

In line with cultural-historical traditions, following Vygotsky’s legacy and the recognition that concepts are tools that enable us to work, Hedegaard’s ideas have not only been literally applied in diverse settings around the world but they have also been nuanced and developed by other researchers as they create new designs for new and local problems and analyse their empirical data.

In Hedegaard’s model from 2012, it is evident that Vygotsky’s work grounds the modelling of her ‘wholeness approach’, but not solely. She is also in dialogue with and inspired by Elkonin, Bruner, and Rogoff’s work, to name a few (Hedegaard, 2012 ) (Fig. 1.1 ).

Hedegaard’s model of Wholeness Approach to children’s development (2012)

The dialectic relation between social demands (society) and the child’s motives (person) constitutes an important dynamic in the model. This line of cultural-historical tradition of psychology sees the child’s development as trajectories through institutional practices. The model supports analyses of children’s development with the premise that every point can be localised in relation to the child’s social situation. As articulated in a recent tribute to Hedegaard’s legacy:

This approach encourages us to try to understand the child as she or he engages with the demands and opportunities for action in activities that occur within institutional practices, which are themselves embedded in local and national histories and societal expectations (Edwards et al., 2019 , p. 2).

The model visualises three overlapping streams of cultural traditions: home, school, and daycare (including varieties of early childhood settings, such as preschool and kindergarten).

This analytical approach, stemming from Hedegaard’s models, enables the researcher to problematise time as change and continuity, as developmental trajectories, and as transitions. The concept of ‘activity setting’ is central in the model and helpful for designing methodologies for early childhood educational settings and beyond, as ‘activity settings’ can be any everyday scene or event that will unfold in time and be situated in a local place. Activity settings are recurring events located in practices. These practices are based on traditions in a society’s different institutions.

Later, Hedegaard included human biology in her model to further theorise the nature of child development from a cultural-historical perspective (e.g. Hedegaard & Ødegaard, 2020 ). In our understanding, human biology entails wider cultural-historical interdisciplinary knowledge areas such as genetics, evolution, physiology, anatomy, epidemiology, anthropology, ecology, nutrition, population genetics, and the interplay of these. In adding human biology as a concept in the theorisations, Hedegaard opens up the way for understanding children, childhood, and institutional practices as more than cultures alone, and this is interesting from the perspective of crises. As we know, crises can encompass epidemics, a lack of nutrition, genetic variations in individuals as well as in populations, unexpected ecological disasters, and other unforeseen events.

This example of Hedegaard’s transformation of her own model is suggestive that theories are not static self-contained systems of thought but are always in motion and always being transformed in relation to the local and societal conditions and to the research questions targeted. We suggest that the international context of the global pandemic and its associated crises for researchers and research participants also acted as a catalyst for the transformation of her model, as will be shown later in this chapter.

Therefore, we posit that the anchoring principle of the emergent models, methods, and methodologies will continue to change, as reflected in the evolution of the model of child development in contemporary times by cultural-historical theorists such as Hedegaard and those who have contributed to this book.

Theme 3: Hologram

The concept of the hologram comes into the picture in Sect. 1.4 as growing from the dialectics of crisis experiences and the process of innovating out of these through conceiving new activity settings for institutional practices. The hologram, then, is a response to the demand for continuation of academic practices from the isolation of individuals’ homes. As the essence of the hologram is an ‘apparent dematerialisation’ (Johnston, 2017 , p. 494), we use this concept to capture the transfer of institutional activity settings to a cyber space extending beyond the campuses and homes. The hologram is also a way in which academic institutions respond to the expectations of particular historical moments.

The hologram of the university comprises digital rooms, break-out rooms, and platforms entered by researchers, lecturers, and students instead of offices, classrooms, and meeting rooms. Such a ‘dematerialisation’ depends strongly on the technological materiality being activated both on the university servers and at the individuals’ homes. Apart from the technological aspect of ‘freezing light interference’ (Johnston, 2017 , p. 495), the hologram is also related to a joint intersubjectivity, a common imaginary space, where it is possible to participate and collaborate in both synchronous and asynchronous ways. This ‘three-dimensional imagery’ (Johnston, 2017 , p. 493) captures the dialectics of the hologram itself, which is the dialectics between the material and ideal space. Extracted from the physical surroundings of a campus, it gives a sense of an ideal state, while its deep material/technological anchoring flashes out through the digital devices being used to enter the hologram (dematerialised university). Constituted in the dialectics between the ideal and material, it resembles the object put by Leontyev ( 2009 ) as existing ‘in twofold: first, in its independent existence as subordinating to itself and transforming the activity of the subject; second, as an image of the object, as a product of its property of psychological reflection that is realized as an activity of the subject and cannot exist otherwise’ (p. 86).

Through the lens of the hologram concept, it is possible to grasp how the re-searching for new practices of emergent research and academic teaching unfolds within the dialectical interplay of the material and ideal, as expounded upon in Sect. 1.4 . The collaborations in the educational experiment cannot be undertaken in person. Through the digital platforms, a hologram of the relations between researchers and research participants is captured and understood as family–university and childcare–university sites. Collaborations are now virtually enabled.

Theme 4: Crisis: Plurotemporal and In-flux Material Conditions/Activity Settings/Space

Educational and developmental psychology is often criticised for its reliance on universal (spaceless) and ahistorical (timeless) conceptualisations of human development. In stable periods, space and time are generally considered in the background. Time (in terms of age and stage) and space (in terms of cultural and material conditions) are merely referenced to explain development in such a theorisation. This position contrasts with Vygotsky’s ‘genetic historical approach’, where he argues for studying development historically, which ‘means to study it in motion. Precisely this is the basic requirement of the dialectical method’; thus, ‘historical study of behavior is not supplementary or auxiliary to theoretical study but is a basis of the latter’ (Vygotsky, 1997 , p. 43). One of the central features of a crisis is that it amplifies the moment (time), and in a crisis of the nature of a global pandemic it also restricts our access to spaces (workplace, school, early learning centres, preschools, playgroups, etc.) and forces new ways of using space. In these challenging moments, as Perret-Clermont and Lambolez remark:

It seems that we are prisoners of time and completely powerless when faced with it; we cannot speed it up, slow it down or stop it, much less go backward in it; it imposes its own pace on us, and we cannot change it. (Perret-Clermont & Lambolez, 2005 )

A crisis is a critical moment in chronological time distinct from the past, present, and future. It is a time of acceleration, urgency, uncertainty, new demands, and new potentialities and transformation. This temporal distinctiveness also makes a crisis a time of modification and transformation. In the temporal sense, a crisis is ‘a state of greater or lesser permanence, as in longer or shorter transitions towards something better or worse or towards something altogether different’ (Koselleck & Richter, 2006 , p. 358). A crisis is a moment marked by uncertainty about the future, a suspension of existing daily routines and habits. Moreover, it is also a moment of heightened emotional response, with the pressure of taking urgent actions even without fully understanding their consequences. It is impossible to plot all these developments in a single stream of time.

Crises also highlight that the relationship between time and space is not unidimensional or linear but plurotemporal. As Perret-Clermont and Lambolez ( 2005 ) suggest, following the work of Bruno Latour: ‘Time-space is perceived as enriched by the agency of human beings subtly weaving together interactions from many places, times and types of material’ (p. 9). While challenging the idea of timelessness in Piaget’s theory, Latour ( 2005 ) argues that ‘we should not speak of time, space and actant but rather of temporalization, spatialization and actantialization’ (p. 178). He continues with a comment that ‘since these words are horrible to understand’, a more elegantly way of expression this is ‘of timing, spacing, acting’ (p. 178). These ideas resonate with Chaiklin’s ( 2011 ) claim that cultural-historical science is directed to the study of human practices (see further below). This is in alignment with the Vygotsky’s own position as he suggested:

The most complex contradictions of psychological methodology are transferred to the grounds of practice and only there can they be solved … “Method” means “way,” we view it as a means of knowledge acquisition. But in all its points the way is determined by the goal to which it leads. That is why practice reforms the whole methodology of science. (Vygotsky, 1997 , p. 306)

There is a discrete departure from the stable period; the crisis brings time and space to the forefront when regarding human development as a legitimate object of inquiry while thinking about practice interventions in educational experiments (as discussed in Sects. 1.1 , 1.2 , and 1.3 ). We begin to live in an in-flux/transitional time that is amplified in its experience, emotionally laden with new demands, and seems to move at a different pace marked by changes in routine and ways of living. Therefore, the new research methods presented in this book

… [lay the] foundations for a dialectical view of history as an ongoing fluid and dynamic process that is always here in the present, existing in the unending and ever-expanding dynamic layering of social practices in which the past and the present interpenetrate one another. (Vianna & Stetsenko, 2006 , p. 82).

Theme 5: The Drama of Motion and (e)motions: e-motion (Emotions and Digital)

In many of the chapters that present new research methods, emotions are not always foregrounded. Yet, each of the researchers and practitioners has, in one way or another, experienced disturbances at a societal level that have to a lesser or greater extent had an impact on the institutional practices and personal motives of the researchers and research participants. Paying respect to the challenges faced and experienced in times of crisis means giving attention to emotions. We make visible new motives and demands when going digital during a crisis. Emotions constitute a variety of quality, intensity, frequency, course, and expression (Holodynski, 2013 ). The inner state of emotions is not necessarily consciously realised as a feeling state.

The function of cultural-historical dynamics in emotions and their role in development has been addressed in cultural-historical methodologies as a co-construction of emotions in social relationships (Fleer & Hammer, 2013 ; Holodynski, 2013 ). Emotions in this perspective are most often understood in the context of social others. How emotions are fundamentally biologically situated in the body, however, is not ignored in cultural-historical roots, and it is pointed out as the primary driver of human biology in Hedegaard’s latest works (e.g. Hedegaard & Ødegaard, 2020 ). This is in line with Vygotsky’s discussion of the ‘dynamogenic effect on emotional excitation’ as a basic factor in development. In Teaching about emotions: Historical-psychological studies (Vygotsky, 1933/1999 ), he states that:

… emotions control us from the very beginning of life on earth and increasing intensity of emotions becomes the commanding stimulus for strong movement. Each bodily change that occurs in the internal organs-cessation of digestive processes (which is accompanied by a release of a supply of energy that may be used by other organs), outflow of blood from internal organs whose activity is decreased to organs that participate directly in muscle tension (lungs, heart, central nervous system); strengthening of heart contractions; rapid elimination of muscle fatigue; mobilization of large reserves of sugar that contains energy-each of these internal changes results in a direct benefit, fortifying the organism during great expenditure of energy elicited by fright, pain, or anger. (p. 77)

Such bodily changes stemming from emotional states do not belong to the primary drives of the infant only. It is an inborn human capacity that may serve as an organic preparation for coming tensions and conflicts that potentially arise when confronted with uncertainty and worries, as well as with excitement and engagement, coming to the forefront, for example in digital agility, as pointed out in Part V. One should, however, take into consideration that ‘emotions differ and are set apart endlessly, but you will not find any logical generalisations in them’ (Vygotsky, 1933/1999 , p. 75).

Even if emotions are not elaborated as emotions per se, in the practices referred to in this book, a range of emotions are at work when the research refers to ‘uncertainty’, ‘tensions’, ‘distress’, ‘safety’, ‘shame’, ‘engagement, ‘resilience’, and ‘agility’.

Noting the under-communicated emotions means recognising states often hidden from the surface of the methodology, including those with either negative or positive connotations. Even if emotions can be self-regulated, first after a cognitive recognition of what they mean in relation to the social context, it might be difficult and even impossible to control every aspect of biological motion set off by emotions. Emotions will disturb and even alter conditions in the social context and, therefore, notably in the research methodology. Being a field of predominantly women, ignoring emotions can mean ignoring cultural taken-for-granted gender discourses and practices in society. Valuing emotions is, therefore, a key issue in early childhood educational research.

Being in power has historically been associated with men, while powerlessness has been associated with women. Research during the global pandemic revealed an increase in female vulnerability. Male violence towards women increased in this period, at the same time as the complexity of women’s conditions increased (Pfitzner et al., 2020 ). Knowing that in the field of early childhood practitioners and researchers are predominantly female, valuing emotions is, therefore, a key determinant in understanding the field. Digitalisation in our context, in times of crisis, means that the emotional triggers of motives and demands are not neutral but must be considered both culturally and historically.

Consequently, we bring forward how economics is also an e-motion. This can refer to economic motion, electronic digital economics, and emotions. The crisis creates new conditions of labour, and how this plays out is differently experienced. Figure 1.2 is illustrative of one way to conceptualise the relations between emotions and economics in the context of electronic digital research.

E-motion – dialectical motion between economics, electronics, and emotions

1.3 Research Practices in Times of Crisis

In this section of the chapter, we look at how research practices have shaped the development of the concepts previously discussed and how the new concepts have enabled different ways of practising research. Chaiklin ( 2011 ) famously said that ‘All sciences have an object toward which they are directed’ (p. 227; original emphasis), and in our case, it was how to do research during times of crisis , and how to take into account new societal conditions. In addition to the societal conditions, we realised that nature, as biological and material conditions , must be considered when researching children’s development and conditions for professionals, families, researchers and their collaborative partners. Nature is unpredictable and will suddenly alter the more stable conditions we are used to considering in research and practice. Chaiklin ( 2011 ) said, ‘ Human practices are manifest in institutionally structured traditions of action, which are organised in relation to the production of collectively needed products’ (p. 227). However, as will be shown throughout the forthcoming chapters, the actions and products of the institutional academy of the university were no longer possible (Part IV) when PhD students and academics could not enter the country to gather data (Sect. 3.1 , Chap. 3 ), participate in the living laboratory of a childcare centre or kindergarten (Sects. 1.2 and 1.5 ), or introduce interventions in family homes (Sec. 1.3 ). The problem was that researchers could not enter into the institutional practices that were foundational for their research, and the study designs and associated methods were no longer relevant for answering the research questions posed by the researchers. When a pandemic, earthquake, flood, tsunami, slide, fire or volcano hits, human practices previously manifested in institutional traditions might not be given sufficient analytic power to understand human practices.

Chaiklin ( 2011 ) shows how, in the dialectical tradition, scientific work includes ‘analytical perspectives about the goals and purposes for research, conceptions about the object of analytical focus (i.e. ontological dimensions), and conceptions about the kinds of scientific analyses that one seeks to make (i.e. epistemological dimensions)’. Whilst the goals and purpose of the research would appear to have remained during the period of the pandemic, the challenges associated with the analytical focus had to bring in the scientific concept of crisis but in relation to the everyday lived realities that the new demands of a pandemic made on the researchers (the role of the researcher) and the participants. Similarly, the epistemological dimensions of the research were also in flux because researchers could not use existing and well understood methods, such as an educational experiment, to generate data to answer the original research question (Sect. 1.1 ) or employ historically developed cultural-historical concepts for scientific analyses to realise the goals of the research (Sect. 1.2 ).

New methods to meet the object of the research were developed through the process of the new practices. A reliance on the available digital tools was needed to enable access, data collection, new forms of digital analysis, and pedagogical innovations. The digital conditions that emerged, such as a ‘research fairy’ Zooming from Australia into a childcare centre in China (Chap. 3 ) or posting a diorama to a kindergarten with a digital device that could Zoom in the researcher to interview children (Chap. 5 ), had not previously been imagined or crystallised (Vygotsky, 2004 ) into the institutional research practices of the academy. The new digital conditions allowed more explorative and cross-country collaboration (see also as this book documents). Two key digitally enabled research practices are shown throughout the chapters of this book, namely:

The digital educational experiment

The role of the researcher in digitally enabled research

Digital Educational Experiment

Vygotsky ( 1997 ) argued that ‘Usually the decisive moment of the experiment—the instruction—is left outside of the field of vision of the researcher. It is not subjected to analysis and is reduced to a secondary auxiliary process’ (p. 36). In line with this principle, we determined that it was through the everyday crisis of the global pandemic that researchers and research participants began to digitally document their shared theoretical problem (Hedegaard, 2008 ) by recording their sessions on Zoom. That is, they included in the research the ‘instruction’ associated with the research need. Different to the in-person practices of an educational experiment, where cameras, notes, or audio recorders are used and highly visible (and sometimes intrusive), the researchers and research participants simply pressed the record button on the Zoom app to document interactions.

The digitally enabled educational experiment is shown in Sects. 1.1 , 1.3 , 1.4 , and 1.5 in a range of centre and family contexts. What is common to the research practices is how the Zoom facility and digital recordings acted as an auxiliary device in the educational experiment to enable efficient connectivity between researchers and research participants. Vygotsky ( 1997 ) says that both tools and signs are mediated, and in the context of a digital educational experiment, the mediated activity takes place virtually between researchers and research participants in their quest to achieve a common goal associated with the theoretical problem that is the core dimension of their collaboration. No travelling to sites or to the university by participants is needed. A convenient short meeting can take place in the car, lunchroom, or family home. It is not the device but how the device acts as the tool for mediated activity. As Vygotsky ( 1997 ) suggests, ‘we usually speak of tools when we have in mind the mediating function of some object or means of some activity’ (p. 60).

Mediation in a digital environment brings with it a particular genre but also new possibilities not yet imagined, such as being inside a diorama or Zooming in as a research fairy to interview children. In a digital educational experiment, the digital tool acting as an auxiliary device (an enabler of the research fairy or being projected from inside a diorama on a device) enables the intervention under study to be implemented through virtual means whilst at the same time capturing the collaborations as they are being constructed and transformed over time. The duality is made visible as both a tool and as the sign, but the core is always the mediating activity:

The use of auxiliary devices, the transition to mediated activity radically reconstructs the whole mental operations just as the use of a tool modifies the natural activity of the organs, and it broadens immeasurably the site of activity of mental functions (Vygotsky, 1997 , p. 63).

Using a digital platform (Zoom), as a supplementary device not only enabled us to continue to research in new ways, but the mediated activity, as the quote from Vygotsky suggests, also radically reconstructed ‘the mental operations’ of the research participants.

What is also different in the context of a digital educational experiment is that the researcher can be both physically located in their home, university, or other worksite but also be internationally connected. The geography of the researcher is no longer crucially relevant.

In summary, the device and the apps are the vehicle, but how they are presented to children or used by researchers and teachers in their collaboration for introducing an intervention are shown across the chapters to be under construction, to transform practices, and in need of being theorised. The researchers did not know if the auxiliary device would support the mediating activity they had imagined as core for their digital educational experiments. The new concepts that arise from the new practices of a digital educational experiment add to the available research methods for studying children’s development and teacher practices within the institutional settings of early childhood.

The Role of the Researcher in Digitally Enabled Research

The role that a researcher takes in cultural-historical research has already been theorised by Hedegaard ( 2008 ). She identifies the duality of the position held by the researcher—as both a partner in the activity setting that is under investigation but also as someone who is trying to understand what is going on in everyday practice. But what does this mean when the activity setting is virtually located and the researcher is not physically in the everyday practice?

In a digital context, the researcher still focuses on the motives and intentions of the research participants. However, new concepts are needed in the practices of following and interpreting motives and demands in a virtual activity setting. In the section above, the concepts of digital agency , boundaries of digital spaces (hologram) , distal contexts , collective digital relationality , transient demands , and potentiality as transitory were introduced to theorise the new methods of digital time and digital space. How these relate to the practices of the researcher for a digital context is now elaborated in relation to Hedegaard’s ( 2008 ) original theorisation of researching child development.

First, Hedegaard argues that the researcher needs to orally or in written form give an introduction when first making contact with children and educators in the particular educational setting. This orientation is important for establishing a relationship. However, in digitally enabled research, particularly during a global pandemic when these settings were closed to visitors, this created new demands on researchers based on how to orient the participants to the research and to build a relationship between the researcher and the research participants. The crisis called for digital agility (Part V).

Hedegaard also warns about the risk of the researcher taking over the activities when in the context of the research site, such as the family home or kindergarten. The researcher is not expected to step in as the teacher. However, at the same time, the researcher does not simply remain aloof and not respond to the situation if a child hurts themself or is in danger. There is a fine balance between the researcher’s position and the position of a human being in the context of the research site. However, as noted in Part III, the researchers take a much more active role by being both the researcher and the person implementing the pedagogical intervention when Zooming directly into family homes and creating new developmental conditions for children and families. The digital context demands that the researchers be more active than suggested by Hedegaard ( 2008 ). However, at the same time, the new conditions are co-experienced by the children and their parents with the researcher—sometimes synchronously and other times asynchronously. The following chapters show how this binary did not capture the new practices, however, and how new concepts were needed to name the new research conditions, notably, distal contexts , collective digital relationality , transient demands , and potentiality as transitory.

The digital environments that are showcased across the chapter are not naturalistic research sites, such as the family home, university, school, or kindergarten, as is characteristic of traditional research practice. The digital environments are difficult to research because they are emerging and transitory new kinds of settings, and therefore have to be conceptualised in practice differently. In particular, the concepts of boundaries of digital spaces and practices (Part III), the university as a hologram and dis-situation of development (Part IV), and resilient digital agility (Part V) are introduced to capture and theorise the new dimensions of the practices. Boundaries are also brought forward into digitally enabled research because researchers can work internationally with ease.

1.4 Methodological Dimensions of Digital Research Methods

In order to capture and theorise the new digital research practices, we introduce our model. Inspired by Hedegaard’s model of development, our model brings forward a dialectical relation between the everyday and scientific readings of the crisis that generated digital research solutions.

The global pandemic created new societal and international rules that placed new demands on researchers as they digitally traversed the multiple institutions of the university and the research sites specific to early childhood. The new demands oriented and motivated the researchers to develop new research methods that were realised as recurrent digital practices within the digital activity settings.

The model shown in Fig. 1.3 ; Cultural-historical Loop Model, enables thinking and analysis of human action and development conditions. The model responds to the situation of the crisis and the conditions created in the historical times we live through. Within the model, concepts, settings, and practices dialectically come together to capture and unpack the complexity of the child’s development in the framework of the crisis. Dynamic and porous borders are symbolised in the model by the mobius image. The metaphor of the Möbius strip is named for the German pioneer in topology, the mathematician and theoretical astronomer August Ferdinand Möbius. A Möbius strip is a property of a flipped one-sided surface: after two loops, you can come back to the beginning in one movement. It constitutes a shape that can be defined as ‘a continuous choice of local orientation’ or a space that is orientable with multiple start and stop points. You can choose ‘inward’ and ‘outward’ or ‘up’ and ‘down’ directions (Alagappan, 2021 ). This visual metaphor is used to image ecological circulation that reminds us to reduce, reuse, and recycle. Figure 1.3 is not just a visual metaphor for circular action; it also visualises the dynamic nature of cultural-historical processes—how conditions for human action are interdependent with material, economic, and social conditions. Figure 1.3 visualises interdependent aspects of a sustainable loop. This choice allows us to illustrate in a symbolic way fluidity and mutuality to showcase the changing nature and dialectic interrelations between the dimensions illustrated in the model.

Cultural-historical Loop Model

For example, during the pandemic, institutional settings and home settings were merged (e.g. home schooling, home office) or institutions appeared to be in transition (e.g. delivering university courses online). The disturbed and in many cases ambiguous boundaries allowed for quick and/or partial shifts (e.g. being in your room but at the same time being in the classroom). Representing these hybrid settings with the infinity image rather than the bubble image, we wish to represent the connections and contradictions between these settings, the motion between the transitions from one setting to another, and the dialect character of being part of diverse settings.

Following the same rationale, the child is not seen isolated in an autonomous context but dialectically connected to adults, peers, and artefacts. In the same way, global and local perspectives are unpacked to capture the societal aspect at the micro and macro levels and in context. In line with Hedegaard’s model, the activity setting is central in the above model. The activity setting here corresponds to the digital system activity setting. Demands, motives, and cultural values are also represented in the model in the same way as they are represented in Hedegaard’s model, but this triptych is extended by economic and biological conditions to acknowledge the critical role of economy as a value and biology as a reality in times of crisis. Crisis, as a concept and as an everyday phenomenon, is also placed at the top and at the bottom of the model to showcase that the child’s development is not just related or influenced by the crisis but rather is generated amidst the crisis and formed by it.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

KINDknow Research Center, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway

Elin Eriksen Ødegaard & Alicja Sadownik

Faculty of Education, Peninsula campus, Monash University, Frankston, VI, Australia

Marilyn Fleer & Prabhat Rai

Faculty of Education, School of Early Childhood Education, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece

Glykeria Fragkiadaki

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elin Eriksen Ødegaard .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Faculty of Education, Peninsula Campus, Monash University, Frankston, VIC, Australia

Marilyn Fleer

Faculty of Education, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece

KINDKNOW Research Centre, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway

Elin Eriksen Ødegaard

Faculty of Education, Monash University, Frankston, VIC, Australia

Prabhat Rai

KINDKNOW Research Centre, Western Norway University of Applied Sci, Bergen, Norway

Alicja R. Sadownik

Rights and permissions

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), 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 license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license 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.

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Ødegaard, E.E., Fleer, M., Fragkiadaki, G., Sadownik, A., Rai, P. (2024). Cultural-Historical Digital Methodologies: The Dialectics of Crisis and Research Innovation. In: Fleer, M., Fragkiadaki, G., Ødegaard, E.E., Rai, P., Sadownik, A.R. (eds) Cultural-historical Digital Methodology in Early Childhood Settings. Perspectives in Cultural-Historical Research, vol 13. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-59785-5_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-59785-5_1

Published : 11 July 2024

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-59784-8

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-59785-5

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

How to Write a Research Proposal: (with Examples & Templates)

Table of Contents

Before conducting a study, a research proposal should be created that outlines researchers’ plans and methodology and is submitted to the concerned evaluating organization or person. Creating a research proposal is an important step to ensure that researchers are on track and are moving forward as intended. A research proposal can be defined as a detailed plan or blueprint for the proposed research that you intend to undertake. It provides readers with a snapshot of your project by describing what you will investigate, why it is needed, and how you will conduct the research.  

Your research proposal should aim to explain to the readers why your research is relevant and original, that you understand the context and current scenario in the field, have the appropriate resources to conduct the research, and that the research is feasible given the usual constraints.  

This article will describe in detail the purpose and typical structure of a research proposal , along with examples and templates to help you ace this step in your research journey.  

What is a Research Proposal ?  

A research proposal¹ ,²  can be defined as a formal report that describes your proposed research, its objectives, methodology, implications, and other important details. Research proposals are the framework of your research and are used to obtain approvals or grants to conduct the study from various committees or organizations. Consequently, research proposals should convince readers of your study’s credibility, accuracy, achievability, practicality, and reproducibility.   

With research proposals , researchers usually aim to persuade the readers, funding agencies, educational institutions, and supervisors to approve the proposal. To achieve this, the report should be well structured with the objectives written in clear, understandable language devoid of jargon. A well-organized research proposal conveys to the readers or evaluators that the writer has thought out the research plan meticulously and has the resources to ensure timely completion.  

Purpose of Research Proposals  

A research proposal is a sales pitch and therefore should be detailed enough to convince your readers, who could be supervisors, ethics committees, universities, etc., that what you’re proposing has merit and is feasible . Research proposals can help students discuss their dissertation with their faculty or fulfill course requirements and also help researchers obtain funding. A well-structured proposal instills confidence among readers about your ability to conduct and complete the study as proposed.  

Research proposals can be written for several reasons:³  

• To describe the importance of research in the specific topic  
• Address any potential challenges you may encounter  
• Showcase knowledge in the field and your ability to conduct a study  
• Apply for a role at a research institute  
• Convince a research supervisor or university that your research can satisfy the requirements of a degree program  
• Highlight the importance of your research to organizations that may sponsor your project  
• Identify implications of your project and how it can benefit the audience  

What Goes in a Research Proposal?    

Research proposals should aim to answer the three basic questions—what, why, and how.  

The What question should be answered by describing the specific subject being researched. It should typically include the objectives, the cohort details, and the location or setting.  

The Why question should be answered by describing the existing scenario of the subject, listing unanswered questions, identifying gaps in the existing research, and describing how your study can address these gaps, along with the implications and significance.  

The How question should be answered by describing the proposed research methodology, data analysis tools expected to be used, and other details to describe your proposed methodology.   

Research Proposal Example  

Here is a research proposal sample template (with examples) from the University of Rochester Medical Center. 4 The sections in all research proposals are essentially the same although different terminology and other specific sections may be used depending on the subject.  

Structure of a Research Proposal  

If you want to know how to make a research proposal impactful, include the following components:¹  

1. Introduction  

This section provides a background of the study, including the research topic, what is already known about it and the gaps, and the significance of the proposed research.  

2. Literature review  

This section contains descriptions of all the previous relevant studies pertaining to the research topic. Every study cited should be described in a few sentences, starting with the general studies to the more specific ones. This section builds on the understanding gained by readers in the Introduction section and supports it by citing relevant prior literature, indicating to readers that you have thoroughly researched your subject.  

3. Objectives  

Once the background and gaps in the research topic have been established, authors must now state the aims of the research clearly. Hypotheses should be mentioned here. This section further helps readers understand what your study’s specific goals are.  

4. Research design and methodology  

Here, authors should clearly describe the methods they intend to use to achieve their proposed objectives. Important components of this section include the population and sample size, data collection and analysis methods and duration, statistical analysis software, measures to avoid bias (randomization, blinding), etc.  

5. Ethical considerations  

This refers to the protection of participants’ rights, such as the right to privacy, right to confidentiality, etc. Researchers need to obtain informed consent and institutional review approval by the required authorities and mention this clearly for transparency.  

6. Budget/funding  

Researchers should prepare their budget and include all expected expenditures. An additional allowance for contingencies such as delays should also be factored in.  

7. Appendices  

This section typically includes information that supports the research proposal and may include informed consent forms, questionnaires, participant information, measurement tools, etc.  

8. Citations  

Important Tips for Writing a Research Proposal  

Writing a research proposal begins much before the actual task of writing. Planning the research proposal structure and content is an important stage, which if done efficiently, can help you seamlessly transition into the writing stage. 3,5  

The Planning Stage  

• Manage your time efficiently. Plan to have the draft version ready at least two weeks before your deadline and the final version at least two to three days before the deadline.
• What is the primary objective of your research?  
• Will your research address any existing gap?  
• What is the impact of your proposed research?  
• Do people outside your field find your research applicable in other areas?  
• If your research is unsuccessful, would there still be other useful research outcomes?  

  The Writing Stage  

• Create an outline with main section headings that are typically used.  
• Focus only on writing and getting your points across without worrying about the format of the research proposal , grammar, punctuation, etc. These can be fixed during the subsequent passes. Add details to each section heading you created in the beginning.   
• Ensure your sentences are concise and use plain language. A research proposal usually contains about 2,000 to 4,000 words or four to seven pages.  
• Don’t use too many technical terms and abbreviations assuming that the readers would know them. Define the abbreviations and technical terms.  
• Ensure that the entire content is readable. Avoid using long paragraphs because they affect the continuity in reading. Break them into shorter paragraphs and introduce some white space for readability.  
• Focus on only the major research issues and cite sources accordingly. Don’t include generic information or their sources in the literature review.  
• Proofread your final document to ensure there are no grammatical errors so readers can enjoy a seamless, uninterrupted read.  
• Use academic, scholarly language because it brings formality into a document.  
• Ensure that your title is created using the keywords in the document and is neither too long and specific nor too short and general.  
• Cite all sources appropriately to avoid plagiarism.  
• Make sure that you follow guidelines, if provided. This includes rules as simple as using a specific font or a hyphen or en dash between numerical ranges.  
• Ensure that you’ve answered all questions requested by the evaluating authority.  

Key Takeaways   

Here’s a summary of the main points about research proposals discussed in the previous sections:  

• A research proposal is a document that outlines the details of a proposed study and is created by researchers to submit to evaluators who could be research institutions, universities, faculty, etc.  
• Research proposals are usually about 2,000-4,000 words long, but this depends on the evaluating authority’s guidelines.  
• A good research proposal ensures that you’ve done your background research and assessed the feasibility of the research.  
• Research proposals have the following main sections—introduction, literature review, objectives, methodology, ethical considerations, and budget.  

Frequently Asked Questions  

Q1. How is a research proposal evaluated?  

A1. In general, most evaluators, including universities, broadly use the following criteria to evaluate research proposals . 6  

• Significance —Does the research address any important subject or issue, which may or may not be specific to the evaluator or university?  
• Content and design —Is the proposed methodology appropriate to answer the research question? Are the objectives clear and well aligned with the proposed methodology?  
• Sample size and selection —Is the target population or cohort size clearly mentioned? Is the sampling process used to select participants randomized, appropriate, and free of bias?  
• Timing —Are the proposed data collection dates mentioned clearly? Is the project feasible given the specified resources and timeline?  
• Data management and dissemination —Who will have access to the data? What is the plan for data analysis?  

Q2. What is the difference between the Introduction and Literature Review sections in a research proposal ?  

A2. The Introduction or Background section in a research proposal sets the context of the study by describing the current scenario of the subject and identifying the gaps and need for the research. A Literature Review, on the other hand, provides references to all prior relevant literature to help corroborate the gaps identified and the research need.  

Q3. How long should a research proposal be?  

A3. Research proposal lengths vary with the evaluating authority like universities or committees and also the subject. Here’s a table that lists the typical research proposal lengths for a few universities.  

Q4. What are the common mistakes to avoid in a research proposal ?  

A4. Here are a few common mistakes that you must avoid while writing a research proposal . 7  

• No clear objectives: Objectives should be clear, specific, and measurable for the easy understanding among readers.  
• Incomplete or unconvincing background research: Background research usually includes a review of the current scenario of the particular industry and also a review of the previous literature on the subject. This helps readers understand your reasons for undertaking this research because you identified gaps in the existing research.  
• Overlooking project feasibility: The project scope and estimates should be realistic considering the resources and time available.   
• Neglecting the impact and significance of the study: In a research proposal , readers and evaluators look for the implications or significance of your research and how it contributes to the existing research. This information should always be included.  
• Unstructured format of a research proposal : A well-structured document gives confidence to evaluators that you have read the guidelines carefully and are well organized in your approach, consequently affirming that you will be able to undertake the research as mentioned in your proposal.  
• Ineffective writing style: The language used should be formal and grammatically correct. If required, editors could be consulted, including AI-based tools such as Paperpal , to refine the research proposal structure and language.  

Thus, a research proposal is an essential document that can help you promote your research and secure funds and grants for conducting your research. Consequently, it should be well written in clear language and include all essential details to convince the evaluators of your ability to conduct the research as proposed.  

This article has described all the important components of a research proposal and has also provided tips to improve your writing style. We hope all these tips will help you write a well-structured research proposal to ensure receipt of grants or any other purpose.  

References  

• Sudheesh K, Duggappa DR, Nethra SS. How to write a research proposal? Indian J Anaesth. 2016;60(9):631-634. Accessed July 15, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5037942/  
• Writing research proposals. Harvard College Office of Undergraduate Research and Fellowships. Harvard University. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://uraf.harvard.edu/apply-opportunities/app-components/essays/research-proposals  
• What is a research proposal? Plus how to write one. Indeed website. Accessed July 17, 2024. https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/research-proposal  
• Research proposal template. University of Rochester Medical Center. Accessed July 16, 2024. https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/MediaLibraries/URMCMedia/pediatrics/research/documents/Research-proposal-Template.pdf  
• Tips for successful proposal writing. Johns Hopkins University. Accessed July 17, 2024. https://research.jhu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Tips-for-Successful-Proposal-Writing.pdf  
• Formal review of research proposals. Cornell University. Accessed July 18, 2024. https://irp.dpb.cornell.edu/surveys/survey-assessment-review-group/research-proposals  
• 7 Mistakes you must avoid in your research proposal. Aveksana (via LinkedIn). Accessed July 17, 2024. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/7-mistakes-you-must-avoid-your-research-proposal-aveksana-cmtwf/  

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

• How to Paraphrase Research Papers Effectively
• How to Cite Social Media Sources in Academic Writing? 
• What is the Importance of a Concept Paper and How to Write It 

APA format: Basic Guide for Researchers

The future of academia: how ai tools are changing the way we do research, you may also like, the ai revolution: authors’ role in upholding academic..., the future of academia: how ai tools are..., how to choose a dissertation topic, how to write a phd research proposal, how to write an academic paragraph (step-by-step guide), five things authors need to know when using..., 7 best referencing tools and citation management software..., maintaining academic integrity with paperpal’s generative ai writing..., research funding basics: what should a grant proposal....