developing qualitative research questions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Explore the platform powering Experience Management

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

Popular Use Cases

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

Market Research

• Partnerships
• Marketplace

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

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

Try Qualtrics for free

How to write qualitative research questions.

11 min read Here’s how to write effective qualitative research questions for your projects, and why getting it right matters so much.

What is qualitative research?

Qualitative research is a blanket term covering a wide range of research methods and theoretical framing approaches. The unifying factor in all these types of qualitative study is that they deal with data that cannot be counted. Typically this means things like people’s stories, feelings, opinions and emotions , and the meanings they ascribe to their experiences.

Qualitative study is one of two main categories of research, the other being quantitative research. Quantitative research deals with numerical data – that which can be counted and quantified, and which is mostly concerned with trends and patterns in large-scale datasets.

What are research questions?

Research questions are questions you are trying to answer with your research. To put it another way, your research question is the reason for your study, and the beginning point for your research design. There is normally only one research question per study, although if your project is very complex, you may have multiple research questions that are closely linked to one central question.

A good qualitative research question sums up your research objective. It’s a way of expressing the central question of your research, identifying your particular topic and the central issue you are examining.

Research questions are quite different from survey questions, questions used in focus groups or interview questions. A long list of questions is used in these types of study, as opposed to one central question. Additionally, interview or survey questions are asked of participants, whereas research questions are only for the researcher to maintain a clear understanding of the research design.

Research questions are used in both qualitative and quantitative research , although what makes a good research question might vary between the two.

In fact, the type of research questions you are asking can help you decide whether you need to take a quantitative or qualitative approach to your research project.

Discover the fundamentals of qualitative research

Quantitative vs. qualitative research questions

Writing research questions is very important in both qualitative and quantitative research, but the research questions that perform best in the two types of studies are quite different.

Quantitative research questions

Quantitative research questions usually relate to quantities, similarities and differences.

It might reflect the researchers’ interest in determining whether relationships between variables exist, and if so whether they are statistically significant. Or it may focus on establishing differences between things through comparison, and using statistical analysis to determine whether those differences are meaningful or due to chance.

• How much? This kind of research question is one of the simplest. It focuses on quantifying something. For example:

How many Yoruba speakers are there in the state of Maine?

• What is the connection?

This type of quantitative research question examines how one variable affects another.

For example:

How does a low level of sunlight affect the mood scores (1-10) of Antarctic explorers during winter?

• What is the difference? Quantitative research questions in this category identify two categories and measure the difference between them using numerical data.

Do white cats stay cooler than tabby cats in hot weather?

If your research question fits into one of the above categories, you’re probably going to be doing a quantitative study.

Qualitative research questions

Qualitative research questions focus on exploring phenomena, meanings and experiences.

Unlike quantitative research, qualitative research isn’t about finding causal relationships between variables. So although qualitative research questions might touch on topics that involve one variable influencing another, or looking at the difference between things, finding and quantifying those relationships isn’t the primary objective.

In fact, you as a qualitative researcher might end up studying a very similar topic to your colleague who is doing a quantitative study, but your areas of focus will be quite different. Your research methods will also be different – they might include focus groups, ethnography studies, and other kinds of qualitative study.

A few example qualitative research questions:

• What is it like being an Antarctic explorer during winter?
• What are the experiences of Yoruba speakers in the USA?
• How do white cat owners describe their pets?

Qualitative research question types

Marshall and Rossman (1989) identified 4 qualitative research question types, each with its own typical research strategy and methods.

• Exploratory questions

Exploratory questions are used when relatively little is known about the research topic. The process researchers follow when pursuing exploratory questions might involve interviewing participants, holding focus groups, or diving deep with a case study.

• Explanatory questions

With explanatory questions, the research topic is approached with a view to understanding the causes that lie behind phenomena. However, unlike a quantitative project, the focus of explanatory questions is on qualitative analysis of multiple interconnected factors that have influenced a particular group or area, rather than a provable causal link between dependent and independent variables.

• Descriptive questions

As the name suggests, descriptive questions aim to document and record what is happening. In answering descriptive questions , researchers might interact directly with participants with surveys or interviews, as well as using observational studies and ethnography studies that collect data on how participants interact with their wider environment.

• Predictive questions

Predictive questions start from the phenomena of interest and investigate what ramifications it might have in the future. Answering predictive questions may involve looking back as well as forward, with content analysis, questionnaires and studies of non-verbal communication (kinesics).

Why are good qualitative research questions important?

We know research questions are very important. But what makes them so essential? (And is that question a qualitative or quantitative one?)

Getting your qualitative research questions right has a number of benefits.

• It defines your qualitative research project Qualitative research questions definitively nail down the research population, the thing you’re examining, and what the nature of your answer will be.This means you can explain your research project to other people both inside and outside your business or organization. That could be critical when it comes to securing funding for your project, recruiting participants and members of your research team, and ultimately for publishing your results. It can also help you assess right the ethical considerations for your population of study.
• It maintains focus Good qualitative research questions help researchers to stick to the area of focus as they carry out their research. Keeping the research question in mind will help them steer away from tangents during their research or while they are carrying out qualitative research interviews. This holds true whatever the qualitative methods are, whether it’s a focus group, survey, thematic analysis or other type of inquiry.That doesn’t mean the research project can’t morph and change during its execution – sometimes this is acceptable and even welcome – but having a research question helps demarcate the starting point for the research. It can be referred back to if the scope and focus of the project does change.
• It helps make sure your outcomes are achievable

Because qualitative research questions help determine the kind of results you’re going to get, it helps make sure those results are achievable. By formulating good qualitative research questions in advance, you can make sure the things you want to know and the way you’re going to investigate them are grounded in practical reality. Otherwise, you may be at risk of taking on a research project that can’t be satisfactorily completed.

Developing good qualitative research questions

All researchers use research questions to define their parameters, keep their study on track and maintain focus on the research topic. This is especially important with qualitative questions, where there may be exploratory or inductive methods in use that introduce researchers to new and interesting areas of inquiry. Here are some tips for writing good qualitative research questions.

1. Keep it specific

Broader research questions are difficult to act on. They may also be open to interpretation, or leave some parameters undefined.

Strong example: How do Baby Boomers in the USA feel about their gender identity?

Weak example: Do people feel different about gender now?

2. Be original

Look for research questions that haven’t been widely addressed by others already.

Strong example: What are the effects of video calling on women’s experiences of work?

Weak example: Are women given less respect than men at work?

3. Make it research-worthy

Don’t ask a question that can be answered with a ‘yes’ or ‘no’, or with a quick Google search.

Strong example: What do people like and dislike about living in a highly multi-lingual country?

Weak example: What languages are spoken in India?

4. Focus your question

Don’t roll multiple topics or questions into one. Qualitative data may involve multiple topics, but your qualitative questions should be focused.

Strong example: What is the experience of disabled children and their families when using social services?

Weak example: How can we improve social services for children affected by poverty and disability?

4. Focus on your own discipline, not someone else’s

Avoid asking questions that are for the politicians, police or others to address.

Strong example: What does it feel like to be the victim of a hate crime?

Weak example: How can hate crimes be prevented?

5. Ask something researchable

Big questions, questions about hypothetical events or questions that would require vastly more resources than you have access to are not useful starting points for qualitative studies. Qualitative words or subjective ideas that lack definition are also not helpful.

Strong example: How do perceptions of physical beauty vary between today’s youth and their parents’ generation?

Weak example: Which country has the most beautiful people in it?

Related resources

Qualitative research design 12 min read, primary vs secondary research 14 min read, business research methods 12 min read, qualitative research interviews 11 min read, market intelligence 10 min read, marketing insights 11 min read, ethnographic research 11 min read, request demo.

Ready to learn more about Qualtrics?

Qualitative Research Questions: Gain Powerful Insights + 25 Examples

We review the basics of qualitative research questions, including their key components, how to craft them effectively, & 25 example questions.

Einstein was many things—a physicist, a philosopher, and, undoubtedly, a mastermind. He also had an incredible way with words. His quote, "Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted," is particularly poignant when it comes to research. 

Some inquiries call for a quantitative approach, for counting and measuring data in order to arrive at general conclusions. Other investigations, like qualitative research, rely on deep exploration and understanding of individual cases in order to develop a greater understanding of the whole. That’s what we’re going to focus on today.

Qualitative research questions focus on the "how" and "why" of things, rather than the "what". They ask about people's experiences and perceptions , and can be used to explore a wide range of topics.

The following article will discuss the basics of qualitative research questions, including their key components, and how to craft them effectively. You'll also find 25 examples of effective qualitative research questions you can use as inspiration for your own studies.

Let’s get started!

What are qualitative research questions, and when are they used?

When researchers set out to conduct a study on a certain topic, their research is chiefly directed by an overarching question . This question provides focus for the study and helps determine what kind of data will be collected.

By starting with a question, we gain parameters and objectives for our line of research. What are we studying? For what purpose? How will we know when we’ve achieved our goals?

Of course, some of these questions can be described as quantitative in nature. When a research question is quantitative, it usually seeks to measure or calculate something in a systematic way.

For example:

• How many people in our town use the library?
• What is the average income of families in our city?
• How much does the average person weigh?

Other research questions, however—and the ones we will be focusing on in this article—are qualitative in nature. Qualitative research questions are open-ended and seek to explore a given topic in-depth.

According to the Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry , “Qualitative research aims to address questions concerned with developing an understanding of the meaning and experience dimensions of humans’ lives and social worlds.”

This type of research can be used to gain a better understanding of people’s thoughts, feelings and experiences by “addressing questions beyond ‘what works’, towards ‘what works for whom when, how and why, and focusing on intervention improvement rather than accreditation,” states one paper in Neurological Research and Practice .

Qualitative questions often produce rich data that can help researchers develop hypotheses for further quantitative study.

• What are people’s thoughts on the new library?
• How does it feel to be a first-generation student at our school?
• How do people feel about the changes taking place in our town?

As stated by a paper in Human Reproduction , “...‘qualitative’ methods are used to answer questions about experience, meaning, and perspective, most often from the standpoint of the participant. These data are usually not amenable to counting or measuring.”

Both quantitative and qualitative questions have their uses; in fact, they often complement each other. A well-designed research study will include a mix of both types of questions in order to gain a fuller understanding of the topic at hand.

If you would like to recruit unlimited participants for qualitative research for free and only pay for the interview you conduct, try using Respondent  today. 

Crafting qualitative research questions for powerful insights

Now that we have a basic understanding of what qualitative research questions are and when they are used, let’s take a look at how you can begin crafting your own.

According to a study in the International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, there is a certain process researchers should follow when crafting their questions, which we’ll explore in more depth.

1. Beginning the process 

Start with a point of interest or curiosity, and pose a draft question or ‘self-question’. What do you want to know about the topic at hand? What is your specific curiosity? You may find it helpful to begin by writing several questions.

For example, if you’re interested in understanding how your customer base feels about a recent change to your product, you might ask: 

• What made you decide to try the new product?
• How do you feel about the change?
• What do you think of the new design/functionality?
• What benefits do you see in the change?

2. Create one overarching, guiding question 

At this point, narrow down the draft questions into one specific question. “Sometimes, these broader research questions are not stated as questions, but rather as goals for the study.”

As an example of this, you might narrow down these three questions: 

into the following question: 

• What are our customers’ thoughts on the recent change to our product?

3. Theoretical framing 

As you read the relevant literature and apply theory to your research, the question should be altered to achieve better outcomes. Experts agree that pursuing a qualitative line of inquiry should open up the possibility for questioning your original theories and altering the conceptual framework with which the research began.

If we continue with the current example, it’s possible you may uncover new data that informs your research and changes your question. For instance, you may discover that customers’ feelings about the change are not just a reaction to the change itself, but also to how it was implemented. In this case, your question would need to reflect this new information: 

• How did customers react to the process of the change, as well as the change itself?

4. Ethical considerations 

A study in the International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education stresses that ethics are “a central issue when a researcher proposes to study the lives of others, especially marginalized populations.” Consider how your question or inquiry will affect the people it relates to—their lives and their safety. Shape your question to avoid physical, emotional, or mental upset for the focus group.

In analyzing your question from this perspective, if you feel that it may cause harm, you should consider changing the question or ending your research project. Perhaps you’ve discovered that your question encourages harmful or invasive questioning, in which case you should reformulate it.

5. Writing the question 

The actual process of writing the question comes only after considering the above points. The purpose of crafting your research questions is to delve into what your study is specifically about” Remember that qualitative research questions are not trying to find the cause of an effect, but rather to explore the effect itself.

Your questions should be clear, concise, and understandable to those outside of your field. In addition, they should generate rich data. The questions you choose will also depend on the type of research you are conducting: 

• If you’re doing a phenomenological study, your questions might be open-ended, in order to allow participants to share their experiences in their own words.
• If you’re doing a grounded-theory study, your questions might be focused on generating a list of categories or themes.
• If you’re doing ethnography, your questions might be about understanding the culture you’re studying.

Whenyou have well-written questions, it is much easier to develop your research design and collect data that accurately reflects your inquiry.

In writing your questions, it may help you to refer to this simple flowchart process for constructing questions:

Download Free E-Book 

25 examples of expertly crafted qualitative research questions

It's easy enough to cover the theory of writing a qualitative research question, but sometimes it's best if you can see the process in practice. In this section, we'll list 25 examples of B2B and B2C-related qualitative questions.

Let's begin with five questions. We'll show you the question, explain why it's considered qualitative, and then give you an example of how it can be used in research.

1. What is the customer's perception of our company's brand?

Qualitative research questions are often open-ended and invite respondents to share their thoughts and feelings on a subject. This question is qualitative because it seeks customer feedback on the company's brand. 

This question can be used in research to understand how customers feel about the company's branding, what they like and don't like about it, and whether they would recommend it to others.

2. Why do customers buy our product?

This question is also qualitative because it seeks to understand the customer's motivations for purchasing a product. It can be used in research to identify the reasons  customers buy a certain product, what needs or desires the product fulfills for them, and how they feel about the purchase after using the product.

3. How do our customers interact with our products?

Again, this question is qualitative because it seeks to understand customer behavior. In this case, it can be used in research to see how customers use the product, how they interact with it, and what emotions or thoughts the product evokes in them.

4. What are our customers' biggest frustrations with our products?

By seeking to understand customer frustrations, this question is qualitative and can provide valuable insights. It can be used in research to help identify areas in which the company needs to make improvements with its products.

5. How do our customers feel about our customer service?

Rather than asking why customers like or dislike something, this question asks how they feel. This qualitative question can provide insights into customer satisfaction or dissatisfaction with a company. 

This type of question can be used in research to understand what customers think of the company's customer service and whether they feel it meets their needs.

20 more examples to refer to when writing your question

Now that you’re aware of what makes certain questions qualitative, let's move into 20 more examples of qualitative research questions:

• How do your customers react when updates are made to your app interface?
• How do customers feel when they complete their purchase through your ecommerce site?
• What are your customers' main frustrations with your service?
• How do people feel about the quality of your products compared to those of your competitors?
• What motivates customers to refer their friends and family members to your product or service?
• What are the main benefits your customers receive from using your product or service?
• How do people feel when they finish a purchase on your website?
• What are the main motivations behind customer loyalty to your brand?
• How does your app make people feel emotionally?
• For younger generations using your app, how does it make them feel about themselves?
• What reputation do people associate with your brand?
• How inclusive do people find your app?
• In what ways are your customers' experiences unique to them?
• What are the main areas of improvement your customers would like to see in your product or service?
• How do people feel about their interactions with your tech team?
• What are the top five reasons people use your online marketplace?
• How does using your app make people feel in terms of connectedness?
• What emotions do people experience when they're using your product or service?
• Aside from the features of your product, what else about it attracts customers?
• How does your company culture make people feel?

As you can see, these kinds of questions are completely open-ended. In a way, they allow the research and discoveries made along the way to direct the research. The questions are merely a starting point from which to explore.

This video offers tips on how to write good qualitative research questions, produced by Qualitative Research Expert, Kimberly Baker.

Wrap-up: crafting your own qualitative research questions.

Over the course of this article, we've explored what qualitative research questions are, why they matter, and how they should be written. Hopefully you now have a clear understanding of how to craft your own.

Remember, qualitative research questions should always be designed to explore a certain experience or phenomena in-depth, in order to generate powerful insights. As you write your questions, be sure to keep the following in mind:

• Are you being inclusive of all relevant perspectives?
• Are your questions specific enough to generate clear answers?
• Will your questions allow for an in-depth exploration of the topic at hand?
• Do the questions reflect your research goals and objectives?

If you can answer "yes" to all of the questions above, and you've followed the tips for writing qualitative research questions we shared in this article, then you're well on your way to crafting powerful queries that will yield valuable insights.

Download Free E-Book

Asking the right questions in the right way is the key to research success. That’s true for not just the discussion guide but for every step of a research project. Following are 100+ questions that will take you from defining your research objective through  screening and participant discussions.

Fill out the form below to access free e-book! 

Recommend Resources:

• How to Recruit Participants for Qualitative Research
• The Best UX Research Tools of 2022
• 10 Smart Tips for Conducting Better User Interviews
• 50 Powerful Questions You Should Ask In Your Next User Interview
• How To Find Participants For User Research: 13 Ways To Make It Happen
• UX Diary Study: 5 Essential Tips For Conducing Better Studies
• User Testing Recruitment: 10 Smart Tips To Find Participants Fast
• Qualitative Research Questions: Gain Powerful Insights + 25
• How To Successfully Recruit Participants for A Study (2022 Edition)
• How To Properly Recruit Focus Group Participants (2022 Edition)
• The Best Unmoderated Usability Testing Tools of 2022

50 Powerful User Interview Questions You Should Consider Asking

We researched the best user interview questions you can use for your qualitative research studies. Use these 50 sample questions for your next...

A Guide to Usability Testing Questions (Including 100 Examples)

Asking the right questions in the right way is the key to the success of your UX research project. With tips and 100+ question examples, Respondent...

How To ​​Unleash Your Extra Income Potential With Respondent

The number one question we get from new participants is “how can I get invited to participate in more projects.” In this article, we’ll discuss a few...

Developing qualitative research questions: a reflective process

• Related Documents

Using Emphasis-Purposeful Sampling-Phenomenon of Interest–Context (EPPiC) Framework to Reflect on Two Qualitative Research Designs and Questions: A Reflective Process

A satisfactory research question often signifies the beginning point for many researchers. While this can be true for quantitative studies because of pre-defined research questions, qualitative research questions undergo series of revisions through a reflective process. This reflective process provides the framework for the subjectivity associated with qualitative inquiry. The continuous iterative reflective process is an essential component for developing qualitative research questions that correspond with the various qualitative study designs. Although qualitative inquiry is term exclusively subjective, there is a need to use a framework in developing qualitative research questions. The Emphasis- Purposeful sampling- Phenomenon of interest – Context (EPPiC) framework guides qualitative researchers in developing and revising qualitative research questions to suit a specific qualitative approach. This article addresses both the development of a research question using the “EPPiC framework” and demonstrate how to revise the “developed” research question to reflect two qualitative research design. I developed a qualitative research question for Sally Thorne’s Interpretive Description design using the EPPiC Framework and subsequently revised the research question to suit a grounded theory design.

OUTDOOR CAMP EFFECTS ON ATHLETES: ORIENTEERING EXAMPLE

Background. In this research, we aimed to investigate the effects of outdoor camps on orienteering athletes. Methods. The study group consisted of 74 athletes (44 males and 30 females, aged 11.94 ± 1.32 years) who participated in Bolu outdoor camp on the 3 rd –13 th of August, 2015. Interview technique, which is one of the qualitative research methods, was used as data collection tool and content analysis method was used for data analysis. Results. Demographic factors were interpreted after the analysis of the obtained data and three main research questions were discussed under the topics of the views of athletes about the concept of Orienteering which is an outdoor sport, themes and codes regarding the purpose of Orienteering by the students who participated in the outdoor camp, and themes and codes about the outcomes of Orienteering for the students who participated in outdoor camps. Conclusion. It is suggested that a policy must be developed within the Ministry of Youth and Sport and Sport Federations in order to disseminate more deliberate and more comprehensive outdoor education among young people and measures should be taken to provide extensive participation.

Change, Challenges, and Mixed Methods

This chapter discusses three ongoing issues related to the evaluation of qualitative research. First, the chapter considers whether a set of evaluation criteria is either determinative or changeable. Due to the evolving nature of qualitative research, it is likely that the way in which qualitative research is evaluated can change—not all at once, but gradually. Second, qualitative research has been criticized by newly resurrected positivists whose definitions of scientific research and evaluation criteria are narrow. “Politics of evidence” and a recent big-tent evaluation strategy are examined. Last, this chapter analyzes how validity criteria of qualitative research are incorporated into the evaluation of mixed methods research. The elements of qualitative research seem to be fairly represented but are largely treated as trivial. A criterion, the fit of research questions to design, is identified as distinctive in the review guide of the Journal of Mixed Methods Research.

MOOD TYPES OF DONALD TRUMP’S SPEECH IN THE ARAB ISLAMIC AMERICAN SUMMIT

This research deals with analyzing language from the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) from Donald Trump’s speech in the Arab Islamic American Summit. In English, one of types of meaning is Interpersonal meaning. It is realized by mood and modality. This research focuses on mood, then formulated into two research questions: 1) What mood types are used in Donald Trump’s speech in the Arab Islamic American summit? 2) What mood adjuncts are used in Donald Trump’s speech in the Arab Islamic American Summit?. The method used in this research is qualitative research. The source of data is the video of Donald Trump’s speech from Youtube. It was taken from (CNN, 2017) to get the transcript of speech by Donald Trump. It was found that there were 355 clauses in Donald Trump’s speech; there were 4 types of mood in the speech of Donald Trump; there were 337 declaratives mood with percentage 94.92%, 4 Polar-Interrogatives mood with percentage 1.12%, 4 WH-Interrogatives mood with percentage 1.12% and 10 imperatives mood with percentage 2.25%. Declarative as the most dominant types of mood is used in Donald Trump’s, speech which means that he gave or stated information to the audiences. In addition, in Donald Trump’s speech, there are 19 clauses which contain mood adjunct. The findings indicated that there were 3 types of mood adjunct in the speech, namely, 5 adjuncts of modality with percentage 26.31%, 3 adjuncts of temporality with percentage 15.78%, and 11 adjuncts of intensity with percentage 57.89%. The most dominant is adjuncts of intensity which expresses expectation. Keywords: Systemic Functional Linguistics; Mood; Mood Adjunct

MAPPING THE CONCEPT OF A GOOD SCHOOL WITH TEACHERS’ CHARACTERISTICS IN THE CONTEXT OF A GOOD SCHOOL CONCEPT

Aim. The concept of Good School was formed in 2015, however, the implementation of it has been rather slow. Therefore, the research aim of this article is to identify the educational experts’ viewpoints on the concept. The following questions have been raised to specify the aim: if the concept of the school of general education, presented as Good School, is adequately understood, what features should a teacher have in order to implement the concept of Good School? Methods. To answer the research questions a qualitative research by using structured interviews was carried out, i.e. experts’ written surveys were analyzed. The study revealed three positions that are discussed in this article: the concept of Good School, the mission and teachers’ features, which are interpreted in the context of the concept of Good School, albeit in a particular way. Results. The analysis of the empirical research data revealed that insufficient emphasis is placed on the value aspect, modelling of community-based school activities and their reflection. The research findings also showed that there has been a considerable lack of attention paid to some of the teacher's competences – there has been a lack of experts’ focus on the personalization of the educational content, its construction in the interaction with the elements of the pedagogical system, the reflection of pedagogical activities, and others. Conclusions. The concept of Good School is understood by the experts as a map, a conceptual idea, a guideline unfolding the schools’ specificity. The implementation of the concept of Good School should be based on the ideas of constructionism  that open the pathways of common  development,  realization, and improvement of Good School.

"Me and my students' smartphones in the classroom": A case study using arts-based methods

There is a new area flourishing within qualitative research based on methods using all forms of art: music, theatre, visual arts, and literature. In this paper we present an overview of the basic features of arts-based research; emphasizing on their meaning on education research, on the freedom of expression given to the participants in the research, and on the method the researcher applies to evaluate the collected data. We then present an arts-based research case study where the research questions relate to teachers’ reactions to the use of smartphones by students in the classroom. In this case study, teachers, especially those working on secondary education, are invited to portray their thoughts, emotions, and images that respond to these questions by painting them on a paper using markers. The findings show that the majority of the teachers are negative about the children using their smartphone in the classroom, along with evidence for teachers’ emotional response and how to confront the phenomenon.

‘I Do Not Appear to Have had Previous Letters’. The Potential and Pitfalls of Using a Qualitative Correspondence Method to Facilitate Insights Into Life in Prison During the Covid-19 Pandemic

The Covid-19 pandemic and lockdown represents a significant challenge for qualitative researchers due to social distancing measures restricting face-to-face data collection. At the time of ethical approval (early April 2020), all face-to-face research projects facilitated by the Scottish Prison Service and most prison jurisdictions were paused. In response to these methodological challenges, a participatory action correspondence methodology was designed in order for people in custody to influence the direction of this project by suggesting research questions and themes. This article analyses the potential of this approach, what this illuminated and critically engages with the challenges of implementing this qualitative methodology. Eight participants were selected due to previous participation in a Participatory Action Research project at one Scottish prison. After consent was given via post, eight letters were sent to the participants. This paper analyses the questions relating to, and aspects of Covid-19 that were important to the participants, in the hope that these insights will influence other qualitative research on the impacts of Covid-19 within prison settings. Methodologically and theoretically, this paper illustrates the potential and challenges relating to using a qualitative correspondence method to facilitate unique insights into life in custody during what emerges as a particularly challenging time in prison settings. More widely the paper reiterates and restates the importance of qualitative research methods as methods that provide unique and rich insights into the Covid-19 pandemic.

Qualitative Research in Information Systems

The purpose of this chapter is to provide the researcher, who already is inclined to apply qualitative research, with an overview of methods. A representative sample of qualitative research methods is presented, which may be employed when conducting information systems research. These methods include Action Research, Case Study, Ethnography, Grounded Theory, and Narrative Inquiry. Examples of these research methods are also included, which provide a description of the method and references to more detailed presentations. Researchers should thoroughly explore these methods and become fully cognizant of when to appropriately apply each method. It is important to ensure that the chosen method addresses the research questions and supports the research objectives.

Intellectual Property and Behavioural Studies: Methodological Perspectives

Intellectual property (IP) infringement is widely researched in behavioural studies with manifold quantitative and qualitative research. The current chapter focuses on qualitative research and gives an introduction to how data from expert interviews and websites of relevant stakeholders can be analysed to understand and interpret IP infringement applying triangulation. This chapter selects the comprehensive perspective of the entire business and institutional environment in an international context, focusing on the social-cultural, legal, economic, political, and technological framework in different countries, which determines business activities. It answers three research questions on past, current, and future activities regarding IP with data from forty-six organizations (expert interviews, website analyses). The analysis of the data with Computer Assisted/Aided Qualitative Data AnalysiS (CAQDAS) follows four steps: (1) organizing the material; (2) coding; (3) searching; and (4) modelling and interpreting. The analysis revealed that first, there were several activities regarding IP that have been applied by different stakeholders, second, the present status of IP from the point of view of the different stakeholders has a strong legal aspect, and third, a cross-national collaboration for enforcement and harmonizing legislation is seen important for the future of IP specifically by governmental bodies. Overall, these findings allow for recommendations not only for legislators but also for industry and organizations lobbying for more lenient IP rights leading to a bright future for IP.

The Structure and Writing of Qualitative Reports

The first section of this chapter contains information related the structure of the introduction of the qualitative projects' reports. Readers should be able to compile appropriate background to the study, statement of the problem, research objective, research questions, significance of the study, and other requirements for qualitative projects. The second section contains details related to the review of literature. The readers should be able to understand and apply empirical and theoretical literature in qualitative projects. The third section discusses the structure of methodology of qualitative projects and the strategies of executing it. The analysis and discussion of qualitative data is discussed in Section 4. The final section contains the concluding structure of qualitative research reports.

Export Citation Format

Share document.

• (855) 776-7763

Training Maker

All Products

Qualaroo Insights

ProProfs.com

• Get Started Free

FREE. All Features. FOREVER!

Try our Forever FREE account with all premium features!

How to Write Qualitative Research Questions: Types & Examples

Market Research Specialist

Emma David, a seasoned market research professional, specializes in employee engagement, survey administration, and data management. Her expertise in leveraging data for informed decisions has positively impacted several brands, enhancing their market position.

Qualitative research questions focus on depth and quality, exploring the “why and how” behind decisions, without relying on statistical tools.

Unlike quantitative research, which aims to collect tangible, measurable data from a broader demographic, qualitative analysis involves smaller, focused datasets, identifying patterns for insights.

The information collected by qualitative surveys can vary from text to images, demanding a deep understanding of the subject, and therefore, crafting precise qualitative research questions is crucial for success.

In this guide, we’ll discuss how to write effective qualitative research questions, explore various types, and highlight characteristics of good qualitative research questions.

Let’s dive in!

What Are Qualitative Research Questions?

Qualitative questions aim to understand the depth and nuances of a phenomenon, focusing on “why” and “how” rather than quantifiable measures.

They explore subjective experiences, perspectives, and behaviors, often using open-ended inquiries to gather rich, descriptive data.

Unlike quantitative questions, which seek numerical data, qualitative questions try to find out meanings, patterns, and underlying processes within a specific context.

These questions are essential for exploring complex issues, generating hypotheses, and gaining deeper insights into human behavior and phenomena.

Here’s an example of a qualitative research question:

“How do you perceive and navigate organizational culture within a tech startup environment?”

This question asks about the respondent’s subjective interpretations and experiences of organizational culture within a specific context, such as a tech startup.

It seeks to uncover insights into the values, norms, and practices that shape workplace dynamics and employee behaviors, providing qualitative data for analysis and understanding.

When Should We Use Qualitative Research Questions?

Qualitative research questions typically aim to open up conversations, encourage detailed narratives, and foster a deep understanding of the subject matter. Here are some scenarios they are best suited for:

• Exploring Complex Phenomena : When the research topic involves understanding complex processes, behaviors, or interactions that cannot be quantified easily, qualitative questions help delve into these intricate details.
• Understanding Contexts and Cultures : To grasp the nuances of different social contexts, cultures, or subcultures, qualitative research questions allow for an in-depth exploration of these environments and how they influence individuals and groups.
• Exploring Perceptions and Experiences : When the aim is to understand people’s perceptions, experiences, or feelings about a particular subject, qualitative questions facilitate capturing the depth and variety of these perspectives.
• Developing Concepts or Theories : In the early stages of research, where concepts or theories are not yet well-developed, qualitative questions can help generate hypotheses, identify variables, and develop theoretical frameworks based on observations and interpretations.
• Investigating Processes : To understand how processes unfold over time and the factors that influence these processes, qualitative questions are useful for capturing the dynamics and complexities involved.
• Seeking to Understand Change : When researching how individuals or groups experience change, adapt to new circumstances, or make decisions, qualitative research questions can provide insights into the motivations, challenges, and strategies involved.
• Studying Phenomena Not Easily Quantified : For phenomena that are not easily captured through quantitative measures, such as emotions, beliefs, or motivations, qualitative questions can probe these abstract concepts more effectively.
• Addressing Sensitive or Taboo Topics : In studies where topics may be sensitive, controversial, or taboo, qualitative research questions allow for a respectful and empathetic exploration of these subjects, providing space for participants to share their experiences in their own words.

How to Write Qualitative Research Questions?

Read this guide to learn how you can craft well-thought-out qualitative research questions:

1. Begin with Your Research Goals

The first step in formulating qualitative research questions is to have a clear understanding of what you aim to discover or understand through your research. There are two types of qualitative questionnaires or research – Ontological and Epistemological.

Finding out the nature of your research influences all aspects of your research design, including the formulation of research questions.

Subsequently:

• Identify your main objective : Consider the broader context of your study. Are you trying to explore a phenomenon, understand a process, or interpret the meanings behind behaviors? Your main objective should guide the formulation of your questions, ensuring they are aligned with what you seek to achieve.
• Focus on the ‘how’ and ‘why’ : Qualitative research is inherently exploratory and aims to understand the nuances of human behavior and experience. Starting your questions with “how” or “why” encourages a deeper investigation into the motivations, processes, and contexts underlying the subject matter. This approach facilitates an open-ended exploration, allowing participants to provide rich, detailed responses that illuminate their perspectives and experiences.

Take a quick look at the following visual for a better understanding:

So, if you are doing Ontological research, ensure that the questions focus on the “what” aspects of reality (the premise of your research) and opt for the nature of the knowledge for Epistemological research.

2. Choose the Right Structure

The structure of your research questions significantly impacts the depth and quality of data you collect. Opting for an open-ended format allows respondents the flexibility to express themselves freely, providing insights that pre-defined answers might miss.

• Open-ended format : These questions do not constrain respondents to a set of predetermined answers, unlike closed-ended questions. By allowing participants to articulate their thoughts in their own words, you can uncover nuances and complexities in their responses that might otherwise be overlooked.
• Avoid yes/no questions : Yes/no questions tend to limit the depth of responses. While they might be useful for gathering straightforward factual information, they are not conducive to exploring the depths and nuances that qualitative research seeks to uncover. Encouraging participants to elaborate on their experiences and perspectives leads to richer, more informative data.

For example, take a look at some qualitative questions examples shown in the following image:

3. Be Clear and Specific

Clarity and specificity in your questions are crucial to ensure that participants understand what is being asked and that their responses are relevant to your research objectives.

• Use clear language : Use straightforward, understandable language in your questions. Avoid jargon, acronyms, or overly technical terms that might confuse participants or lead to misinterpretation. The goal is to make your questions accessible to everyone involved in your study.
• Be specific : While maintaining the open-ended nature of qualitative questions, it’s important to narrow down your focus to specific aspects of the phenomenon you’re studying. This specificity helps guide participants’ responses and ensures that the data you collect directly relates to your research objectives.

4. Ensure Relevance and Feasibility

Each question should be carefully considered for its relevance to your research goals and its feasibility, given the constraints of your study.

• Relevance : Questions should be crafted to address the core objectives of your research directly. They should probe areas that are essential to understanding the phenomenon under investigation and should align with your theoretical framework or literature review findings.
• Feasibility : Consider the practical aspects of your research, including the time available for data collection and analysis, resources, and access to participants. Questions should be designed to elicit meaningful responses within the constraints of your study, ensuring that you can gather and analyze data effectively.

5. Focus on a Single Concept or Theme per Question

To ensure clarity and depth, each question should concentrate on a single idea or theme. However, if your main qualitative research question is tough to understand or has a complex structure, you can create sub-questions in limited numbers and with a “ladder structure”.

This will help your respondents understand the overall research objective in mind, and your research can be executed in a better manner.

For example, suppose your main question is – “What is the current state of illiteracy in your state?”

Then, you can create the following subquestions: 

“How does illiteracy block progress in your state?”

“How would you best describe the feelings you have about illiteracy in your state?”

For an even better understanding, you can see the various qualitative research question examples in the following image:

Types of Qualitative Research Questions With Examples

Qualitative survey questions primarily focus on a specific group of respondents that are participating in case studies, surveys, ethnography studies, etc., rather than numbers or statistics.

As a result, the questions are mostly open-ended and can be subdivided into the following types as discussed below:

1. Descriptive Questions

Descriptive research questions aim to detail the “what” of a phenomenon, providing a comprehensive overview of the context, individuals, or situations under study. These questions are foundational, helping to establish a baseline understanding of the research topic.

• What are the daily experiences of teachers in urban elementary schools?
• What strategies do small businesses employ to adapt to rapid technological changes?
• How do young adults describe their transition from college to the workforce?
• What are the coping mechanisms of families with members suffering from chronic illnesses?
• How do community leaders perceive the impact of gentrification in their neighborhoods?

2. Interpretive Questions

Interpretive questions seek to understand the “how” and “why” behind a phenomenon, focusing on the meanings people attach to their experiences. These questions delve into the subjective interpretations and perceptions of participants.

• How do survivors of natural disasters interpret their experiences of recovery and rebuilding?
• Why do individuals engage in voluntary work within their communities?
• How do parents interpret and navigate the challenges of remote schooling for their children?
• Why do consumers prefer local products over global brands in certain markets?
• How do artists interpret the influence of digital media on traditional art forms?

3. Comparative Questions

Comparative research questions are designed to explore differences and similarities between groups, settings, or time periods. These questions can help to highlight the impact of specific variables on the phenomenon under study.

• How do the strategies for managing work-life balance compare between remote and office workers?
• What are the differences in consumer behavior towards sustainable products in urban versus rural areas?
• How do parenting styles in single-parent households compare to those in dual-parent households?
• What are the similarities and differences in leadership styles across different cultures?
• How has the perception of online privacy changed among teenagers over the past decade?

4. Process-oriented Questions

These questions focus on understanding the processes or sequences of events over time. They aim to uncover the “how” of a phenomenon, tracing the development, changes, or evolution of specific situations or behaviors.

• How do non-profit organizations develop and implement community outreach programs?
• What is the process of decision-making in high-stakes business environments?
• How do individuals navigate the process of career transition after significant industry changes?
• What are the stages of adaptation for immigrants in a new country?
• How do social movements evolve from inception to national recognition?

5. Evaluative Questions

Evaluative questions aim to assess the effectiveness, value, or impact of a program, policy, or phenomenon. These questions are critical for understanding the outcomes and implications of various initiatives or situations.

• How effective are online therapy sessions compared to in-person sessions in treating anxiety?
• What is the impact of community gardening programs on neighborhood cohesion?
• How do participants evaluate the outcomes of leadership training programs in their professional development?
• What are the perceived benefits and drawbacks of telecommuting for employees and employers?
• How do residents evaluate the effectiveness of local government policies on waste management?

6. One-on-One Questions

The one-on-one questions are asked to a single person and can be thought of as individual interviews that you can conduct online via phone and video chat as well.

The main aim of such questions is to ask your customers or people in the focus group a series of questions about their purchase motivations. These questions might also come with follow-ups, and if your customers respond with some interesting fact or detail, dig deeper and explore the findings as much as you want.

• What makes you happy in regard to [your research topic]?
• If I could make a wish of yours come true, what do you desire the most?
• What do you still find hard to come to terms with?
• Have you bought [your product] before?
• If so, what was your initial motivation behind the purchase?

7. Exploratory Questions

These questions are designed to enhance your understanding of a particular topic. However, while asking exploratory questions, you must ensure that there are no preconceived notions or biases to it. The more transparent and bias-free your questions are, the better and fair results you will get.

• What is the effect of personal smart devices on today’s youth?
• Do you feel that smart devices have positively or negatively impacted you?
• How do your kids spend their weekends?
• What do you do on a typical weekend morning?

8. Predictive Questions

The predictive questions are used for qualitative research that is focused on the future outcomes of an action or a series of actions. So, you will be using past information to predict the reactions of respondents to hypothetical events that might or might not happen in the future.

These questions come in extremely handy for identifying your customers’ current brand expectations, pain points, and purchase motivation.

• Are you more likely to buy a product when a celebrity promotes it?
• Would you ever try a new product because one of your favorite celebs claims that it actually worked for them?
• Would people in your neighborhood enjoy a park with rides and exercise options?
• How often would you go to a park with your kids if it had free rides?

9. Focus Groups

These questions are mostly asked in person to the customer or respondent groups. The in-person nature of these surveys or studies ensures that the group members get a safe and comfortable environment to express their thoughts and feelings about your brand or services.

• How would you describe your ease of using our product?
• How well do you think you were able to do this task before you started using our product?
• What do you like about our promotional campaigns?
• How well do you think our ads convey the meaning?

10. In-Home Videos

Collecting video feedback from customers in their comfortable, natural settings offers a unique perspective. At home, customers are more relaxed and less concerned about their mannerisms, posture, and choice of words when responding.

This approach is partly why Vogue’s 73 Questions Series is highly popular among celebrities and viewers alike. In-home videos provide insights into customers in a relaxed environment, encouraging them to be honest and share genuine experiences.

• What was your first reaction when you used our product for the first time?
• How well do you think our product performed compared to your expectations?
• What was your worst experience with our product?
• What made you switch to our brand?

11. Online Focus Groups

Online focus groups mirror the traditional, in-person format but are conducted virtually, offering a more cost-effective and efficient approach to gathering data. This digital format extends your reach and allows a rapid collection of responses from a broader audience through online platforms.

You can utilize social media and other digital forums to create communities of respondents and initiate meaningful discussions. Once you have them started, you can simply observe the exchange of thoughts and gather massive amounts of interesting insights!

• What do you like best about our product?
• How familiar are you with this particular service or product we offer?
• What are your concerns with our product?
• What changes can we make to make our product better?

Ask the Right Qualitative Research Questions for Meaningful Insights From Your Respondents

Watch: How to Create a Survey Using ProProfs Survey Maker

By now, you might have realized that manually creating a list of qualitative research questions is a daunting task. Keeping numerous considerations in mind, it’s easy to run out of ideas while crafting qualitative survey questions .

However, investing in smart survey tools, like ProProfs Survey Maker, can significantly streamline this process, allowing you to create various types of surveys in minutes.

With this survey tool , you can generate forms, NPS surveys , tests, quizzes, and assessments.

It’s also useful for conducting polls, sidebar surveys, and in-app surveys. Offering over 100 templates and more than 1,000,000 ready-to-use examples of phenomenological research questions, this software simplifies the task immensely.

Equipped with the right tools and the professional tips shared here, you’re well-prepared to conduct thorough research studies and obtain valuable insights that drive impactful results.

Frequently Asked Questions on Q ualitative Research Questions

1. how do you choose qualitative research questions.

To choose qualitative research questions, identify your main research goal, focus on exploring ‘how’ and ‘why’ aspects, ensure questions are open-ended, and align them with your theoretical framework and methodology.

2. Why are good qualitative research questions important?

Good qualitative research questions are important because they guide the research focus, enable the exploration of depth and complexity, and facilitate the gathering of rich, detailed insights into human experiences and behaviors.

About the author

Emma David is a seasoned market research professional with 8+ years of experience. Having kick-started her journey in research, she has developed rich expertise in employee engagement, survey creation and administration, and data management. Emma believes in the power of data to shape business performance positively. She continues to help brands and businesses make strategic decisions and improve their market standing through her understanding of research methodologies.

Related Posts

10 Best Market Research Survey Software (Free+Paid) for 2024

How to Ask Sensitive Questions in Surveys

What Is a Business Survey Question? Definition, Importance & Examples

Client Onboarding Questionnaire: Best Practices & 20+ Questions

Employee Pulse Surveys: Everything You Need To Know

How to Use Screening Survey Questions Like a Pro

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

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

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

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

Edward barroga.

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

Glafera Janet Matanguihan

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

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

INTRODUCTION

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

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

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

DEFINITIONS AND RELATIONSHIP OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

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

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

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

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

CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

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

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

TYPES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

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

Research questions in quantitative research

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

Hypotheses in quantitative research

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

Research questions in qualitative research

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

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

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

Hypotheses in qualitative research

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

FRAMEWORKS FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CONSTRUCTING RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

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

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

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

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

EXAMPLES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS FROM PUBLISHED ARTICLES

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

EXAMPLES OF HYPOTHESES IN PUBLISHED ARTICLES

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

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

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

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

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

Author Contributions:

• Conceptualization: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.
• Methodology: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.
• Writing - original draft: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.
• Writing - review & editing: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.

The Ultimate Guide to Qualitative Research - Part 1: The Basics

• Introduction and overview
• What is qualitative research?
• What is qualitative data?
• Examples of qualitative data
• Qualitative vs. quantitative research
• Mixed methods
• Qualitative research preparation
• Theoretical perspective
• Theoretical framework
• Literature reviews
• Introduction

Why are research questions so important?

Research question examples, types of qualitative research questions, writing a good research question, guiding your research through research questions.

• Conceptual framework
• Conceptual vs. theoretical framework
• Data collection
• Qualitative research methods
• Focus groups
• Observational research
• Case studies
• Ethnographical research
• Ethical considerations
• Confidentiality and privacy
• Power dynamics
• Reflexivity

Research questions

The research question plays a critical role in the research process, as it guides the study design, data collection , analysis , and interpretation of the findings.

A research paper relies on a research question to inform readers of the research topic and the research problem being addressed. Without such a question, your audience may have trouble understanding the rationale for your research project.

People can take for granted the research question as an essential part of a research project. However, explicitly detailing why researchers need a research question can help lend clarity to the research project. Here are some of the key roles that the research question plays in the research process:

Defines the scope and focus of the study

The research question helps to define the scope and focus of the study. It identifies the specific topic or issue that the researcher wants to investigate, and it sets the boundaries for the study. A research question can also help you determine if your study primarily contributes to theory or is more applied in nature. Clinical research and public health research, for example, may be more concerned with research questions that contribute to practice, while a research question focused on cognitive linguistics are aimed at developing theory.

Provides a rationale for the study

The research question provides a rationale for the study by identifying a gap or problem in existing literature or practice that the researcher wants to address. It articulates the purpose and significance of the study, and it explains why the study is important and worth conducting.

Guides the study design

The research question guides the study design by helping the researcher select appropriate research methods , sampling strategies, and data collection tools. It also helps to determine the types of data that need to be collected and the best ways to analyze and interpret the data because the principal aim of the study is to provide an answer to that research question.

Shapes the data analysis and interpretation

The research question shapes the data analysis and interpretation by guiding the selection of appropriate analytical methods and by focusing the interpretation of the findings. It helps to identify which patterns and themes in the data are more relevant and worth digging into, and it guides the development of conclusions and recommendations based on the findings.

Generates new knowledge

The research question is the starting point for generating new knowledge. By answering the research question, the researcher contributes to the body of knowledge in the field and helps to advance the understanding of the topic or issue under investigation.

Overall, the research question is a critical component of the research process, as it guides the study from start to finish and provides a foundation for generating new knowledge.

Supports the thesis statement

The thesis statement or main assertion in any research paper stems from the answers to the research question. As a result, you can think of a focused research question as a preview of what the study aims to present as a new contribution to existing knowledge.

Here area few examples of focused research questions that can help set the stage for explaining different types of research questions in qualitative research . These questions touch upon various fields and subjects, showcasing the versatility and depth of research.

• What factors contribute to the job satisfaction of remote workers in the technology industry?
• How do teachers perceive the implementation of technology in the classroom, and what challenges do they face?
• What coping strategies do refugees use to deal with the challenges of resettlement in a new country?
• How does gentrification impact the sense of community and identity among long-term residents in urban neighborhoods?
• In what ways do social media platforms influence body image and self-esteem among adolescents?
• How do family dynamics and communication patterns affect the management of type 2 diabetes in adult patients?
• What is the role of mentorship in the professional development and career success of early-career academics?
• How do patients with chronic illnesses experience and navigate the healthcare system, and what barriers do they encounter?
• What are the motivations and experiences of volunteers in disaster relief efforts, and how do these experiences impact their future involvement in humanitarian work?
• How do cultural beliefs and values shape the consumer preferences and purchasing behavior of young adults in a globalized market?
• How do individuals whose genetic factors predict a high risk for developing a specific medical condition perceive, cope with, and make lifestyle choices based on this information?

These example research questions highlight the different kinds of inquiries common to qualitative research. They also demonstrate how qualitative research can address a wide range of topics, from understanding the experiences of specific populations to examining the impact of broader social and cultural phenomena.

Also, notice that these types of research questions tend to be geared towards inductive analyses that describe a concept in depth or develop new theory. As such, qualitative research questions tend to ask "what," "why," or "how" types of questions. This contrasts with quantitative research questions that typically aim to verify an existing theory. and tend to ask "when," "how much," and "why" types of questions to nail down causal mechanisms and generalizable findings.

Whatever your research inquiry, turn to ATLAS.ti

Powerful tools to help turn your research question into meaningful analysis, starting with a free trial.

As you can see above, the research questions you ask play a critical role in shaping the direction and depth of your study. These questions are designed to explore, understand, and interpret social phenomena, rather than testing a hypothesis or quantifying data like in quantitative research. In this section, we will discuss the various types of research questions typically found in qualitative research, making it easier for you to craft appropriate questions for your study.

Descriptive questions

Descriptive research questions aim to provide a detailed account of the phenomenon being studied. These questions usually begin with "what" or "how" and seek to understand the nature, characteristics, or functions of a subject. For example, "What are the experiences of first-generation college students?" or "How do small business owners adapt to economic downturns?"

Comparative questions

Comparative questions seek to examine the similarities and differences between two or more groups, cases, or phenomena. These questions often include the words "compare," "contrast," or "differences." For example, "How do parenting practices differ between single-parent and two-parent families?" or "What are the similarities and differences in leadership styles among successful female entrepreneurs?"

Exploratory questions

Exploratory research questions are open-ended and intended to investigate new or understudied areas. These questions aim to identify patterns, relationships, or themes that may warrant further investigation. For example, "How do teenagers use social media to construct their identities?" or "What factors influence the adoption of renewable energy technologies in rural communities?"

Explanatory questions

Explanatory research questions delve deeper into the reasons or explanations behind a particular phenomenon or behavior. They often start with "why" or "how" and aim to uncover underlying motivations, beliefs, or processes. For example, "Why do some employees resist organizational change?" or "How do cultural factors influence decision-making in international business negotiations?"

Evaluative questions

Evaluative questions assess the effectiveness, impact, or outcomes of a particular intervention, program, or policy. They seek to understand the value or significance of an initiative by examining its successes, challenges, or unintended consequences. For example, "How effective is the school's anti-bullying program in reducing incidents of bullying?" or "What are the long-term impacts of a community-based health promotion campaign on residents' well-being?"

Interpretive questions

Interpretive questions focus on understanding how individuals or groups make sense of their experiences, actions, or social contexts. These questions often involve the analysis of language, symbols, or narratives to uncover the meanings and perspectives that shape human behavior. For example, "How do cancer survivors make sense of their illness journey?" or "What meanings do members of a religious community attach to their rituals and practices?"

There are mainly two overarching ways to think about how to devise a research question. Many studies are built on existing research, but others can be founded on personal experiences or pilot research.

Using the literature review

Within scholarly research, the research question is often built from your literature review . An analysis of the relevant literature reporting previous studies should allow you to identify contextual, theoretical, or methodological gaps that can be addressed in future research.

A compelling research question built on a robust literature review ultimately illustrates to your audience what is novel about your study's objectives.

Conducting pilot research

Researchers may conduct preliminary research or pilot research when they are interested in a particular topic but don't yet have a basis for forming a research question on that topic. A pilot study is a small-scale, preliminary study that is conducted in order to test the feasibility of a research design, methods, and procedures. It can help identify unresolved puzzles that merit further investigation, and pilot studies can draw attention to potential issues or problems that may arise in the full study.

One potential benefit of conducting a pilot study in qualitative research is that it can help the researcher to refine their research question. By collecting and analyzing a small amount of data, the researcher can get a better sense of the phenomenon under investigation and can develop a more focused and refined research question for the full study. The pilot study can also help the researcher to identify key themes, concepts, or variables that should be included in the research question.

In addition to helping to refine the research question, a pilot study can also help the researcher to develop a more effective data collection and analysis plan. The researcher can test different methods for collecting and analyzing data, and can make adjustments based on the results of the pilot study. This can help to ensure that the full study is conducted in the most effective and efficient manner possible.

Overall, conducting a pilot study in qualitative research can be a valuable tool for refining the research question and developing a more effective research design, methods, and procedures. It can help to ensure that the full study is conducted in a rigorous and effective manner, and can increase the likelihood of generating meaningful and useful findings.

When you write a research question for your qualitative study, consider which type of question best aligns with your research objectives and the nature of the phenomenon you are investigating. Remember, qualitative research questions should be open-ended, allowing for a range of perspectives and insights to emerge. As you progress in your research, these questions may evolve or be refined based on the data you collect, helping to guide your analysis and deepen your understanding of the topic.

Use ATLAS.ti for every step of your research project

From the research question to the key insights, ATLAS.ti is there for you. See how with a free trial.

Chapter 4. Finding a Research Question and Approaches to Qualitative Research

We’ve discussed the research design process in general and ways of knowing favored by qualitative researchers.  In chapter 2, I asked you to think about what interests you in terms of a focus of study, including your motivations and research purpose.  It might be helpful to start this chapter with those short paragraphs you wrote about motivations and purpose in front of you.  We are now going to try to develop those interests into actual research questions (first part of this chapter) and then choose among various “traditions of inquiry” that will be best suited to answering those questions.  You’ve already been introduced to some of this (in chapter 1), but we will go further here.

Developing a Research Question

Research questions are different from general questions people have about the social world.  They are narrowly tailored to fit a very specific issue, complete with context and time boundaries.  Because we are engaged in empirical science and thus use “data” to answer our questions, the questions we ask must be answerable by data.  A question is not the same as stating a problem.  The point of the entire research project is to answer a particular question or set of questions.  The question(s) should be interesting, relevant, practical, and ethical.  Let’s say I am generally interested in the problem of student loan debt.  That’s a good place to start, but we can’t simply ask,

General question: Is student loan debt really a problem today?

How could we possibly answer that question? What data could we use? Isn’t this really an axiological (values-based) question? There are no clues in the question as to what data would be appropriate here to help us get started. Students often begin with these large unanswerable questions. They are not research questions. Instead, we could ask,

Poor research question: How many people have debt?

This is still not a very good research question. Why not? It is answerable, although we would probably want to clarify the context. We could add some context to improve it so that the question now reads,

Mediocre research question: How many people in the US have debt today? And does this amount vary by age and location?

Now we have added some context, so we have a better idea of where to look and who to look at. But this is still a pretty poor or mediocre research question. Why is that? Let’s say we did answer it. What would we really know? Maybe we would find out that student loan debt has increased over time and that young people today have more of it. We probably already know this. We don’t really want to go through a lot of trouble answering a question whose answer we already have. In fact, part of the reason we are even asking this question is that we know (or think) it is a problem. Instead of asking what you already know, ask a question to which you really do not know the answer. I can’t stress this enough, so I will say it again: Ask a question to which you do not already know the answer . The point of research is not to prove or make a point but to find out something unknown. What about student loan debt is still a mystery to you? Reviewing the literature could help (see chapter 9). By reviewing the literature, you can get a good sense of what is still mysterious or unknown about student loan debt, and you won’t be reinventing the wheel when you conduct your research. Let’s say you review the literature, and you are struck by the fact that we still don’t understand the true impact of debt on how people are living their lives. A possible research question might be,

Fair research question: What impact does student debt have on the lives of debtors?

Good start, but we still need some context to help guide the project. It is not nearly specific enough.

Better research question: What impact does student debt have on young adults (ages twenty-five to thirty-five) living in the US today?

Now we’ve added context, but we can still do a little bit better in narrowing our research question so that it is both clear and doable; in other words, we want to frame it in a way that provides a very clear research program:

Optimal research question: How do young adults (ages twenty-five to thirty-five) living in the US today who have taken on $30,000 or more in student debt describe the impact of their debt on their lives in terms of finding/choosing a job, buying a house, getting married, and other major life events?

Now you have a research question that can be answered and a clear plan of how to answer it. You will talk to young adults living in the US today who have high debt loads and ask them to describe the impacts of debt on their lives. That is all now in the research question. Note how different this very specific question is from where we started with the “problem” of student debt.

Take some time practicing turning the following general questions into research questions:

• What can be done about the excessive use of force by police officers?
• Why haven’t societies taken firmer steps to address climate change?
• How do communities react to / deal with the opioid epidemic?
• Who has been the most adversely affected by COVID?
• When did political polarization get so bad?

Hint: Step back from each of the questions and try to articulate a possible underlying motivation, then formulate a research question that is specific and answerable.

It is important to take the time to come up with a research question, even if this research question changes a bit as you conduct your research (yes, research questions can change!). If you don’t have a clear question to start your research, you are likely to get very confused when designing your study because you will not be able to make coherent decisions about things like samples, sites, methods of data collection, and so on. Your research question is your anchor: “If we don’t have a question, we risk the possibility of going out into the field thinking we know what we’ll find and looking only for proof of what we expect to be there. That’s not empirical research (it’s not systematic)” ( Rubin 2021:37 ).

Researcher Note

How do you come up with ideas for what to study?

I study what surprises me. Usually, I come across a statistic that suggests something is common that I thought was rare. I tend to think it’s rare because the theories I read suggest it should be, and there’s not a lot of work in that area that helps me understand how the statistic came to be. So, for example, I learned that it’s common for Americans to marry partners who grew up in a different class than them and that about half of White kids born into the upper-middle class are downwardly mobile. I was so shocked by these facts that they naturally led to research questions. How do people come to marry someone who grew up in a different class? How do White kids born near the top of the class structure fall?

—Jessi Streib, author of The Power of the Past and Privilege Lost

What if you have literally no idea what the research question should be? How do you find a research question? Even if you have an interest in a topic before you get started, you see the problem now: topics and issues are not research questions! A research question doesn’t easily emerge; it takes a lot of time to hone one, as the practice above should demonstrate. In some research designs, the research question doesn’t even get clearly articulated until the end of data collection . More on that later. But you must start somewhere, of course. Start with your chosen discipline. This might seem obvious, but it is often overlooked. There is a reason it is called a discipline. We tend to think of “sociology,” “public health,” and “physics” as so many clusters of courses that are linked together by subject matter, but they are also disciplines in the sense that the study of each focuses the mind in a particular way and for particular ends. For example, in my own field, sociology, there is a loosely shared commitment to social justice and a general “sociological imagination” that enables its practitioners to connect personal experiences to society at large and to historical forces. It is helpful to think of issues and questions that are germane to your discipline. Within that overall field, there may be a particular course or unit of study you found most interesting. Within that course or unit of study, there may be an issue that intrigued you. And finally, within that issue, there may be an aspect or topic that you want to know more about.

When I was pursuing my dissertation research, I was asked often, “Why did you choose to study intimate partner violence among Native American women?” This question is necessary, and each time I answered, it helped shape me into a better researcher. I was interested in intimate partner violence because I am a survivor. I didn’t have intentions to work with a particular population or demographic—that came from my own deep introspection on my role as a researcher. I always questioned my positionality: What privileges do I hold as an academic? How has public health extracted information from institutionally marginalized populations? How can I build bridges between communities using my position, knowledge, and power? Public health as a field would not exist without the contributions of Indigenous people. So I started hanging out with them at community events, making friends, and engaging in self-education. Through these organic relationships built with Native women in the community, I saw that intimate partner violence was a huge issue. This led me to partner with Indigenous organizations to pursue a better understanding of how Native survivors of intimate partner violence seek support.

—Susanna Y. Park, PhD, mixed-methods researcher in public health and author of “How Native Women Seek Support as Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence: A Mixed-Methods Study”

One of the most exciting and satisfying things about doing academic research is that whatever you end up researching can become part of the body of knowledge that we have collectively created. Don’t make the mistake of thinking that you are doing this all on your own from scratch. Without even being aware of it, no matter if you are a first-year undergraduate student or a fourth-year graduate student, you have been trained to think certain questions are interesting. The very fact that you are majoring in a particular field or have signed up for years of graduate study in a program testifies to some level of commitment to a discipline. What we are looking for, ideally, is that your research builds on in some way (as extension, as critique, as lateral move) previous research and so adds to what we, collectively, understand about the social world. It is helpful to keep this in mind, as it may inspire you and also help guide you through the process. The point is, you are not meant to be doing something no one has ever thought of before, even if you are trying to find something that does not exactly duplicate previous research: “You may be trying to be too clever—aiming to come up with a topic unique in the history of the universe, something that will have people swooning with admiration at your originality and intellectual precociousness. Don’t do it. It’s safer…to settle on an ordinary, middle-of-the-road topic that will lend itself to a nicely organized process of project management. That’s the clever way of proceeding.… You can always let your cleverness shine through during the stages of design, analysis, and write-up. Don’t make things more difficult for yourself than you need to do” ( Davies 2007:20 ).

Rubin ( 2021 ) suggests four possible ways to develop a research question (there are many more, of course, but this can get you started). One way is to start with a theory that interests you and then select a topic where you can apply that theory. For example, you took a class on gender and society and learned about the “glass ceiling.” You could develop a study that tests that theory in a setting that has not yet been explored—maybe leadership at the Oregon Country Fair. The second way is to start with a topic that interests you and then go back to the books to find a theory that might explain it. This is arguably more difficult but often much more satisfying. Ask your professors for help—they might have ideas of theories or concepts that could be relevant or at least give you an idea of what books to read. The third way is to be very clever and select a question that already combines the topic and the theory. Rubin gives as one example sentencing disparities in criminology—this is both a topic and a theory or set of theories. You then just have to figure out particulars like setting and sample. I don’t know if I find this third way terribly helpful, but it might help you think through the possibilities. The fourth way involves identifying a puzzle or a problem, which can be either theoretical (something in the literature just doesn’t seem to make sense and you want to tackle addressing it) or empirical (something happened or is happening, and no one really understands why—think, for example, of mass school shootings).

Once you think you have an issue or topic that is worth exploring, you will need to (eventually) turn that into a good research question. A good research question is specific, clear, and feasible .

Specific . How specific a research question needs to be is somewhat related to the disciplinary conventions and whether the study is conceived inductively or deductively. In deductive research, one begins with a specific research question developed from the literature. You then collect data to test the theory or hypotheses accompanying your research question. In inductive research, however, one begins with data collection and analysis and builds theory from there. So naturally, the research question is a bit vaguer. In general, the more closely aligned to the natural sciences (and thus the deductive approach), the more a very tight and specific research question (along with specific, focused hypotheses) is required. This includes disciplines like psychology, geography, public health, environmental science, and marine resources management. The more one moves toward the humanities pole (and the inductive approach), the more looseness is permitted, as there is a general belief that we go into the field to find what is there, not necessarily what we imagine we are looking for (see figure 4.2). Disciplines such as sociology, anthropology, and gender and sexuality studies and some subdisciplines of public policy/public administration are closer to the humanities pole in this sense.

Regardless of discipline and approach, however, it is a good idea for beginning researchers to create a research question as specific as possible, as this will serve as your guide throughout the process. You can tweak it later if needed, but start with something specific enough that you know what it is you are doing and why. It is more difficult to deal with ambiguity when you are starting out than later in your career, when you have a better handle on what you are doing. Being under a time constraint means the more specific the question, the better. Questions should always specify contexts, geographical locations, and time frames. Go back to your practice research questions and make sure that these are included.

Clear . A clear research question doesn’t only need to be intelligible to any reader (which, of course, it should); it needs to clarify any meanings of particular words or concepts (e.g., What is excessive force?). Check all your concepts to see if there are ways you can clarify them further—for example, note that we shifted from impact of debt to impact of high debt load and specified this as beginning at $30,000. Ideally, we would use the literature to help us clarify what a high debt load is or how to define “excessive” force.

Feasible . In order to know if your question is feasible, you are going to have to think a little bit about your entire research design. For example, a question that asks about the real-time impact of COVID restrictions on learning outcomes would require a time machine. You could tweak the question to ask instead about the long-term impacts of COVID restrictions, as measured two years after their end. Or let’s say you are interested in assessing the damage of opioid abuse on small-town communities across the United States. Is it feasible to cover the entire US? You might need a team of researchers to do this if you are planning on on-the-ground observations. Perhaps a case study of one particular community might be best. Then your research question needs to be changed accordingly.

Here are some things to consider in terms of feasibility:

• Is the question too general for what you actually intend to do or examine? (Are you specifying the world when you only have time to explore a sliver of that world?)
• Is the question suitable for the time you have available? (You will need different research questions for a study that can be completed in a term than one where you have one to two years, as in a master’s program, or even three to eight years, as in a doctoral program.)
• Is the focus specific enough that you know where and how to begin?
• What are the costs involved in doing this study, including time? Will you need to travel somewhere, and if so, how will you pay for it?
• Will there be problems with “access”? (More on this in later chapters, but for now, consider how you might actually find people to interview or places to observe and whether gatekeepers exist who might keep you out.)
• Will you need to submit an application proposal for your university’s IRB (institutional review board)? If you are doing any research with live human subjects, you probably need to factor in the time and potential hassle of an IRB review (see chapter 8). If you are under severe time constraints, you might need to consider developing a research question that can be addressed with secondary sources, online content, or historical archives (see chapters 16 and 17).

In addition to these practicalities, you will also want to consider the research question in terms of what is best for you now. Are you engaged in research because you are required to be—jumping a hurdle for a course or for your degree? If so, you really do want to think about your project as training and develop a question that will allow you to practice whatever data collection and analysis techniques you want to develop. For example, if you are a grad student in a public health program who is interested in eventually doing work that requires conducting interviews with patients, develop a research question and research design that is interview based. Focus on the practicality (and practice) of the study more than the theoretical impact or academic contribution, in other words. On the other hand, if you are a PhD candidate who is seeking an academic position in the future, your research question should be pitched in a way to build theoretical knowledge as well (the phrasing is typically “original contribution to scholarship”).

The more time you have to devote to the study and the larger the project, the more important it is to reflect on your own motivations and goals when crafting a research question (remember chapter 2?). By “your own motivations and goals,” I mean what interests you about the social world and what impact you want your research to have, both academically and practically speaking. Many students have secret (or not-so-secret) plans to make the world a better place by helping address climate change, pointing out pressure points to fight inequities, or bringing awareness to an overlooked area of concern. My own work in graduate school was motivated by the last of these three—the not-so-secret goal of my research was to raise awareness about obstacles to success for first-generation and working-class college students. This underlying goal motivated me to complete my dissertation in a timely manner and then to further continue work in this area and see my research get published. I cared enough about the topic that I was not ready to put it away. I am still not ready to put it away. I encourage you to find topics that you can’t put away, ever. That will keep you going whenever things get difficult in the research process, as they inevitably will.

On the other hand, if you are an undergraduate and you really have very little time, some of the best advice I have heard is to find a study you really like and adapt it to a new context. Perhaps you read a study about how students select majors and how this differs by class ( Hurst 2019 ). You can try to replicate the study on a small scale among your classmates. Use the same research question, but revise for your context. You can probably even find the exact questions I  used and ask them in the new sample. Then when you get to the analysis and write-up, you have a comparison study to guide you, and you can say interesting things about the new context and whether the original findings were confirmed (similar) or not. You can even propose reasons why you might have found differences between one and the other.

Another way of thinking about research questions is to explicitly tie them to the type of purpose of your study. Of course, this means being very clear about what your ultimate purpose is! Marshall and Rossman ( 2016 ) break down the purpose of a study into four categories: exploratory, explanatory, descriptive, and emancipatory ( 78 ). Exploratory purpose types include wanting to investigate little-understood phenomena, or identifying or discovering important new categories of meaning, or generating hypotheses for further research. For these, research questions might be fairly loose: What is going on here? How are people interacting on this site? What do people talk about when you ask them about the state of the world? You are almost (but never entirely) starting from scratch. Be careful though—just because a topic is new to you does not mean it is really new. Someone else (or many other someones) may already have done this exploratory research. Part of your job is to find this out (more on this in “What Is a ‘Literature Review’?” in chapter 9). Descriptive purposes (documenting and describing a phenomenon) are similar to exploratory purposes but with a much clearer goal (description). A good research question for a descriptive study would specify the actions, events, beliefs, attitudes, structures, and/or processes that will be described.

Most researchers find that their topic has already been explored and described, so they move to trying to explain a relationship or phenomenon. For these, you will want research questions that capture the relationships of interest. For example, how does gender influence one’s understanding of police brutality (because we already know from the literature that it does, so now we are interested in understanding how and why)? Or what is the relationship between education and climate change denialism? If you find that prior research has already provided a lot of evidence about those relationships as well as explanations for how they work, and you want to move the needle past explanation into action, you might find yourself trying to conduct an emancipatory study. You want to be even more clear in acknowledging past research if you find yourself here. Then create a research question that will allow you to “create opportunities and the will to engage in social action” ( Marshall and Rossman 2016:78 ). Research questions might ask, “How do participants problematize their circumstances and take positive social action?” If we know that some students have come together to fight against student debt, how are they doing this, and with what success? Your purpose would be to help evaluate possibilities for social change and to use your research to make recommendations for more successful emancipatory actions.

Recap: Be specific. Be clear. Be practical. And do what you love.

Choosing an Approach or Tradition

Qualitative researchers may be defined as those who are working with data that is not in numerical form, but there are actually multiple traditions or approaches that fall under this broad category. I find it useful to know a little bit about the history and development of qualitative research to better understand the differences in these approaches. The following chart provides an overview of the six phases of development identified by Denzin and Lincoln ( 2005 ):

Table 4.1. Six Phases of Development

There are other ways one could present the history as well. Feminist theory and methodologies came to the fore in the 1970s and 1980s and had a lot to do with the internal critique of more positivist approaches. Feminists were quite aware that standpoint matters—that the identity of the researcher plays a role in the research, and they were ardent supporters of dismantling unjust power systems and using qualitative methods to help advance this mission. You might note, too, that many of the internal disputes were basically epistemological disputes about how we know what we know and whether one’s social location/position delimits that knowledge. Today, we are in a bountiful world of qualitative research, one that embraces multiple forms of knowing and knowledge. This is good, but it means that you, the student, have more choice when it comes to situating your study and framing your research question, and some will expect you to signal the choices you have made in any research protocols you write or publications and presentations.

Creswell’s ( 1998 ) definition of qualitative research includes the notion of distinct traditions of inquiry: “Qualitative research is an inquiry process of understanding based on distinct methodological traditions of inquiry that explore a social or human problem. The research builds complex,   holistic pictures, analyzes words, reports detailed views of informants , and conducted the study in a natural setting” (15; emphases added). I usually caution my students against taking shelter under one of these approaches, as, practically speaking, there is a lot of mixing of traditions among researchers. And yet it is useful to know something about the various histories and approaches, particularly as you are first starting out. Each tradition tends to favor a particular epistemological perspective (see chapter 3), a way of reasoning (see “ Advanced: Inductive versus Deductive Reasoning ”), and a data-collection technique.

There are anywhere from ten to twenty “traditions of inquiry,” depending on how one draws the boundaries. In my accounting, there are twelve, but three approaches tend to dominate the field.

Ethnography

Ethnography was developed from the discipline of anthropology, as the study of (other) culture(s). From a relatively positivist/objective approach to writing down the “truth” of what is observed during the colonial era (where this “truth” was then often used to help colonial administrators maintain order and exploit people and extract resources more effectively), ethnography was adopted by all kinds of social science researchers to get a better understanding of how groups of people (various subcultures and cultures) live their lives. Today, ethnographers are more likely to be seeking to dismantle power relations than to support them. They often study groups of people that are overlooked and marginalized, and sometimes they do the obverse by demonstrating how truly strange the familiar practices of the dominant group are. Ethnography is also central to organizational studies (e.g., How does this institution actually work?) and studies of education (e.g., What is it like to be a student during the COVID era?).

Ethnographers use methods of participant observation and intensive fieldwork in their studies, often living or working among the group under study for months at a time (and, in some cases, years). I’ve called this “deep ethnography,” and it is the subject of chapter 14. The data ethnographers analyze are copious “field notes” written while in the field, often supplemented by in-depth interviews and many more casual conversations. The final product of ethnographers is a “thick” description of the culture. This makes reading ethnographies enjoyable, as the goal is to write in such a way that the reader feels immersed in the culture.

There are variations on the ethnography, such as the autoethnography , where the researcher uses a systematic and rigorous study of themselves to better understand the culture in which they find themselves. Autoethnography is a relatively new approach, even though it is derived from one of the oldest approaches. One can say that it takes to heart the feminist directive to “make the personal political,” to underscore the connections between personal experiences and larger social and political structures. Introspection becomes the primary data source.

Grounded Theory

Grounded Theory holds a special place in qualitative research for a few reasons, not least of which is that nonqualitative researchers often mistakenly believe that Grounded Theory is the only qualitative research methodology . Sometimes, it is easier for students to explain what they are doing as “Grounded Theory” because it sounds “more scientific” than the alternative descriptions of qualitative research. This is definitely part of its appeal. Grounded Theory is the name given to the systematic inductive approach first developed by Glaser and Strauss in 1967, The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research . Too few people actually read Glaser and Strauss’s book. It is both groundbreaking and fairly unremarkable at the same time. As a historical intervention into research methods generally, it is both a sharp critique of positivist methods in the social sciences (theory testing) and a rejection of purely descriptive accounts-building qualitative research. Glaser and Strauss argued for an approach whose goal was to construct (middle-level) theories from recursive data analysis of nonnumerical data (interviews and observations). They advocated a “constant comparative method” in which coding and analysis take place simultaneously and recursively. The demands are fairly strenuous. If done correctly, the result is the development of a new theory about the social world.

So why do I call this “fairly unremarkable”? To some extent, all qualitative research already does what Glaser and Strauss ( 1967 ) recommend, albeit without denoting the processes quite so specifically. As will be seen throughout the rest of this textbook, all qualitative research employs some “constant comparisons” through recursive data analyses. Where Grounded Theory sets itself apart from a significant number of qualitative research projects, however, is in its dedication to inductively building theory. Personally, I think it is important to understand that Glaser and Strauss were rejecting deductive theory testing in sociology when they first wrote their book. They were part of a rising cohort who rejected the positivist mathematical approaches that were taking over sociology journals in the 1950s and 1960s. Here are some of the comments and points they make against this kind of work:

Accurate description and verification are not so crucial when one’s purpose is to generate theory. ( 28 ; further arguing that sampling strategies are different when one is not trying to test a theory or generalize results)

Illuminating perspectives are too often suppressed when the main emphasis is verifying theory. ( 40 )

Testing for statistical significance can obscure from theoretical relevance. ( 201 )

Instead, they argued, sociologists should be building theories about the social world. They are not physicists who spend time testing and refining theories. And they are not journalists who report descriptions. What makes sociologists better than journalists and other professionals is that they develop theory from their work “In their driving efforts to get the facts [research sociologists] tend to forget that the distinctive offering of sociology to our society is sociological theory, not research description” ( 30–31 ).

Grounded Theory’s inductive approach can be off-putting to students who have a general research question in mind and a working hypothesis. The true Grounded Theory approach is often used in exploratory studies where there are no extant theories. After all, the promise of this approach is theory generation, not theory testing. Flying totally free at the start can be terrifying. It can also be a little disingenuous, as there are very few things under the sun that have not been considered before. Barbour ( 2008:197 ) laments that this approach is sometimes used because the researcher is too lazy to read the relevant literature.

To summarize, Glaser and Strauss justified the qualitative research project in a way that gave it standing among the social sciences, especially vis-à-vis quantitative researchers. By distinguishing the constant comparative method from journalism, Glaser and Strauss enabled qualitative research to gain legitimacy.

So what is it exactly, and how does one do it? The following stages provide a succinct and basic overview, differentiating the portions that are similar to/in accordance with qualitative research methods generally and those that are distinct from the Grounded Theory approach:

Step 1. Select a case, sample, and setting (similar—unless you begin with a theory to test!).

Step 2. Begin data collection (similar).

Step 3. Engage data analysis (similar in general but specificity of details somewhat unique to Grounded Theory): (1) emergent coding (initial followed by focused), (2) axial (a priori) coding , (3) theoretical coding , (4) creation of theoretical categories; analysis ends when “theoretical saturation ” has been achieved.

Grounded Theory’s prescriptive (i.e., it has a set of rules) framework can appeal to beginning students, but it is unnecessary to adopt the entire approach in order to make use of some of its suggestions. And if one does not exactly follow the Grounded Theory rulebook, it can mislead others if you tend to call what you are doing Grounded Theory when you are not:

Grounded theory continues to be a misunderstood method, although many researchers purport to use it. Qualitative researchers often claim to conduct grounded theory studies without fully understanding or adopting its distinctive guidelines. They may employ one or two of the strategies or mistake qualitative analysis for grounded theory. Conversely, other researchers employ grounded theory methods in reductionist, mechanistic ways. Neither approach embodies the flexible yet systematic mode of inquiry, directed but open-ended analysis, and imaginative theorizing from empirical data that grounded theory methods can foster. Subsequently, the potential of grounded theory methods for generating middle-range theory has not been fully realized ( Charmaz 2014 ).

Phenomenology

Where Grounded Theory sets itself apart for its inductive systematic approach to data analysis, phenomenologies are distinct for their focus on what is studied—in this case, the meanings of “lived experiences” of a group of persons sharing a particular event or circumstance. There are phenomenologies of being working class ( Charlesworth 2000 ), of the tourist experience ( Cohen 1979 ), of Whiteness ( Ahmed 2007 ). The phenomenon of interest may also be an emotion or circumstance. One can study the phenomenon of “White rage,” for example, or the phenomenon of arranged marriage.

The roots of phenomenology lie in philosophy (Husserl, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, Sartre) but have been adapted by sociologists in particular. Phenomenologists explore “how human beings make sense of experience and transform experience into consciousness, both individually and as shared meaning” ( Patton 2002:104 ).

One of the most important aspects of conducting a good phenomenological study is getting the sample exactly right so that each person can speak to the phenomenon in question. Because the researcher is interested in the meanings of an experience, in-depth interviews are the preferred method of data collection. Observations are not nearly as helpful here because people may do a great number of things without meaning to or without being conscious of their implications. This is important to note because phenomenologists are studying not “the reality” of what happens at all but an articulated understanding of a lived experience. When reading a phenomenological study, it is important to keep this straight—too often I have heard students critique a study because the interviewer didn’t actually see how people’s behavior might conflict with what they say (which is, at heart, an epistemological issue!).

In addition to the “big three,” there are many other approaches; some are variations, and some are distinct approaches in their own right. Case studies focus explicitly on context and dynamic interactions over time and can be accomplished with quantitative or qualitative methods or a mixture of both (for this reason, I am not considering it as one of the big three qualitative methods, even though it is a very common approach). Whatever methods are used, a contextualized deep understanding of the case (or cases) is central.

Critical inquiry is a loose collection of techniques held together by a core argument that understanding issues of power should be the focus of much social science research or, to put this another way, that it is impossible to understand society (its people and institutions) without paying attention to the ways that power relations and power dynamics inform and deform those people and institutions. This attention to power dynamics includes how research is conducted too. All research fundamentally involves issues of power. For this reason, many critical inquiry traditions include a place for collaboration between researcher and researched. Examples include (1) critical narrative analysis, which seeks to describe the meaning of experience for marginalized or oppressed persons or groups through storytelling; (2) participatory action research, which requires collaboration between the researcher and the research subjects or community of interest; and (3) critical race analysis, a methodological application of Critical Race Theory (CRT), which posits that racial oppression is endemic (if not always throughout time and place, at least now and here).

Do you follow a particular tradition of inquiry? Why?

Shawn Wilson’s book, Research Is Ceremony: Indigenous Research Methods , is my holy grail. It really flipped my understanding of research and relationships. Rather than thinking linearly and approaching research in a more canonical sense, Wilson shook my world view by drawing me into a pattern of inquiry that emphasized transparency and relational accountability. The Indigenous research paradigm is applicable in all research settings, and I follow it because it pushes me to constantly evaluate my position as a knowledge seeker and knowledge sharer.

Autoethnography takes the researcher as the subject. This is one approach that is difficult to explain to more quantitatively minded researchers, as it seems to violate many of the norms of “scientific research” as understood by them. First, the sample size is quite small—the n is 1, the researcher. Two, the researcher is not a neutral observer—indeed, the subjectivity of the researcher is the main strength of this approach. Autoethnographies can be extremely powerful for their depth of understanding and reflexivity, but they need to be conducted in their own version of rigor to stand up to scrutiny by skeptics. If you are skeptical, read one of the excellent published examples out there—I bet you will be impressed with what you take away. As they say, the proof is in the pudding on this approach.

Advanced: Inductive versus Deductive Reasoning

There has been a great deal of ink shed in the discussion of inductive versus deductive approaches, not all of it very instructive. Although there is a huge conceptual difference between them, in practical terms, most researchers cycle between the two, even within the same research project. The simplest way to explain the difference between the two is that we are using deductive reasoning when we test an existing theory (move from general to particular), and we are using inductive reasoning when we are generating theory (move from particular to general). Figure 4.2 provides a schematic of the deductive approach. From the literature, we select a theory about the impact of student loan debt: student loan debt will delay homeownership among young adults. We then formulate a hypothesis based on this theory: adults in their thirties with high debt loads will be less likely to own homes than their peers who do not have high debt loads. We then collect data to test the hypothesis and analyze the results. We find that homeownership is substantially lower among persons of color and those who were the first in their families to graduate from college. Notably, high debt loads did not affect homeownership among White adults whose parents held college degrees. We thus refine the theory to match the new findings: student debt loads delay homeownership among some young adults, thereby increasing inequalities in this generation. We have now contributed new knowledge to our collective corpus.

The inductive approach is contrasted in figure 4.3. Here, we did not begin with a preexisting theory or previous literature but instead began with an observation. Perhaps we were conducting interviews with young adults who held high amounts of debt and stumbled across this observation, struck by how many were renting apartments or small houses. We then noted a pattern—not all the young adults we were talking to were renting; race and class seemed to play a role here. We would then probably expand our study in a way to be able to further test this developing theory, ensuring that we were not seeing anomalous patterns. Once we were confident about our observations and analyses, we would then develop a theory, coming to the same place as our deductive approach, but in reverse.

A third form of reasoning, abductive (sometimes referred to as probabilistic reasoning) was developed in the late nineteenth century by American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce. I have included some articles for further reading for those interested.

Among social scientists, the deductive approach is often relaxed so that a research question is set based on the existing literature rather than creating a hypothesis or set of hypotheses to test. Some journals still require researchers to articulate hypotheses, however. If you have in mind a publication, it is probably a good idea to take a look at how most articles are organized and whether specific hypotheses statements are included.

Table 4.2. Twelve Approaches. Adapted from Patton 2002:132-133.

Further Readings

The following readings have been examples of various approaches or traditions of inquiry:

Ahmed, Sara. 2007. “A Phenomenology of Whiteness.” Feminist Theory 8(2):149–168.

Charlesworth, Simon. 2000. A Phenomenology of Working-Class Experience . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.*

Clandinin, D. Jean, and F. Michael Connelly. 2000. Narrative Inquiry: Experience and Story in Qualitative Research . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cohen, E. 1979. “A Phenomenology of Tourist Experiences.” Sociology 13(2):179–201.

Cooke, Bill, and Uma Kothari, eds. 2001. Participation: The New Tyranny? London: Zed Books. A critique of participatory action.

Corbin, Juliet, and Anselm Strauss. 2008. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory . 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Crabtree, B. F., and W. L. Miller, eds. 1999. Doing Qualitative Research: Multiple Strategies . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Creswell, John W. 1997. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Glaser, Barney G., and Anselm Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research . New York: Aldine.

Gobo, Giampetro, and Andrea Molle. 2008. Doing Ethnography . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Hancock, Dawson B., and Bob Algozzine. 2016. Doing Case Study Research: A Practical Guide for Beginning Research . 3rd ed. New York: Teachers College Press.

Harding, Sandra. 1987. Feminism and Methodology . Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Husserl, Edmund. (1913) 2017. Ideas: Introduction to Pure Phenomenology . Eastford, CT: Martino Fine Books.

Rose, Gillian. 2012. Visual Methodologies . 3rd ed. London: SAGE.

Van der Riet, M. 2009. “Participatory Research and the Philosophy of Social Science: Beyond the Moral Imperative.” Qualitative Inquiry 14(4):546–565.

Van Manen, Max. 1990. Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy . Albany: State University of New York.

Wortham, Stanton. 2001. Narratives in Action: A Strategy for Research and Analysis . New York: Teachers College Press.

Inductive, Deductive, and Abductive Reasoning and Nomothetic Science in General

Aliseda, Atocha. 2003. “Mathematical Reasoning vs. Abductive Reasoning: A Structural Approach.” Synthese 134(1/2):25–44.

Bonk, Thomas. 1997. “Newtonian Gravity, Quantum Discontinuity and the Determination of Theory by Evidence.” Synthese 112(1):53–73. A (natural) scientific discussion of inductive reasoning.

Bonnell, Victoria E. 1980. “The Uses of Theory, Concepts and Comparison in Historical Sociology.” C omparative Studies in Society and History 22(2):156–173.

Crane, Mark, and Michael C. Newman. 1996. “Scientific Method in Environmental Toxicology.” Environmental Reviews 4(2):112–122.

Huang, Philip C. C., and Yuan Gao. 2015. “Should Social Science and Jurisprudence Imitate Natural Science?” Modern China 41(2):131–167.

Mingers, J. 2012. “Abduction: The Missing Link between Deduction and Induction. A Comment on Ormerod’s ‘Rational Inference: Deductive, Inductive and Probabilistic Thinking.’” Journal of the Operational Research Society 63(6):860–861.

Ormerod, Richard J. 2010. “Rational Inference: Deductive, Inductive and Probabilistic Thinking.” Journal of the Operational Research Society 61(8):1207–1223.

Perry, Charner P. 1927. “Inductive vs. Deductive Method in Social Science Research.” Southwestern Political and Social Science Quarterly 8(1):66–74.

Plutynski, Anya. 2011. “Four Problems of Abduction: A Brief History.” HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 1(2):227–248.

Thompson, Bruce, and Gloria M. Borrello. 1992. “Different Views of Love: Deductive and Inductive Lines of Inquiry.” Current Directions in Psychological Science 1(5):154–156.

Tracy, Sarah J. 2012. “The Toxic and Mythical Combination of a Deductive Writing Logic for Inductive Qualitative Research.” Qualitative Communication Research 1(1):109–141.

A place or collection containing records, documents, or other materials of historical interest; most universities have an archive of material related to the university’s history, as well as other “special collections” that may be of interest to members of the community.

A person who introduces the researcher to a field site’s culture and population.  Also referred to as guides.  Used in ethnography .

A form of research and a methodological tradition of inquiry in which the researcher uses self-reflection and writing to explore personal experiences and connect this autobiographical story to wider cultural, political, and social meanings and understandings.  “Autoethnography is a research method that uses a researcher's personal experience to describe and critique cultural beliefs, practices, and experiences” ( Adams, Jones, and Ellis 2015 ).

The philosophical framework in which research is conducted; the approach to “research” (what practices this entails, etc.).  Inevitably, one’s epistemological perspective will also guide one’s methodological choices, as in the case of a constructivist who employs a Grounded Theory approach to observations and interviews, or an objectivist who surveys key figures in an organization to find out how that organization is run.  One of the key methodological distinctions in social science research is that between quantitative and qualitative research.

The process of labeling and organizing qualitative data to identify different themes and the relationships between them; a way of simplifying data to allow better management and retrieval of key themes and illustrative passages.  See coding frame and  codebook.

A later stage coding process used in Grounded Theory in which data is reassembled around a category, or axis.

A later stage-coding process used in Grounded Theory in which key words or key phrases capture the emergent theory.

The point at which you can conclude data collection because every person you are interviewing, the interaction you are observing, or content you are analyzing merely confirms what you have already noted.  Achieving saturation is often used as the justification for the final sample size.

A methodological tradition of inquiry that focuses on the meanings held by individuals and/or groups about a particular phenomenon (e.g., a “phenomenology of whiteness” or a “phenomenology of first-generation college students”).  Sometimes this is referred to as understanding “the lived experience” of a particular group or culture.  Interviews form the primary tool of data collection for phenomenological studies.  Derived from the German philosophy of phenomenology (Husserl 1913; 2017).

The number of individuals (or units) included in your sample

A form of reasoning which employs a “top-down” approach to drawing conclusions: it begins with a premise or hypothesis and seeks to verify it (or disconfirm it) with newly collected data.  Inferences are made based on widely accepted facts or premises.  Deduction is idea-first, followed by observations and a conclusion.  This form of reasoning is often used in quantitative research and less often in qualitative research.  Compare to inductive reasoning .  See also abductive reasoning .

A form of reasoning that employs a “bottom-up” approach to drawing conclusions: it begins with the collection of data relevant to a particular question and then seeks to build an argument or theory based on an analysis of that data.  Induction is observation first, followed by an idea that could explain what has been observed.  This form of reasoning is often used in qualitative research and seldom used in qualitative research.  Compare to deductive reasoning .  See also abductive reasoning .

An “interpretivist” form of reasoning in which “most likely” conclusions are drawn, based on inference.  This approach is often used by qualitative researchers who stress the recursive nature of qualitative data analysis.  Compare with deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning .

A form of social science research that generally follows the scientific method as established in the natural sciences.  In contrast to idiographic research , the nomothetic researcher looks for general patterns and “laws” of human behavior and social relationships.  Once discovered, these patterns and laws will be expected to be widely applicable.  Quantitative social science research is nomothetic because it seeks to generalize findings from samples to larger populations.  Most qualitative social science research is also nomothetic, although generalizability is here understood to be theoretical in nature rather than statistical .  Some qualitative researchers, however, espouse the idiographic research paradigm instead.

Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods Copyright © 2023 by Allison Hurst is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base
• Starting the research process
• Writing Strong Research Questions | Criteria & Examples

Writing Strong Research Questions | Criteria & Examples

Published on October 26, 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on November 21, 2023.

A research question pinpoints exactly what you want to find out in your work. A good research question is essential to guide your research paper , dissertation , or thesis .

All research questions should be:

• Focused on a single problem or issue
• Researchable using primary and/or secondary sources
• Feasible to answer within the timeframe and practical constraints
• Specific enough to answer thoroughly
• Complex enough to develop the answer over the space of a paper or thesis
• Relevant to your field of study and/or society more broadly

Table of contents

How to write a research question, what makes a strong research question, using sub-questions to strengthen your main research question, research questions quiz, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about research questions.

You can follow these steps to develop a strong research question:

• Choose your topic
• Do some preliminary reading about the current state of the field
• Narrow your focus to a specific niche
• Identify the research problem that you will address

The way you frame your question depends on what your research aims to achieve. The table below shows some examples of how you might formulate questions for different purposes.

Using your research problem to develop your research question

Note that while most research questions can be answered with various types of research , the way you frame your question should help determine your choices.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Research questions anchor your whole project, so it’s important to spend some time refining them. The criteria below can help you evaluate the strength of your research question.

Focused and researchable

Feasible and specific

Complex and arguable

Relevant and original

Chances are that your main research question likely can’t be answered all at once. That’s why sub-questions are important: they allow you to answer your main question in a step-by-step manner.

Good sub-questions should be:

• Less complex than the main question
• Focused only on 1 type of research
• Presented in a logical order

Here are a few examples of descriptive and framing questions:

• Descriptive: According to current government arguments, how should a European bank tax be implemented?
• Descriptive: Which countries have a bank tax/levy on financial transactions?
• Framing: How should a bank tax/levy on financial transactions look at a European level?

Keep in mind that sub-questions are by no means mandatory. They should only be asked if you need the findings to answer your main question. If your main question is simple enough to stand on its own, it’s okay to skip the sub-question part. As a rule of thumb, the more complex your subject, the more sub-questions you’ll need.

Try to limit yourself to 4 or 5 sub-questions, maximum. If you feel you need more than this, it may be indication that your main research question is not sufficiently specific. In this case, it’s is better to revisit your problem statement and try to tighten your main question up.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

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

Methodology

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

 Statistics

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

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

The way you present your research problem in your introduction varies depending on the nature of your research paper . A research paper that presents a sustained argument will usually encapsulate this argument in a thesis statement .

A research paper designed to present the results of empirical research tends to present a research question that it seeks to answer. It may also include a hypothesis —a prediction that will be confirmed or disproved by your research.

As you cannot possibly read every source related to your topic, it’s important to evaluate sources to assess their relevance. Use preliminary evaluation to determine whether a source is worth examining in more depth.

This involves:

• Reading abstracts , prefaces, introductions , and conclusions
• Looking at the table of contents to determine the scope of the work
• Consulting the index for key terms or the names of important scholars

A research hypothesis is your proposed answer to your research question. The research hypothesis usually includes an explanation (“ x affects y because …”).

A statistical hypothesis, on the other hand, is a mathematical statement about a population parameter. Statistical hypotheses always come in pairs: the null and alternative hypotheses . In a well-designed study , the statistical hypotheses correspond logically to the research hypothesis.

Formulating a main research question can be a difficult task. Overall, your question should contribute to solving the problem that you have defined in your problem statement .

However, it should also fulfill criteria in three main areas:

• Researchability
• Feasibility and specificity
• Relevance and originality

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2023, November 21). Writing Strong Research Questions | Criteria & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved September 3, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/research-questions/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to define a research problem | ideas & examples, how to write a problem statement | guide & examples, 10 research question examples to guide your research project, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

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

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

Home Market Research

Qualitative Research Questions: What it is and how to write it

Qualitative research questions are like a compass that points researchers in the right direction to find rich stories, untangle complicated social relationships, and get a clear picture of how people act in subtle ways. Unlike their quantitative counterparts, these questions go beyond numbers and figures to explore the subjective, contextual, and complex parts of the human experience.

It’s well-established that all forms of research come with their own theories and implementation methods. Qualitative research is much the same. Qualitative research is conducted to understand the thought process of both the respondents as well as researchers. It usually is conducted in a natural setup where respondents will be their true selves and would respond transparently. 

Results achieved from this research will not be generalized to the entire population but asked research questions , and their vocabulary gives away the researcher’s motive making it easier for respondents to participate in qualitative market research .

LEARN ABOUT: Research Process Steps

Qualitative research survey questions are created to understand a particular topic better or to inspect a new subject to understand the nerve of respondent experiences.

Content Index

What are qualitative research questions?

How to write qualitative research questions, types of qualitative research questions, how to choose qualitative research questions, what should be the process of forming qualitative research questions and questionnaires.

Qualitative research questions are the inquiries that lead to qualitative research studies and investigations. They are meant to help people explore and understand phenomena, experiences, meanings, and views from the participant’s point of view. 

Different from quantitative research questions, which often try to measure and quantify variables, qualitative research questions try to understand the richness and complexity of human experiences and social events.

Most qualitative research questions are open-ended and allow for in-depth study. They want more than simple yes/no answers but instead want people to talk about their thoughts, feelings, views, and experiences. These questions try to find deeper meanings, patterns, and connections in a given situation.

Here are some examples of qualitative study questions in different fields:

• In psychology: How do individuals experience and cope with traumatic events?
• In sociology: What factors influence a student’s decision to pursue higher education?
• In anthropology: How do cultural norms and values shape gender roles in a specific community?
• In education: What are the challenges faced by teachers in implementing project-based learning in the classroom?
• In healthcare: What are the experiences and perspectives of patients undergoing long-term treatment for a chronic illness?

Qualitative research questions should be straightforward, specific, and tailored to the research’s goals. They guide the process of gathering data through interviews, observations, or document analysis and give a method for analyzing and interpreting data.

Writing the right qualitative research questions requires careful thought about the research goals, the event being studied, and the wanted level of understanding. Here are some tips to help you write good qualitative research questions:

Begin with a broad research question

Start by posing an all-encompassing question that probes the subject or phenomenon of interest. Exploring and learning from the answer to this open-ended question should be possible.

Specify the research objectives

Clearly state the objectives and purposes of your research. What do you want your qualitative study to accomplish? What facets or dimensions of the subject do you wish to investigate?

Focus on the phenomenon

Decide on whatever specific subject or phenomenon you want to research. Any pertinent topic, including social behavior, cultural customs, personal experiences, and more, may be used.

Use open-ended and exploratory language

In qualitative research, open-ended questions should be used to enable participants to offer thorough and in-depth responses. Avoid yes/no questions and queries with a one-word answer. Use words like “how,” “what,” “why,” or “describe” instead to compel people to express their thoughts and experiences.

LEARN ABOUT: Qualitative Interview

Consider the context and participants

Consider your research’s background as well as the qualities of your subjects. Make sure your qualitative methods are specific to the people you will be studying so that they are pertinent and meaningful to them.

Incorporate theory and literature

Your research questions should be based on pertinent theories and available literature. This gives your investigation a theoretical foundation and places your study within the body of knowledge.

Balance breadth and depth

When formulating your research topics, try to strike a balance between depth and breadth. To fully understand the subject, you should investigate it broadly to get a variety of viewpoints and intensively delve into certain areas.

Avoid leading or biased questions

Ensure your questions are neutral and unbiased. Avoid leading participants towards a particular response. Instead, create questions that allow participants to express their thoughts and experiences freely.

Pilot test your questions

Pilot-test your research questions with a small group of people before finalizing them. This will make it easier to spot any possible problems, ambiguities, or places where clarity may be increased.

Revise and refine

Revise and clarify your research questions based on the comments and understandings received from the pilot testing. Aim for consistency, coherence, and congruence with your research goals.

Remember, qualitative market research questions should be flexible and adaptable throughout the research process. They serve as a guide but may evolve as you delve deeper into the data and discover new insights.

LEARN ABOUT: Steps in Qualitative Research

There are several types of qualitative research questions focus that can be used to guide qualitative studies. Here are some common types:

1. Descriptive questions

These questions aim to describe and understand a phenomenon or topic in detail. They focus on providing a comprehensive account of the subject matter. For example:

• What are the experiences of individuals living with chronic pain?
• How do employees perceive the organizational culture in a specific company?

2. Exploratory questions

These questions are used to explore new or under-researched areas. They seek to gain a deeper understanding of a topic or phenomenon. For example:

• What are the factors influencing consumers’ decision-making process when purchasing organic food?
• How do teachers perceive the implementation of project-based learning in the classroom?

3. Experiential questions

These questions focus on understanding individuals’ experiences, perspectives, and subjective meanings related to a particular phenomenon. They aim to capture personal experiences and emotions. For example:

• What are the challenges first-generation college students face during their transition to higher education?
• How do individuals with social anxiety disorder experience social interactions?

4. Comparative questions

These questions involve comparing and contrasting different groups, contexts, or perspectives to identify similarities, differences, or patterns. They explore variations in experiences or phenomena. For example:

• How do parenting practices differ between cultures A and B in terms of child discipline?
• What are the similarities and differences in the coping strategies used by individuals with individuals and depression questionnaire with anxiety disorders?

5. Process-oriented questions

These questions focus on understanding a phenomenon’s processes, mechanisms, or dynamics. They aim to uncover how and why certain outcomes or behaviors occur. For example:

• What are the processes by which teams in a workplace reach a consensus on decision-making?
• How does the negotiation process unfold during conflict resolution in interpersonal relationships?

6. Theoretical questions

These questions seek to generate or refine theory. They explore concepts, relationships, or theoretical frameworks to contribute to the existing body of knowledge. For example:

• How does the concept of “self-efficacy” manifest in the context of entrepreneurship?
• What underlying mechanisms explain the relationship between social support and mental health outcomes?

These are just a few examples of the types of qualitative research questions that can be used. The specific type of question you choose will depend on your research objectives, the phenomenon under investigation, and the depth of understanding you aim to achieve.

Explore Insightfully Contextual Inquiry in Qualitative Research

Choosing a good qualitative research question involves a thoughtful and systematic approach to ensure they align with the objectives of your study and allows for an in-depth exploration of the topic. Here are some steps to help you choose effective qualitative research questions:

Identify your research objectives

Clearly define the purpose of your study. What do you want to explore or understand? What specific insights or knowledge are you seeking to gain through your market research?

Review existing literature

Conduct a thorough review of relevant literature to identify existing research gaps or areas requiring further exploration. This will help you understand the current state of knowledge and inform the development of your research questions.

Brainstorm potential qualitative research question

Generate a list of potential research questions that address your research objectives. Consider different angles, perspectives, and dimensions of your topic. Creating open-ended questions that allow for in-depth exploration rather than simple yes/no answers is important.

Prioritize and refine the questions

Evaluate the generated questions based on their relevance to your research objectives, feasibility, and potential to yield meaningful insights. Prioritize the questions that are most likely to provide rich and valuable data. Refine and rephrase the questions as needed to ensure clarity and focus.

Consider the research design and methodology

Take into account the specific qualitative research design and methodology you plan to use. Different research approaches, such as ethnography, interviews, focus groups, or case studies, may require different types of research questions. Ensure that your questions align with your chosen methodology and will help you gather the desired data.

Pilot test the questions

Before finalizing your research questions, consider conducting a pilot test with a small group of participants. This will allow you to assess your questions’ clarity, appropriateness, and effectiveness. Make necessary revisions based on the feedback received.

Seek feedback

Share your research questions with colleagues, mentors, or experts in your field for feedback and suggestions. They can provide valuable insights and help you refine your questions further.

Finalize your research questions

Based on the steps above, select a set of research questions that are well-aligned with your research objectives, provide scope for exploration, and are feasible within the resources and time available for your study.

1. Mention the purpose of conducting qualitative research. It can be in the form of either of these sentences:

• This study will be on the topic of ….
• The reason for conducting this research is ….

2. Create qualitative statements with a defined objective that can be easily communicated to the target audience .

Keep these pointers in mind while designing this statement:

• Try and form single-sentence statements. Single statements can be much more effective than elaborate ones as they help in communicating important messages in an impactful manner in a short and succinct sentence.
• Clarify the purpose of conducting qualitative research in clear words so that respondents understand their contribution to this research.
• Mention the main topic of research that would prompt respondents to have a clearer idea about what they’re getting into.
• It’s the words that make all the difference. Use qualitative words that demonstrate the quality or feeling behind your purpose, such as understanding, describing, explore.
• Specify details that you would want to communicate to your respondents.
• Mention the name of the research website.

3. Other than the primary qualitative questions, you must create sub-questions so that the purpose is executed in a better manner.

• The main question might be – “What is the state of illiteracy in your state?”
• You can create sub-questions such as: “How does illiteracy hamper progress in your state?” or “How would you best describe your feelings about illiteracy?”

4. Highlight these questions using ‘qualitative’ words:

• Start the questions with “What” or “How” to make sure the respondents provide details about their feelings.
• Communicate what you’re trying to “understand,” “explore,” or “identify” using this Qualitative research online survey questionnaire.
• Questions such as “What happened” can be asked to develop a description of the topic.
• Questions about “how did respondents interpret the what happened question” can be asked to examine the outcome.
• Understand the entire qualitative research process by asking questions about “What happened to you with time?”

5. Develop a skeleton to design the primary questions and also the sub-questions. For example:

• Primary Qualitative research survey question: “How do you think _______ (the main topic of research) means?” or “Describe _____(the main topic of research) as you’ve experienced.”
• Sub-question for qualitative research: “What _________ (characteristic) does __________ (respondents) interest in as a _________ (main topic of research)?”

LEARN ABOUT: Structured Questionnaire

Qualitative research questions are key to giving research studies depth and breadth. These questions go into the details and complexities of human experiences, perceptions, and behaviors. This helps researchers get a full picture of a certain occurrence. 

Qualitative research questions are meant to explore, describe, and make sense of subjective truths. Most of the time, they are open-ended, so people can say what they think and feel in their own words. 

QuestionPro is an online poll and research platform with several tools and features that can make it easier to make and use qualitative research questions. Its easy-to-use design and variety of question types help researchers collect qualitative data quickly and easily, improving the whole research process.

LEARN MORE         FREE TRIAL

MORE LIKE THIS

Interactive Forms: Key Features, Benefits, Uses + Design Tips

Sep 4, 2024

Closed-Loop Management: The Key to Customer Centricity

Sep 3, 2024

Net Trust Score: Tool for Measuring Trust in Organization

Sep 2, 2024

Why You Should Attend XDAY 2024

Aug 30, 2024

Other categories

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

Mass Communication Theory

Mass communication theory: from theory to practical application, writing good qualitative research questions.

Got a great handout a while back that I stumbled over today, hopefully it’s as helpful to you as it was to me. Here are the steps for writing good (mass communication of course) qualitative research questions:

Specify the research problem: the practical issue that leads to a need for your study.

Complete these sentences:

• “The topic for this study will be…”
• “This study needs to be conducted because…”

How to write a good qualitative purpose statement: a statement that provides the major objective or intent or roadmap to the study. Fulfill the following criteria:

• Single sentence
• Include the purpose of the study
• Include the central phenomenon
• Use qualitative words e.g. explore, understand, discover
• Note the participants (if any)
• State the research site

A good place to start: The purpose of this ______________ (narrative, phenomenological, grounded theory, ethnographic, case, etc.) study is (was? will be?) will be to ____________ (understand, describe, develop, discover) the _____________ (central phenomenon of the study) for ______________ (the participants) at (the site). At this stage in the research, the ___________ (central phenomenon) will be generally defined as ____________ (a general definition of the central concept).

Research questions serve to narrow the purpose. There are two types: Central

• The most general questions you could ask

Sub-questions

• Subdivides central question into more specific topical questions
• Limited number

Use good qualitative wording for these questions.

• Begin with words such as “how” or “what”
• Tell the reader what you are attempting to “discover,” “generate,” “explore,” “identify,” or “describe”
• Ask “what happened?” to help craft your description
• Ask “what was the meaning to people of what happened?” to understand your results
• Ask “what happened over time?” to explore the process

Avoid words such as: relate, influence, impact, effect, cause

Scripts to help design qualitative central and sub-questions: Central question script (usually use only one):

• “What does it mean to _________________ (central phenomenon)?”
• “How would ______________ (participants) describe (central phenomenon)?”

Sub-question script:

• “What _________ (aspect) does __________ (participant) engage in as a _____________ (central phenomenon)?”
• Cresswell. J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches.  Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
• Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. Principles of qualitative research: Designing a qualitative study. You can download the entire document here .
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)

19 thoughts on “ Writing Good Qualitative Research Questions ”

Pingback: 9 Tips to Conducting Accurate Qualitative Research – YUSA'AD

Pingback: Qualitative research methods : Optimal Workshop

Pingback: UX book review: Shane, the lone ethnographer — A beginner’s guide to ethnography : Optimal Workshop

very clear and helpful, thanks!

Pingback: 9 Tips to Conducting Accurate Qualitative Research – Like A Girl

Pingback: 9 Tips to Conducting Accurate Qualitative Research

Thank you helpful

Pingback: UX book review: Shane, the lone ethnographer — A beginner's guide to ethnography - Optimal Workshop

Pingback: Qualitative research methods - Optimal Workshop

Reblogged this on VeryVexed .

This is helpful, thank you.

Pingback: How to Write Survey Questions

This is incredibly helpful. Thank you!

Reblogged this on Writing Across the Curriculum @ Staten Island and commented: Some great ideas from the folks as masscommtheory.com!

You saved my sanity! Thanks so so much! Juli

Thanks for this. It was very simple and clear. A lot of the textbooks I am reading for my EdD aren’t as easy to understand!

Pingback: Beginners Guide to the Research Proposal | Mass Communication Theory

Pingback: claytonravine

Leave a comment Cancel reply

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

• DOI: 10.1080/09518390902736512
• Corpus ID: 54747338

Developing qualitative research questions: a reflective process

• Published 1 July 2009
• Sociology, Education
• International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education

541 Citations

Elements of research questions in relation to qualitative inquiry.

• Highly Influenced

Using Emphasis-Purposeful Sampling-Phenomenon of Interest–Context (EPPiC) Framework to Reflect on Two Qualitative Research Designs and Questions: A Reflective Process

Qualitative doctoral research in educational settings: reflecting on meaningful encounters, a review of the quality indicators of rigor in qualitative research, how to…write a good research question, qualitative methodology: a practical guide, policy feedback & research methods: how qualitative research designs with marginalized groups inform theory, pharmacy quality indicators of rigor in qualitative research, visually hypothesising in scientific paper writing: confirming and refuting qualitative research hypotheses using diagrams, adapting practices from qualitative research to tell a compelling story: a practical framework for conducting a literature review, 41 references, an introduction to qualitative research, designing qualitative research, a review of narrative ethics.

• Highly Influential

Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design

Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis kathy charmaz constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis sage 224 £19.99 0761973532 0761973532 [formula: see text]., recognizing respondents’ ways of being and knowing: lessons un/learned in researching asian immigrant and asian‐american teachers, reciprocal ethnography : no one said it was easy, qualitative analysis for social scientists, studying dialogical selves dialogically: multiple-horizon analysis of critical moments in the working life of theatre actors in two cultures, ''winks upon winks'': multiple lenses on settings in qualitative educational research, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Literature Searching

Types of Research Questions

Research questions can be categorized into different types, depending on the type of research to be undertaken.

Qualitative questions concern broad areas or more specific areas of research and focus on discovering, explaining and exploring.  Types of qualitative questions include:

• Exploratory Questions, which seeks to understand without influencing the results.  The objective is to learn more about a topic without bias or preconceived notions.
• Predictive Questions, which seek to understand the intent or future outcome around a topic.
• Interpretive Questions, which tries to understand people’s behavior in a natural setting.  The objective is to understand how a group makes sense of shared experiences with regards to various phenomena.

Quantitative questions prove or disprove a  researcher’s hypothesis and are constructed to express the relationship between variables  and whether this relationship is significant.  Types of quantitative questions include:

• Descriptive questions , which are the most basic type of quantitative research question and seeks to explain the when, where, why or how something occurred. 
• Comparative questions are helpful when studying groups with dependent variables where one variable is compared with another.
• Relationship-based questions try to answer whether or not one variable has an influence on another.  These types of question are generally used in experimental research questions.

References/Additional Resources

Lipowski, E. E. (2008). Developing great research questions . American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 65(17), 1667–1670.

Ratan, S. K., Anand, T., & Ratan, J. (2019). Formulation of Research Question - Stepwise Approach .  Journal of Indian Association of Pediatric Surgeons ,  24 (1), 15–20.

Fandino W.(2019). Formulating a good research question: Pearls and pitfalls . I ndian J Anaesth. 63(8) :611-616. 

Beck, L. L. (2023). The question: types of research questions and how to develop them . In Translational Surgery: Handbook for Designing and Conducting Clinical and Translational Research (pp. 111-120). Academic Press. 

Doody, O., & Bailey, M. E. (2016). Setting a research question, aim and objective. Nurse Researcher, 23(4), 19–23.

Plano Clark, V., & Badiee, M. (2010). Research questions in mixed methods research . In: SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research .  SAGE Publications, Inc.,

Agee, J. (2009). Developing qualitative research questions: A reflective process .  International journal of qualitative studies in education ,  22 (4), 431-447. 

Flemming, K., & Noyes, J. (2021). Qualitative Evidence Synthesis: Where Are We at? I nternational Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20.  

Research Question Frameworks

Research question frameworks have been designed to help structure research questions and clarify the main concepts. Not every question can fit perfectly into a framework, but using even just parts of a framework can help develop a well-defined research question. The framework to use depends on the type of question to be researched.   There are over 25 research question frameworks available.  The University of Maryland has a nice table listing out several of these research question frameworks, along with what the acronyms mean and what types of questions/disciplines that may be used for.

The process of developing a good research question involves taking your topic and breaking each aspect of it down into its component parts.

Booth, A., Noyes, J., Flemming, K., Moore, G., Tunçalp, Ö., & Shakibazadeh, E. (2019). Formulating questions to explore complex interventions within qualitative evidence synthesis.   BMJ global health ,  4 (Suppl 1), e001107. (See supplementary data#1)

The "Well-Built Clinical Question“: PICO(T)

One well-established framework that can be used both for refining questions and developing strategies is known as PICO(T). The PICO framework was designed primarily for questions that include interventions and comparisons, however other types of questions may also be able to follow its principles.  If the PICO(T) framework does not precisely fit your question, using its principles (see alternative component suggestions) can help you to think about what you want to explore even if you do not end up with a true PICO question.

A PICO(T) question has the following components:

• P : The patient’s disorder or disease or problem of interest / research object
• I: The intervention, exposure or finding under review / Application of a theory or method
• C: A comparison intervention or control (if applicable- not always present)/ Alternative theories or methods (or, in their absence, the null hypothesis)
• O : The outcome(s) (desired or of interest) / Knowledge generation
• T : (The time factor or period)

Keep in mind that solely using a tool will not enable you to design a good question. What is required is for you to think, carefully, about exactly what you want to study and precisely what you mean by each of the things that you think you want to study.

Rzany, & Bigby, M. (n.d.). Formulating Well-Built Clinical Questions. In Evidence-based dermatology / (pp. 27–30). Blackwell Pub/BMJ Books.  

Nishikawa-Pacher, A. (2022). Research questions with PICO: a universal mnemonic.   Publications ,  10 (3), 21.

• << Previous: Characteristics of a good research question
• Next: Choosing the Search Terms >>

Research Writing and Analysis

• NVivo Group and Study Sessions
• SPSS This link opens in a new window
• Statistical Analysis Group sessions
• Using Qualtrics
• Dissertation and Data Analysis Group Sessions
• Defense Schedule - Commons Calendar This link opens in a new window
• Research Process Flow Chart
• Research Alignment Chapter 1 This link opens in a new window
• Step 1: Seek Out Evidence
• Step 2: Explain
• Step 3: The Big Picture
• Step 4: Own It
• Step 5: Illustrate
• Annotated Bibliography
• Seminal Authors
• Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analyses
• How to Synthesize and Analyze
• Synthesis and Analysis Practice
• Synthesis and Analysis Group Sessions
• Problem Statement
• Purpose Statement
• Conceptual Framework
• Theoretical Framework
• Locating Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks This link opens in a new window
• Quantitative Research Questions

Qualitative Research Questions

• Trustworthiness of Qualitative Data
• Analysis and Coding Example- Qualitative Data
• Thematic Data Analysis in Qualitative Design
• Dissertation to Journal Article This link opens in a new window
• International Journal of Online Graduate Education (IJOGE) This link opens in a new window
• Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning (JRIT&L) This link opens in a new window

What’s in a Qualitative Research Question?

Qualitative research questions are driven by the need for the study. Ideally, research questions are formulated as a result of the problem and purpose, which leads to the identification of the methodology. When a qualitative methodology is chosen, research questions should be exploratory and focused on the actual phenomenon under study.

From the Dissertation Center, Chapter 1: Research Question Overview , there are several considerations when forming a qualitative research question. Qualitative research questions should

Below is an example of a qualitative phenomenological design. Note the use of the term “lived experience” in the central research question. This aligns with phenomenological design.

RQ1: “ What are the lived experiences of followers of mid-level managers in the financial services sector regarding their well-being on the job?”

If the researcher wants to focus on aspects of the theory used to support the study or dive deeper into aspects of the central RQ, sub-questions might be used. The following sub-questions could be formulated to seek further insight:

RQ1a.   “How do followers perceive the quality and adequacy of the leader-follower exchanges between themselves and their novice leaders?”

RQ1b.  “Under what conditions do leader-member exchanges affect a follower’s own level of well-being?”

Qualitative research questions also display the desire to explore or describe phenomena. Qualitative research seeks the lived experience, the personal experiences, the understandings, the meanings, and the stories associated with the concepts present in our studies.

We want to ensure our research questions are answerable and that we are not making assumptions about our sample. View the questions below:

How do healthcare providers perceive income inequality when providing care to poor patients?

In Example A, we see that there is no specificity of location or geographic areas. This could lead to findings that are varied, and the researcher may not find a clear pattern. Additionally, the question implies the focus is on “income inequality” when the actual focus is on the provision of care. The term “poor patients” can also be offensive, and most providers will not want to seem insensitive and may perceive income inequality as a challenge (of course!).

How do primary care nurses in outreach clinics describe providing quality care to residents of low-income urban neighborhoods?

In Example B, we see that there is greater specificity in the type of care provider. There is also a shift in language so that the focus is on how the individuals describe what they think about, experience, and navigate providing quality care.

Other Qualitative Research Question Examples

Vague : What are the strategies used by healthcare personnel to assist injured patients?

Try this : What is the experience of emergency room personnel in treating patients with a self-inflicted household injury?

The first question is general and vague. While in the same topic area, the second question is more precise and gives the reader a specific target population and a focus on the phenomenon they would have experienced. This question could be in line with a phenomenological study as we are seeking their experience or a case study as the ER personnel are a bounded entity.

Unclear : How do students experience progressing to college?

Try this : How do first-generation community members describe the aspects of their culture that promote aspiration to postsecondary education?

The first question does not have a focus on what progress is or what students are the focus. The second question provides a specific target population and provides the description to be provided by the participants. This question could be in line with a descriptive study.

• << Previous: Quantitative Research Questions
• Next: Trustworthiness of Qualitative Data >>
• Last Updated: Aug 30, 2024 8:27 AM
• URL: https://resources.nu.edu/researchtools

Login | Register

• Current Issues
• Previous Issues
• Editorial Team
• Managerial Board
• Become a Reviewer
• Submission Guidelines
• Harvard Citation Style
• Vancouver Citation Style
• APA Citation Style
• Download RIS
• Download BibTeX

Thematically Synthesizing the Qualitative Evidence Reporting the Impact of Poverty Alleviation Programs in Low-income Communities in South Africa: A Review

• Madoda Sitshange (University of Stellenbosch)

Significant poverty levels raise critical questions about the impact of poverty eradication programs. Literature reviews play a critical role in highlighting impactful and ineffective socio-economic approaches. This article presents a review of nine qualitative studies that were reported between 2006 and 2013 in poor urban, semi-rural, and rural communities in South Africa. The main goal of this paper is to describe how low-income communities were impacted by programs to reduce poverty. Themes on strength-based interventions, participation, and holistic-multidimensional approaches, emerge from the content analysis as the best account of the impact of community-based poverty eradication programs. Due to the qualitative nature of the small sample of studies under review, a thematic synthesis of the qualitative data provides baseline evidence for further research to assess progress in the provision of development programs, and to generate more insight to strengthen evidence-informed approaches to address persistently high rates of poverty.

Keywords: poverty eradication, community-based programs, thematic synthesis, systematic review, qualitative evidence, social development

Sitshange, M., (2024) “Thematically Synthesizing the Qualitative Evidence Reporting the Impact of Poverty Alleviation Programs in Low-income Communities in South Africa: A Review”, Social Development Issues 46(3): 7. doi: https://doi.org/10.3998/sdi.6771

Downloads: Download XML Download PDF

11 Downloads

Published on 04 sep 2024, peer reviewed, creative commons attribution 4.0, introduction.

A higher rate of poverty indicates that South Africa might not reach the 2030 National Development Plan (NDP) target of reducing poverty-induced hunger to 0 percent ( National Development Plan, 2012 ). The Human Development Report (HDR) presented data showing that 18.9 percent of the population, about 11 million South Africans, live on less than R28 ($1.90) for a day. In terms of the Human Development Index, a measurement of equality developed by the United Nations (UN) that ranks countries by analyzing their quality of life against their rate of industrial development, ranked South Africa 114 out of 189 countries due to its declining standard of living and deepening income inequality ( Human Development Report, 2022 ). Since the COVID-19 pandemic, inequality worsened as the country has dropped two levels lower on the index as a result of more than 2 million job losses ( Human Development Report, 2022 ; World Bank, 2022 ).

Consistent with the statistics that are reported by global development agencies, Statistics South Africa reported that 55.5 percent of the South African population could not afford to meet their basic needs ( Stats SA, 2017 ). In terms of the Gini coefficient index, which measures inequality on a scale from 0 to 1 (where the higher values indicate higher inequality), inequality rose from 0.66 in 1993 to 0.72 in 2006: despite a decrease from 2006 to 0.68 in 2015, South Africa is the most unequal country in the world ( Stats SA, 2017 ). The World Inequality Report presented data showing that in 2014 the richest 10 percent of the population received two-thirds of the national income, while the top 1 percent received 20 percent of the national income ( Alvaredo, Chancel, Piketty, Saez, & Zucman, 2018 ).

Women make up a large percentage of the poor. Compared to male-headed households, poverty is consistently higher in female-headed households. In 2015, poverty was found to be 51.2 percent among female-headed households compared to 31.4 percent in male-headed households ( Stats SA, 2019 ). Gender “…disparities are still predominant in South Africa’s labor market with unemployment at 29.5 for women and 26.1 for men” (National Development Agency, 2019:10). In addition to gender inequality, racial disparities continue to define post-apartheid South Africa socio-economic fault lines. While the post-1994 government social and economic transformation policies improved the living conditions of many black South Africans, many still live in poverty. Unemployment rates are 30.5 percent for black Africans and 8 percent for whites. Race still affects the ability to find a job, as well as the wages received once employed ( World Bank, 2018 ).

Literature Review

The reviewer’s content analysis of the qualitative studies under review was guided by theoretical perspectives in poverty studies. According to Bradshaw (2007) , five main theoretical perspectives provide a comprehensive view of the causes, effects, and solutions to poverty: (1) Individual deficiencies, (2) Cultural belief systems that support subcultures in poverty, (3) Political-economic distortions, (4) Geographical disparities, or (5) Cumulative and circumstantial origins.

Theoretical perspectives on poverty that proffer individualistic, systematic, and cyclical explanations are summarized in Table 1 advanced into a variety of multidimensional perspectives that inform contemporary analysis and research. According to Adetoro, Ngidi, and Danso-Abbeam (2023), “a multidimensional approach has been developed to analyze a wide range of multiple poverty interrelated levels involving severe deprivation of basic human needs, such as health, education, income-generation and living standards”. The Human Development Report (2022) links the concept of multidimensional poverty with a lack of clean water, inadequate access to healthcare services, malnutrition, poor health, and poor housing conditions.

Five theories of poverty

Source: Adopted from Bradshaw (2007) .

There seem to be definite areas of alignment between the South African social security system and the multidimensional poverty formulation. The Department of Social Development provides comprehensive social assistance programs for indigent individuals and families to access a range of benefits such as cash transfers, food aid, and a range of welfare services. Free basic education, free health care, and free social housing are part of social benefits that are provided by housing, health, and education government departments. A multi-departmental approach that collectively provides a range of poverty reduction programs is consistent with a multidimensional theoretical approach to poverty that is applied on a national scale to address inequality, vulnerability, and urban-to-rural poverty ( Mert & Kadioglu, 2016 ). Uni-dimensional assessments of poverty that look at monetary value and consumption, in conjunction with broader multi-dimensional approaches that focus on child poverty, early childhood development and literacy, are indicative of a dynamic theory of poverty that incorporates most of the elements in Bradshaw’s (2007) theory of poverty which considers individualistic to economic-political factors.

Zizzamia, Schotte, and Leibbrandt (2019) posit the concept of poverty dynamics, as referring to a fluid state where individuals, families, and communities experience cyclical periods of chronic poverty, transient poverty, and vulnerable poverty. In expanding on the poverty dynamics perspective, Schotte, Zizzamia, and Leibbrandt (2018) define fluid and cyclical poverty situations as conditions where the chronic poor are trapped in poverty, the transient poor are classified as below the poverty line but with above-average chances of escaping poverty, and the vulnerable are classified as above the poverty line but with above-average chances of falling into poverty. In terms of the poverty dynamics theory, a considerable share of the South African population can be classified as the transient poor and the vulnerable group, estimated as 27 percent of the population ( Zizzamia et al., 2019 ). The poverty dynamics theory draws attention to the rural and urban working poor as most vulnerable due to economic instability and volatile labor markets, irregular forms of employment, and government incompetence, which makes poverty a constant threat in their daily lives, hence are the largest population group that are beneficiaries of poverty alleviation programs.

Contextualization

Meta-synthesizing several qualitative studies sharing similar themes and methods is a well-tested scientific method for assessing and presenting broader experiences ( Graham & Masters-Awatere, 2020 ), which only some research studies can provide. The overriding aim of this article is to present a review of a small sample of primary research studies, that apply qualitative procedures to report data on the impact of poverty eradication programs, by addressing the following questions: In what ways did beneficiaries of community-based poverty eradication programs describe, in their own words, their impact? How did the beneficiaries of poverty eradication programs perceive the extent to which their living conditions improved because of poverty eradication programs?

The two research questions that guide the content analysis of qualitative studies are aimed at highlighting practices and approaches that are associated with positive and negative program outcomes. A review that focuses on program impact might contribute to the knowledge that the implementers of social development interventions need to strengthen the provision of poverty eradication programs. Global, regional, national, and/or local poverty eradication program providers require analysis of program impact to reduce high rates of poverty. Drawing key lessons from systematic reviews, using a review of literature in the paper is in line with the consensus in the research literature that (reviews) play an important role in documenting and disseminating scientific evidence on the impact of programs ( Hlongwa & Hlongwana, 2020 ; Petticrew & Roberts, 2006 ).

A review of poverty eradication programs implemented between 2006 and 2013 is intended to contribute to Lombard’s (2008) 10-year review of the implementation of the White Paper for Social Welfare (1997). The reviewer’s intention in presenting a thematic synthesis of studies focusing on poverty eradication is motivated by a need to provide another perspective on the progress of the social development approach by addressing both the root causes and effects of poverty.

Methodology

A thematic synthesis of qualitative studies on poverty eradication is guided by the question: How were the intended beneficiaries impacted by community-based poverty eradication programs? In addressing the research question, the reviewer sought to highlight themes and trends that may assist in reporting progress in the implementation of social development approaches.

The following keywords in the research report titles, abstracts, keywords, and text, guided the search for qualitative studies: “poverty/poverty-eradication/poverty-alleviation/poverty-reduction/anti-poverty”, “social exclusion”, “community-based program(s)/project(s)”, and “program/project impact”. The reviewer sourced relevant literature through an electronic search using the following databases: Social Science Citation Index on the Web of Science, Google Scholar, and the Social Science Database. A desktop internet search formed a critical part of the search, and some unpublished studies were accessed through the expert opinion of social development researchers. An online search of research reports in development studies, economics, social work, social development, politics, public health, sociology, psychology, and related social sciences and/or humanities disciplines, formed an essential part of the desktop internet search. Peer-reviewed online scientific publications were also examined. University websites were also searched for unpublished dissertations and technical research reports that focus on poverty eradication programs.

The entire search yielded studies that were reported during 2006–2013. This 10-year period is crucial for tracking and assessing progress since the social development approach became official policy, through the White Paper for Social Welfare (1997). The search for qualitative studies produced 76 research reports. The reviewer screened the 76 research studies using the inclusion and exclusion criteria, as presented in Table 2 .

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

After a comprehensive search of the literature, the reviewer applied the inclusion and exclusion criteria on the titles, abstracts, keywords, and text of the 76 reports to remove excluded and duplicated reports. While this is a review of literature, the Preferred Re-porting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) ( Shamseer et al., 2015 ) was applied by the reviewer, to explain the process used to arrive at studies selected for thematic synthesis, as outlined in Figure 1 .

Systematic review process-map.

Of the 76 studies, 16 studies were sourced through a desktop internet search, while an electronic database search yielded 60 studies. Of the 76 studies that represent data on issues related to poverty eradication, social exclusion, and community-based programs, 59 were excluded: 47 mainly because they are quantitative studies, eight use poverty definitions that are inconsistent with the literature review, another set of eight studies did not report the impact of community-based programs, while six studies neither indicate whether ethics clearance was obtained nor peer-review was conducted. Of the 17 studies that complied with the inclusion criteria, further screening narrowed down the number to 15, because two studies were duplicates. After further full-text eligibility assessment, the reviewer narrowed down the number to nine short-listed studies. After re-applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria on the short-listed studies, the reviewer arrived at nine final qualitative studies to be reviewed.

A blind procedure, where a second reviewer, without knowledge of the nine short-listed studies, repeated the process-map that is outlined above, by applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria to the 76 selected studies. The second reviewer confirmed the suitability of the nine studies selected for inclusion in the systematic review. All the included studies were debated to address any inconsistencies and areas of ambiguity as far as the inclusion and exclusion criteria required, and whether the processing of studies through the process-map was standardized and replicable. All nine studies listed in Table 2 are included mainly because of three factors: they all address “‘poverty/poverty-eradication/poverty-alleviation/poverty-reduction/anti-poverty”, “social exclusion”, “community-based program(s)/project(s)”, present qualitative data, and underwent ethics clearance or were peer-reviewed. Adato, Carter, and May (2006) explore household poverty traps and social exclusion. Mashau (2006) and Nkosi (2010) investigate the poverty situation and the impact of a strategy for poverty alleviation in rural and urban areas, while Van der Merwe (2006) provides a description and analysis of the very personal, subjective experience of poverty by Afrikaans-speaking people.

Stephen (2008) , explores factors that might have an impact on the communities’ anti-poverty projects. The study focuses on four projects: two agricultural projects and two non-agricultural projects. Blaauw, Viljoen, and Schenck’s (2011) study sought to determine the prevalence of child-headed households in Gauteng in order to establish a database and to ensure access to aid programs by needy child-headed households. Strydom, Wessels, and Strydom’s (2010) study assesses the effects of health issues and poverty on families in rural areas. Kaeana and Ross (2012) investigated beneficiaries’ perceptions of income-generating projects as alleviators or perpetrators of poverty, and lastly, Sikrweqe (2013) assessed whether a local program contributed towards achieving the goals of poverty reduction.

Table 3 further outlines the sample number and type, the age range of the participants, data collection procedures, and the geographical locations where each study was conducted. All the studies present qualitative data. A study with the smallest sample number reported four participants and a study with the largest sample size reported 700 participants. The age range of the respondents in all nine studies fell within the 18–60 bracket. All the studies (n = 9) interviewed people living and working in underprivileged communities. An overview of geographical areas where the qualitative data were collected shows that the studies were collected in five provinces in South Africa: Gauteng (n = 3), KwaZulu-Natal (n = 2), Limpopo (n = 2), Northern Cape (n = 1), and the Eastern Cape (n = 1).

Studies included in the systematic review.

Guided by relevant theoretical perspectives in poverty, social development, and community-based programs, the reviewer content analyzed the studies by coding of text “line-by-line”; followed by the development of “descriptive themes”; and lastly, the generation of “analytical themes” ( Thomas & Harden, 2008 ; Tong, Palmer, Craig, & Strippoli, 2016 ). “Thematic analysis” completed the identification and confirmation of emerging themes ( Thomas & Harden, 2008 ), and allowed the reviewer to present the qualitative evidence directly from the studies under review. The procedure that was followed by the reviewer enabled explicit translation of the qualitative data by “…synthesizing them in a transparent way, and facilitating the explicit production of new concepts and hypotheses” ( Thomas & Harden, 2008 , p. 1).

Results and Discussion

A thematic synthesis of 2006 to 2013 qualitative studies on the impact of community-based women empowerment programs.

The discussion of findings is presented under three themes: strength-based interventions, participation, and holistic, multi-dimensional approaches. Guided by the literature on poverty eradication, social exclusion, and community-based programs, a comprehensive content analysis of the qualitative data from the studies selected for review enabled the extraction and presentation of the following discussion of the research results.

Strength-based interventions

A content analysis of community-based poverty eradication programs shows that developing the strength of indigent individuals and families is crucial. Strydom et al.’s (2010) study highlights the importance of linkages between the well-being and happiness of beneficiaries and social services providers’ acceptance and enhancement of their (i.e., beneficiaries of poverty-eradication programs) strengths, and material and human resources. The impact of programs, in other words, will be greatly enhanced by leveraging underutilized personal and group coping and survival capabilities. Leveraging underutilized coping and survival capabilities might sustain the structure and functioning of indigent individuals, families, and communities ( Strydom et al., 2010 ). In an urban setting, Van der Merwe (2006 , p.141) posits that psychosocial programs “…need to capitalise on existing strengths and cultivate new personal strengths such as self-confidence, creativity, and capacity for hard work, self-determination, optimism and faith”.

Authors specifically identify social connections, as opposed to social isolation and social exclusion, as crucial for community-based programs to empower indigent individuals and families, to access income-generating opportunities or to cope better in times of periodical cycles of vulnerability to poverty ( Adato et al., 2006 ; Blaauw et al., 2011 ; Sikrweqe, 2013 ; Strydom et al., 2010 ).

Community-based poverty eradication programs that focus on building the strengths of women and children report a crucial area that social service providers need to focus on. Nkosi’s (2010) study found that child-headed and female-headed households went beyond being passive beneficiaries of cash transfers, to using limited savings to access crucial life-skills that translated into increased school attendance, fewer risks of malnutrition, and exposure to abuse. According to Blaauw et al. (2011) , school-based poverty eradication programs play a crucial role in improving the socioeconomic circumstances of child-headed households, primarily by directly linking the development of strengths to child-headed households to directly accessing social services and cash-transfers, rather than relying on adults who might abuse the resources. Even though poverty and the scarcity of resources can cause conflict in households, the respondents in Strydom et al.’s (2010) study felt strongly that the family was their important strength. As a strength that poverty eradication programs must build on, authors present data confirming the family as a form of social capital that is best placed to stabilize basic livelihood levels, owing to the observation that families have the capacity to adapt, change, and become closer in times of social and economic shocks ( Mashau, 2006 ; Stephen, 2008 ).

Gaps in eradicating poverty through the development of individual and family strengths receive great attention in the research literature. According to Adato et al. (2006 , p. 226), for individuals and families that are considered to be living below the poverty line, “…social capital at best helps stabilize livelihoods at low levels and does little to promote upward mobility”. Access to programs that provide a combination of assets with financial value, income-generating capabilities, and access to markets to build on assets over time, could sustainably address both the root causes and effects of poverty, and upward social mobility ( Adato et al., 2006 ; Stephen, 2008 ; Van der Merwe, 2006 ). Focusing poverty eradication programs on individuals and families has its critical limitations. According to Blaauw et al.’s (2011) post-intervention analysis, 26.2 percent of households cannot support even one person with their total monthly income, while less than 40 percent would be able to support a household of two to three members, with only 11.5 percent able to support a household size of four people, and none of the respondents’ households able to support a household size of six members. Holistic and multi-dimensional poverty eradication programs require evidence-informed approaches to supplement and complement strength-based interventions that support individuals, families, and larger communities.

Participation

Participation allowed the beneficiaries of community-based poverty eradication programs to highlight progress and identify gaps in service delivery ( Kaeana & Ross, 2012 ). Sikrweqe’s (2013) study echoes the theme of opening program monitoring and evaluating the voices of the beneficiaries, by presenting data showing that ward committees went beyond improving the participation of beneficiaries, and ensuring that the beneficiaries directly influence decisions about future developments in the neighborhood. The ability of ordinary members of society to influence decisions about development issues deepens democratic practices and governance ( Sikrweqe, 2013 ). Mashau’s (2006) assessment of a flagship local job creation project, highlights a human-centered approach to a collaborative approach to poverty eradication, that brought together the combined strengths of all key stakeholders, ordinary community members, government officials, business people, and non-governmental and faith-based organizations.

At a more practical level, Van der Merwe’s (2006) study emphasizes that, where possible, the beneficiaries must participate in all important areas and phases of program implementation to promote the type of community ownership that will invest in long-term sustainability. In recognition that participation in community-based poverty eradication programs is easier said than done, authors recommend further in-depth research analysis of the impact of participation on the outcomes of poverty eradication programs ( Blaauw et al., 2011 ; Kaeana & Ross, 2012 ; Mashau, 2006 ; Nkosi, 2010 ; Stephen, 2008 ; Van der Merwe, 2006 ). According to Stephen (2008) , least participatory programs tended to have pensioners as the majority of beneficiaries, thereby sensitizing social service providers to be more realistic and strategic in customizing models of participation to be more consistent with the capabilities of the intended beneficiaries.

The main conclusion in Kaeana and Ross’s (2012) study is that income-generating projects achieved their aims to some extent, but there were areas of improvement in terms of the participation of beneficiaries in decision-making. In reiterating the theme of the importance and limitations of participation, Adato et al. (2006) assert that while the impact of the beneficiaries’ participation in poverty eradication programs cannot be denied, there is no compelling evidence that community participation in poverty eradication translated directly into economic advancement and the accumulation of assets with long-term financial value. The link between the level of beneficiary participation in program processes to the reduction of poverty appears to be complex and still to be sufficiently examined, especially when participation occurs within holistic and multi-dimensional approaches.

Holistic and multi-dimensional approaches

A comprehensive and integrated research-informed approach to establish a local and contextually grounded database, according to Blaauw et al. (2011) and Strydom et al. (2010) , sets a standard for poverty to be addressed as the main target of health, development, education, employment creation, and environmental programs. A holistic, multi-disciplinary, and multi-dimensional approach to poverty eradication could be more impactful, in respect of the data that shows that poverty mainly manifests itself in the deprivation of income-generating opportunities, housing, lack of clean water, sanitation, health services, electricity, literacy, public infra-structure, and so on ( Mashau, 2006 ; Sikrweqe, 2012; Stephen, 2008 ; Strydom et al., 2010 ).

According to Kaeana and Ross’s (2012) study, a holistic and multi-pronged approach to poverty eradication needs to integrate income generation and employment creation, the provision of social and physical infrastructure including clinics and schools, measures to address social exclusion and institutionalized racism, xenophobia and sexism, the promotion of sustainable livelihoods, and the dissemination of the type of knowledge and skills that fosters human development at the community level. Community-based programs to raise awareness, through education and skills development are central themes that are frequently reported by the studies under review. For instance, more impactful community-based poverty eradication programs had more beneficiaries with secondary school education, while the worst performing were fewer ( Blaauw et al., 2011 ; Mashau, 2006 ; Nkosi, 2010 ; Van Der Merwe, 2006 ).

Deeper structural changes require innovative and novel approaches in light of growing levels of poverty, unemployment, and socio-economic inequality. According to some authors, the broader problem of “…poverty alleviation seems unlikely to be resolved until deeper structural changes make time and markets work more effectively for the broader community of all South Africans” ( Adato et al., 2006 , p. 245). A theme that cuts across most studies is that current social security programs play a significant role in alleviating poverty, but because of the growing inequality, the social security systems need to be improved to address gaps and shortcomings ( Adato et al., 2006 ; Kaeana & Ross, 2012 ; Sikrweqe, 2012). The research participants in Nkosi’s (2010) study, correctly recommend that gaps and weaknesses in social security programs can be best addressed through intersectoral collaborations between governmental and non-governmental service providers, in conjunction with the training of beneficiaries as a key element towards the sustenance of program impact and comprehensive service delivery. The findings are consistent will the assertion that policymakers recognize the integrated approach as more effective in low-middle-income countries ( Kumar & Cheng, 2024 ).

Recommendations

Similar to systematic reviews, literature reviews analyze an ever-growing scope of research on “best practices” for policy-making and policy evaluation ( Sundberg & Taylor-Gooby, 2013 ; Van Rooyen, Steward, & De Wet, 2012 ). This paper reviews the qualitative evidence to highlight approaches in poverty eradication that can be inferred as impactful and ineffective, subject to more advanced analysis through large-scale reviews that apply qualitative and quantitative methods. This article recommends further systematic reviews that will analyze studies conducted between 2016 and 2023, to provide a more recent and comprehensive picture of the progress and challenges related to social development programs. Reviews place greater emphasis on transparency and accountability ( Thomas & Harden, 2008 ), by providing an overview of impactful and ineffective approaches that no single study can provide. Themes on beneficiaries’ strengths and direct involvement in crucial phases of holistic and multi-multidimensional community-development processes, emerge in the paper as significant to track in forthcoming systematic reviews. Training and research in the three themes outlined above are key areas of focus in assessing progress in the implementation of the social development approach. As noted in a related paper, training “emerges as an important option in expanding the prospects of the intended beneficiaries of community-based programs” ( Sitshange, 2022 ).

Conclusions

Reviews are critical in evaluating the impact of poverty eradication programs. According to the authors, poverty alleviation programs have been ineffective and unsustainable ( Dipela & Mohapi, 2021 ; Raniga, 2018 ), hence high rates of poverty are consistently reported by statisticians. Reviewers of research studies have a responsibility to beyond painting the impact of poverty through numbers, to highlighting the impact of programs using the voices of community members. The thematic synthesis of qualitative research studies in poverty eradication notes a gap between theory and practice. While laws, policies, and institutions are in place to eradicate poverty, reviews need to empower relevant laws, policies, and institutions to prove impact and sustainability using evidence-based frames of reference. While the review that is presented in the paper is qualitative and limited, it lays a basis for more advanced studies on the impact of poverty eradication programs on individuals and groups.

Adato, M., Carter, M. R., & May, J. (2006). Exploring poverty traps and social exclusion in South Africa using qualitative and quantitative data. The Journal of Development Studies , 42(2), 226–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220380500405345 https://doi.org/10.1080/00220380500405345

Adetoro, A. A., Ngidi, M. S. C., & Danso-Abbeam, G. (2023). Towards the global zero poverty agenda: Examining the multidimensional poverty situation in South Africa. SN Social Sciences , 3(148), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-023-00735-2 https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-023-00735-2

Alvaredo, F., Chancel, L., Piketty, T., Saez, E., & Zucman, G. (2018). World Inequality Report 2018, World Inequality Lab.

Blaauw, D., Viljoen, K., & Schenck, R. (2011). “Life is not pap and vleis”: Poverty in child-headed households in Gauteng. Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk , 47(2), 138–154. https://doi.org/10.15270/47-2-132 https://doi.org/10.15270/47-2-132

Bradshaw, T. K. (2007). Theories of poverty and anti-poverty programs in community development. Journal of the Community Development Society , 38(1), 7–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330709490182 https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330709490182

Dipela, M. P., & Mohapi, B. (2021). Barriers affecting effective monitoring and evaluation of poverty alleviation projects within Waterberg District. Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk , 57(3), 278–301. https://doi.org/10.15270/57-3-948 https://doi.org/10.15270/57-3-948

Graham, R., & Masters-Awatere, B. (2020). Experiences of Māori of Aotearoa New Zealand’s public health system: A systematic review of two decades of published qualitative research. Aust NZ J Public Health , 44(3), 193–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-6405.12971 https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-6405.12971

Hlongwa, M., & Hlongwana, K. (2020). Men’s perspectives on HIV self-testing in sub-Saharan Africa: A qualitative systematic review protocol. JBI Evid Synth , 18(3), 571–575. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBISRIR-D-19-00097 https://doi.org/10.11124/JBISRIR-D-19-00097

Human Development Report. (2022). Report to explore uncertainty in the Anthropocene . United Nations: Geneva.

Kaeana, R., & Ross, E. (2012). Income-generating projects: Alleviating or perpetuating poverty. Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk , 48(1), 17–34. https://doi.org/10.15270/48-1-102 https://doi.org/10.15270/48-1-102

Kearney, M. H. (2001). Enduring love: Grounded formal theory of women’s experience of domestic violence. Research in Nursing and Health , 24(4), 270–282. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.1029 https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.1029

Kumar, V., & Cheng, S. C. (2024). A comparative literature review of integrated approach in health care in high and low-middle-income countries. Social Development Issues , 46(1), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.3998/sdi.5294 https://doi.org/10.3998/sdi.5294

Lombard, A. (2008). The implementation of the white paper for social welfare. The Social Work Practitioner-Researcher , 20(2), 154–173. http://hdl.handle.net/2263/9739 http://hdl.handle.net/2263/9739

Mashau, T. D. (2006). Towards a strategy for poverty alleviation in Mashau . Master’s diss., North-West University.

Mert, K., & Kadioglu, H. (2016). Nursing interventions to help prevent children from working on the streets. International Nursing Review , 63(3), 429–436. https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.12301. Epub 2016 Jul 19. PMID: 27430362. https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.12301. Epub 2016 Jul 19. PMID: 27430362.

National Development Plan. (2012). National Development Plan 2030: Our future make it work . Pretoria: National Planning Commission.

Nkosi, B. W. G. (2010). An impact of flagship program: An approach to poverty alleviation . Master’s diss., University of Zululand.

Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences . Oxford: Blackwell.

Porritt, K., Gomersall, J. C., & Lockwood, C. S. (2014). Study selection and critical appraisal. AJN American Journal of Nurs-ing , 114(6), 47–52. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NAJ.0000450430.97383.64 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NAJ.0000450430.97383.64

Raniga, T. (2018). Poverty alleviation, social protection policy and sustainability of economic development cooperatives: Voices of women residing in Bhambhayi, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk , 54(4), 394–406. https://doi.org/10.15270/54-4-668 https://doi.org/10.15270/54-4-668

Republic of South Africa (RSA). (1997). Ministry of Welfare and Population. White Paper for Social Welfare. Notice 1008 of 1997. Government Gazette , 368, (18166). Pretoria: Government Printer.

Schotte, S., Zizzamia, R., & Leibbrandt, M. (2018). A poverty dynamics approach to social stratification: The South Africa case. World Development , 110 (2018), 88–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.05.024 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.05.024

Shamseer, L., Moher, D., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., et al. (2015). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P): Elaboration and explanation. BMJ , 586, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7647 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7647

Sikrweqe, N. P. (2013). Integrated development planning as a poverty reduction strategy in the King Sabata Dalindyebo Municipality, Eastern Cape Province . Master’s diss., University of South Africa.

Sitshange, M. (2022). A thematic synthesis of income-generating studies conducted from 2007 to 2012 in Gauteng, Limpopo and KwaZulu-Natal: A systematic review of the qualitative evidence. Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk , 58(4), 382–393. https://doi.org/10.15270/58-4-1072 https://doi.org/10.15270/58-4-1072

Statistics South Africa (Stats SA). (2017). Poverty Trends in South Africa. An examination of absolute poverty between 2006 and 2015 . Pretoria: Statistics South Africa.

Statistics South Africa (Stats SA). (2019). Marginalised Groups Indicator Report. Report No. 0319-05. Retrieved from https://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/03-19-05/03-19-052019.pdf https://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/03-19-05/03-19-052019.pdf

Stephen, K. (2008). The impact of poverty alleviation projects in Ga-Molepo area in Polokwane Municipality, Limpopo Province . Master’s diss., University of Limpopo.

Strydom, C., Wessels, C., & Strydom, H. (2010). The role of the social worker to empower families in a deep rural community. Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk , 46(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.15270/46-2-172 https://doi.org/10.15270/46-2-172

Sundberg, T., & Taylor-Gooby, P. (2013). A systematic review of comparative studies of attitudes to social policy. Social Policy & Administration , 47(4), 416–433. ISSN 0144-5596. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12027 https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12027

Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology , 8(45), 1471–2288. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-45 https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-45

Tong, A., Palmer, S., Craig, J. C., & Strippoli, G. F. M. (2016). A guide to reading and using systematic reviews of qualitative research. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation , 31(6), 897–903. https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfu354 https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfu354

Van der Merwe, K. (2006). The phenomenology of experiencing poverty – An exploration. The Journal for Transdisciplinary Research in Southern Africa , 2(1), 131–144. https://doi.org/10.4102/td.v2i1.311 https://doi.org/10.4102/td.v2i1.311

Van Rooyen, C., Steward, R., & De Wet, T. (2012). The impact of microfinance in Sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic review of the evidence. World Development , 40(11), 2249–2262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2012.03.012 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2012.03.012

World Bank. (2018). Overcoming poverty and inequality in South Africa: An assessment of drivers, constraints and opportunities. Retrieved from https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/530481521735906534/pdf/124521-rev-ouo-south-africa-povertyand-inequality-assessment-report-2018-fnal-web.pdf https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/530481521735906534/pdf/124521-rev-ouo-south-africa-povertyand-inequality-assessment-report-2018-fnal-web.pdf

World Bank. (2022). Report on inequality in Southern Africa: An assessment of the Southern African Customs Union. Retrieved from https://www.worldbank.org/en/events/2022/03/09/inequality-in-southern-africa-an-assessment-of-the-southern-african-customs-union https://www.worldbank.org/en/events/2022/03/09/inequality-in-southern-africa-an-assessment-of-the-southern-african-customs-union

Zizzamia, R., Schotte, S., & Leibbrandt, M. (2019). Snakes and ladders and loaded dice: Poverty dynamics and inequality in South Africa, 2008-2017 , WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2019-25, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).

Madoda Sitshange, Department of Social Work, University of Stellenbosch, South Africa and Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Johannesburg, South Africa. He can be contacted at [email protected]

Harvard-Style Citation

Sitshange, M. (2024) 'Thematically Synthesizing the Qualitative Evidence Reporting the Impact of Poverty Alleviation Programs in Low-income Communities in South Africa: A Review', Social Development Issues . 46(3) doi: 10.3998/sdi.6771

Show: Vancouver Citation Style | APA Citation Style

Vancouver-Style Citation

Sitshange, M. Thematically Synthesizing the Qualitative Evidence Reporting the Impact of Poverty Alleviation Programs in Low-income Communities in South Africa: A Review. Social Development Issues. 2024 9; 46(3) doi: 10.3998/sdi.6771

Show: Harvard Citation Style | APA Citation Style

APA-Style Citation

Sitshange, M. (2024, 9 4). Thematically Synthesizing the Qualitative Evidence Reporting the Impact of Poverty Alleviation Programs in Low-income Communities in South Africa: A Review. Social Development Issues 46(3) doi: 10.3998/sdi.6771

Show: Harvard Citation Style | {% trans 'Vancouver Citation Style' %}

Non Specialist Summary

This article has no summary