how to do comparative analysis in research

• Utility Menu

GA4 Tracking Code

Gen ed writes, writing across the disciplines at harvard college.

• Comparative Analysis

What It Is and Why It's Useful

Comparative analysis asks writers to make an argument about the relationship between two or more texts. Beyond that, there's a lot of variation, but three overarching kinds of comparative analysis stand out:

• Coordinate (A ↔ B): In this kind of analysis, two (or more) texts are being read against each other in terms of a shared element, e.g., a memoir and a novel, both by Jesmyn Ward; two sets of data for the same experiment; a few op-ed responses to the same event; two YA books written in Chicago in the 2000s; a film adaption of a play; etc. 
• Subordinate (A  → B) or (B → A ): Using a theoretical text (as a "lens") to explain a case study or work of art (e.g., how Anthony Jack's The Privileged Poor can help explain divergent experiences among students at elite four-year private colleges who are coming from similar socio-economic backgrounds) or using a work of art or case study (i.e., as a "test" of) a theory's usefulness or limitations (e.g., using coverage of recent incidents of gun violence or legislation un the U.S. to confirm or question the currency of Carol Anderson's The Second ).
• Hybrid [A  → (B ↔ C)] or [(B ↔ C) → A] , i.e., using coordinate and subordinate analysis together. For example, using Jack to compare or contrast the experiences of students at elite four-year institutions with students at state universities and/or community colleges; or looking at gun culture in other countries and/or other timeframes to contextualize or generalize Anderson's main points about the role of the Second Amendment in U.S. history.

"In the wild," these three kinds of comparative analysis represent increasingly complex—and scholarly—modes of comparison. Students can of course compare two poems in terms of imagery or two data sets in terms of methods, but in each case the analysis will eventually be richer if the students have had a chance to encounter other people's ideas about how imagery or methods work. At that point, we're getting into a hybrid kind of reading (or even into research essays), especially if we start introducing different approaches to imagery or methods that are themselves being compared along with a couple (or few) poems or data sets.

Why It's Useful

In the context of a particular course, each kind of comparative analysis has its place and can be a useful step up from single-source analysis. Intellectually, comparative analysis helps overcome the "n of 1" problem that can face single-source analysis. That is, a writer drawing broad conclusions about the influence of the Iranian New Wave based on one film is relying entirely—and almost certainly too much—on that film to support those findings. In the context of even just one more film, though, the analysis is suddenly more likely to arrive at one of the best features of any comparative approach: both films will be more richly experienced than they would have been in isolation, and the themes or questions in terms of which they're being explored (here the general question of the influence of the Iranian New Wave) will arrive at conclusions that are less at-risk of oversimplification.

For scholars working in comparative fields or through comparative approaches, these features of comparative analysis animate their work. To borrow from a stock example in Western epistemology, our concept of "green" isn't based on a single encounter with something we intuit or are told is "green." Not at all. Our concept of "green" is derived from a complex set of experiences of what others say is green or what's labeled green or what seems to be something that's neither blue nor yellow but kind of both, etc. Comparative analysis essays offer us the chance to engage with that process—even if only enough to help us see where a more in-depth exploration with a higher and/or more diverse "n" might lead—and in that sense, from the standpoint of the subject matter students are exploring through writing as well the complexity of the genre of writing they're using to explore it—comparative analysis forms a bridge of sorts between single-source analysis and research essays.

Typical learning objectives for single-sources essays: formulate analytical questions and an arguable thesis, establish stakes of an argument, summarize sources accurately, choose evidence effectively, analyze evidence effectively, define key terms, organize argument logically, acknowledge and respond to counterargument, cite sources properly, and present ideas in clear prose.

Common types of comparative analysis essays and related types: two works in the same genre, two works from the same period (but in different places or in different cultures), a work adapted into a different genre or medium, two theories treating the same topic; a theory and a case study or other object, etc.

How to Teach It: Framing + Practice

Framing multi-source writing assignments (comparative analysis, research essays, multi-modal projects) is likely to overlap a great deal with "Why It's Useful" (see above), because the range of reasons why we might use these kinds of writing in academic or non-academic settings is itself the reason why they so often appear later in courses. In many courses, they're the best vehicles for exploring the complex questions that arise once we've been introduced to the course's main themes, core content, leading protagonists, and central debates.

For comparative analysis in particular, it's helpful to frame assignment's process and how it will help students successfully navigate the challenges and pitfalls presented by the genre. Ideally, this will mean students have time to identify what each text seems to be doing, take note of apparent points of connection between different texts, and start to imagine how those points of connection (or the absence thereof)

• complicates or upends their own expectations or assumptions about the texts
• complicates or refutes the expectations or assumptions about the texts presented by a scholar
• confirms and/or nuances expectations and assumptions they themselves hold or scholars have presented
• presents entirely unforeseen ways of understanding the texts

—and all with implications for the texts themselves or for the axes along which the comparative analysis took place. If students know that this is where their ideas will be heading, they'll be ready to develop those ideas and engage with the challenges that comparative analysis presents in terms of structure (See "Tips" and "Common Pitfalls" below for more on these elements of framing).

Like single-source analyses, comparative essays have several moving parts, and giving students practice here means adapting the sample sequence laid out at the " Formative Writing Assignments " page. Three areas that have already been mentioned above are worth noting:

• Gathering evidence : Depending on what your assignment is asking students to compare (or in terms of what), students will benefit greatly from structured opportunities to create inventories or data sets of the motifs, examples, trajectories, etc., shared (or not shared) by the texts they'll be comparing. See the sample exercises below for a basic example of what this might look like.
• Why it Matters: Moving beyond "x is like y but also different" or even "x is more like y than we might think at first" is what moves an essay from being "compare/contrast" to being a comparative analysis . It's also a move that can be hard to make and that will often evolve over the course of an assignment. A great way to get feedback from students about where they're at on this front? Ask them to start considering early on why their argument "matters" to different kinds of imagined audiences (while they're just gathering evidence) and again as they develop their thesis and again as they're drafting their essays. ( Cover letters , for example, are a great place to ask writers to imagine how a reader might be affected by reading an their argument.)
• Structure: Having two texts on stage at the same time can suddenly feel a lot more complicated for any writer who's used to having just one at a time. Giving students a sense of what the most common patterns (AAA / BBB, ABABAB, etc.) are likely to be can help them imagine, even if provisionally, how their argument might unfold over a series of pages. See "Tips" and "Common Pitfalls" below for more information on this front.

Sample Exercises and Links to Other Resources

• Common Pitfalls
• Advice on Timing
• Try to keep students from thinking of a proposed thesis as a commitment. Instead, help them see it as more of a hypothesis that has emerged out of readings and discussion and analytical questions and that they'll now test through an experiment, namely, writing their essay. When students see writing as part of the process of inquiry—rather than just the result—and when that process is committed to acknowledging and adapting itself to evidence, it makes writing assignments more scientific, more ethical, and more authentic. 
• Have students create an inventory of touch points between the two texts early in the process.
• Ask students to make the case—early on and at points throughout the process—for the significance of the claim they're making about the relationship between the texts they're comparing.
• For coordinate kinds of comparative analysis, a common pitfall is tied to thesis and evidence. Basically, it's a thesis that tells the reader that there are "similarities and differences" between two texts, without telling the reader why it matters that these two texts have or don't have these particular features in common. This kind of thesis is stuck at the level of description or positivism, and it's not uncommon when a writer is grappling with the complexity that can in fact accompany the "taking inventory" stage of comparative analysis. The solution is to make the "taking inventory" stage part of the process of the assignment. When this stage comes before students have formulated a thesis, that formulation is then able to emerge out of a comparative data set, rather than the data set emerging in terms of their thesis (which can lead to confirmation bias, or frequency illusion, or—just for the sake of streamlining the process of gathering evidence—cherry picking). 
• For subordinate kinds of comparative analysis , a common pitfall is tied to how much weight is given to each source. Having students apply a theory (in a "lens" essay) or weigh the pros and cons of a theory against case studies (in a "test a theory") essay can be a great way to help them explore the assumptions, implications, and real-world usefulness of theoretical approaches. The pitfall of these approaches is that they can quickly lead to the same biases we saw here above. Making sure that students know they should engage with counterevidence and counterargument, and that "lens" / "test a theory" approaches often balance each other out in any real-world application of theory is a good way to get out in front of this pitfall.
• For any kind of comparative analysis, a common pitfall is structure. Every comparative analysis asks writers to move back and forth between texts, and that can pose a number of challenges, including: what pattern the back and forth should follow and how to use transitions and other signposting to make sure readers can follow the overarching argument as the back and forth is taking place. Here's some advice from an experienced writing instructor to students about how to think about these considerations:

a quick note on STRUCTURE

     Most of us have encountered the question of whether to adopt what we might term the “A→A→A→B→B→B” structure or the “A→B→A→B→A→B” structure.  Do we make all of our points about text A before moving on to text B?  Or do we go back and forth between A and B as the essay proceeds?  As always, the answers to our questions about structure depend on our goals in the essay as a whole.  In a “similarities in spite of differences” essay, for instance, readers will need to encounter the differences between A and B before we offer them the similarities (A d →B d →A s →B s ).  If, rather than subordinating differences to similarities you are subordinating text A to text B (using A as a point of comparison that reveals B’s originality, say), you may be well served by the “A→A→A→B→B→B” structure.  

     Ultimately, you need to ask yourself how many “A→B” moves you have in you.  Is each one identical?  If so, you may wish to make the transition from A to B only once (“A→A→A→B→B→B”), because if each “A→B” move is identical, the “A→B→A→B→A→B” structure will appear to involve nothing more than directionless oscillation and repetition.  If each is increasingly complex, however—if each AB pair yields a new and progressively more complex idea about your subject—you may be well served by the “A→B→A→B→A→B” structure, because in this case it will be visible to readers as a progressively developing argument.

As we discussed in "Advice on Timing" at the page on single-source analysis, that timeline itself roughly follows the "Sample Sequence of Formative Assignments for a 'Typical' Essay" outlined under " Formative Writing Assignments, " and it spans about 5–6 steps or 2–4 weeks. 

Comparative analysis assignments have a lot of the same DNA as single-source essays, but they potentially bring more reading into play and ask students to engage in more complicated acts of analysis and synthesis during the drafting stages. With that in mind, closer to 4 weeks is probably a good baseline for many single-source analysis assignments. For sections that meet once per week, the timeline will either probably need to expand—ideally—a little past the 4-week side of things, or some of the steps will need to be combined or done asynchronously.

What It Can Build Up To

Comparative analyses can build up to other kinds of writing in a number of ways. For example:

• They can build toward other kinds of comparative analysis, e.g., student can be asked to choose an additional source to complicate their conclusions from a previous analysis, or they can be asked to revisit an analysis using a different axis of comparison, such as race instead of class. (These approaches are akin to moving from a coordinate or subordinate analysis to more of a hybrid approach.)
• They can scaffold up to research essays, which in many instances are an extension of a "hybrid comparative analysis."
• Like single-source analysis, in a course where students will take a "deep dive" into a source or topic for their capstone, they can allow students to "try on" a theoretical approach or genre or time period to see if it's indeed something they want to research more fully.
• DIY Guides for Analytical Writing Assignments

• Types of Assignments
• Unpacking the Elements of Writing Prompts
• Formative Writing Assignments
• Single-Source Analysis
• Research Essays
• Multi-Modal or Creative Projects
• Giving Feedback to Students

Assignment Decoder

• 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 NPS+ Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Market Research Research Tools and Apps

Comparative Analysis: What It Is & How to Conduct It

When a business wants to start a marketing campaign or grow, a comparative analysis can give them information that helps them make crucial decisions. This analysis gathers different data sets to compare different options so a business can make good decisions for its customers and itself. If you or your business want to make good decisions, learning about comparative analyses could be helpful. 

In this article, we’ll explain the comparative analysis and its importance. We’ll also learn how to do a good in-depth analysis .

What is comparative analysis?

Comparative analysis is a way to look at two or more similar things to see how they are different and what they have in common. 

It is used in many ways and fields to help people understand the similarities and differences between products better. It can help businesses make good decisions about key issues.

One meaningful way it’s used is when applied to scientific data. Scientific data is information that has been gathered through scientific research and will be used for a certain purpose.

When it is used on scientific data, it determines how consistent and reliable the data is. It also helps scientists make sure their data is accurate and valid.

Importance of comparative analysis 

Comparative analyses are important if you want to understand a problem better or find answers to important questions. Here are the main goals businesses want to reach through comparative analysis.

• It is a part of the diagnostic phase of business analytics. It can answer many of the most important questions a company may have and help you figure out how to fix problems at the company’s core to improve performance and even make more money.
• It encourages a deep understanding of the opportunities that apply to specific processes, departments, or business units. This analysis also ensures that we’re addressing the real reasons for performance gaps.
• It is used a lot because it helps people understand the challenges an organization has faced in the past and the ones it faces now. This method gives objective, fact-based information about performance and ways to improve it.

How to successfully conduct it

Consider using the advice below to carry out a successful comparative analysis:

Conduct research

Before doing an analysis, it’s important to do a lot of research . Research not only gives you evidence to back up your conclusions, but it might also show you something you hadn’t thought of before.

Research could also tell you how your competitors might handle a problem.

Make a list of what’s different and what’s the same.

When comparing two things in a comparative analysis, you need to make a detailed list of the similarities and differences.

Try to figure out how a change to one thing might affect another. Such as how increasing the number of vacation days affects sales, production, or costs. 

A comparative analysis can also help you find outside causes, such as economic conditions or environmental analysis problems.

Describe both sides

Comparative analysis may try to show that one argument or idea is better, but the analysis must cover both sides equally. The analysis shows both sides of the main arguments and claims. 

For example, to compare the benefits and drawbacks of starting a recycling program, one might examine both the positive effects, such as corporate responsibility and the potential negative effects, such as high implementation costs, to make wise, practical decisions or come up with alternate solutions.

Include variables

A thorough comparison unit of analysis is usually more than just a list of pros and cons because it usually considers factors that affect both sides.

Variables can be both things that can’t be changed, like how the weather in the summer affects shipping speeds, and things that can be changed, like when to work with a local shipper.

Do analyses regularly

Comparative analyses are important for any business practice. Consider the different areas and factors that a comparative analysis looks at:

• Competitors
• How well do stocks
• Financial position
• Profitability
• Dividends and revenue
• Development and research

Because a comparative analysis can help more than one department in a company, doing them often can help you keep up with market changes and stay relevant.

We’ve talked about how good a comparative analysis is for your business. But things always have two sides. It is a good workaround, but still do your own user interviews or user tests if you can. 

We hope you have fun doing comparative analyses! Comparative analysis is always a method you like to use, and the point of learning from competitors is to add your own ideas. In this way, you are not just following but also learning and making.

QuestionPro can help you with your analysis process, create and design a survey to meet your goals, and analyze data for your business’s comparative analysis.

At QuestionPro, we give researchers tools for collecting data, like our survey software and a library of insights for all kinds of l ong-term research . If you want to book a demo or learn more about our platform, just click here.

LEARN MORE         FREE TRIAL

MORE LIKE THIS

Top 8 Data Trends to Understand the Future of Data

May 30, 2024

Top 12 Interactive Presentation Software to Engage Your User

May 29, 2024

Trend Report: Guide for Market Dynamics & Strategic Analysis

Cannabis Industry Business Intelligence: Impact on Research

May 28, 2024

Other categories

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

How to Do Comparative Analysis in Research ( Examples )

Comparative analysis is a method that is widely used in social science . It is a method of comparing two or more items with an idea of uncovering and discovering new ideas about them. It often compares and contrasts social structures and processes around the world to grasp general patterns. Comparative analysis tries to understand the study and explain every element of data that comparing. 

We often compare and contrast in our daily life. So it is usual to compare and contrast the culture and human society. We often heard that ‘our culture is quite good than theirs’ or ‘their lifestyle is better than us’. In social science, the social scientist compares primitive, barbarian, civilized, and modern societies. They use this to understand and discover the evolutionary changes that happen to society and its people.  It is not only used to understand the evolutionary processes but also to identify the differences, changes, and connections between societies.

Most social scientists are involved in comparative analysis. Macfarlane has thought that “On account of history, the examinations are typically on schedule, in that of other sociologies, transcendently in space. The historian always takes their society and compares it with the past society, and analyzes how far they differ from each other.

The comparative method of social research is a product of 19 th -century sociology and social anthropology. Sociologists like Emile Durkheim, Herbert Spencer Max Weber used comparative analysis in their works. For example, Max Weber compares the protestant of Europe with Catholics and also compared it with other religions like Islam, Hinduism, and Confucianism.

To do a systematic comparison we need to follow different elements of the method.

1. Methods of comparison The comparison method

In social science, we can do comparisons in different ways. It is merely different based on the topic, the field of study. Like Emile Durkheim compare societies as organic solidarity and mechanical solidarity. The famous sociologist Emile Durkheim provides us with three different approaches to the comparative method. Which are;

• The first approach is to identify and select one particular society in a fixed period. And by doing that, we can identify and determine the relationship, connections and differences exist in that particular society alone. We can find their religious practices, traditions, law, norms etc.
•  The second approach is to consider and draw various societies which have common or similar characteristics that may vary in some ways. It may be we can select societies at a specific period, or we can select societies in the different periods which have common characteristics but vary in some ways. For example, we can take European and American societies (which are universally similar characteristics) in the 20 th century. And we can compare and contrast their society in terms of law, custom, tradition, etc. 
• The third approach he envisaged is to take different societies of different times that may share some similar characteristics or maybe show revolutionary changes. For example, we can compare modern and primitive societies which show us revolutionary social changes.

2 . The unit of comparison

We cannot compare every aspect of society. As we know there are so many things that we cannot compare. The very success of the compare method is the unit or the element that we select to compare. We are only able to compare things that have some attributes in common. For example, we can compare the existing family system in America with the existing family system in Europe. But we are not able to compare the food habits in china with the divorce rate in America. It is not possible. So, the next thing you to remember is to consider the unit of comparison. You have to select it with utmost care.

3. The motive of comparison

As another method of study, a comparative analysis is one among them for the social scientist. The researcher or the person who does the comparative method must know for what grounds they taking the comparative method. They have to consider the strength, limitations, weaknesses, etc. He must have to know how to do the analysis.

Steps of the comparative method

1. Setting up of a unit of comparison

As mentioned earlier, the first step is to consider and determine the unit of comparison for your study. You must consider all the dimensions of your unit. This is where you put the two things you need to compare and to properly analyze and compare it. It is not an easy step, we have to systematically and scientifically do this with proper methods and techniques. You have to build your objectives, variables and make some assumptions or ask yourself about what you need to study or make a hypothesis for your analysis.

The best casings of reference are built from explicit sources instead of your musings or perceptions. To do that you can select some attributes in the society like marriage, law, customs, norms, etc. by doing this you can easily compare and contrast the two societies that you selected for your study. You can set some questions like, is the marriage practices of Catholics are different from Protestants? Did men and women get an equal voice in their mate choice? You can set as many questions that you wanted. Because that will explore the truth about that particular topic. A comparative analysis must have these attributes to study. A social scientist who wishes to compare must develop those research questions that pop up in your mind. A study without those is not going to be a fruitful one.

2. Grounds of comparison

The grounds of comparison should be understandable for the reader. You must acknowledge why you selected these units for your comparison. For example, it is quite natural that a person who asks why you choose this what about another one? What is the reason behind choosing this particular society? If a social scientist chooses primitive Asian society and primitive Australian society for comparison, he must acknowledge the grounds of comparison to the readers. The comparison of your work must be self-explanatory without any complications.

If you choose two particular societies for your comparative analysis you must convey to the reader what are you intended to choose this and the reason for choosing that society in your analysis.

3 . Report or thesis

The main element of the comparative analysis is the thesis or the report. The report is the most important one that it must contain all your frame of reference. It must include all your research questions, objectives of your topic, the characteristics of your two units of comparison, variables in your study, and last but not least the finding and conclusion must be written down. The findings must be self-explanatory because the reader must understand to what extent did they connect and what are their differences. For example, in Emile Durkheim’s Theory of Division of Labour, he classified organic solidarity and Mechanical solidarity . In which he means primitive society as Mechanical solidarity and modern society as Organic Solidarity. Like that you have to mention what are your findings in the thesis.

4. Relationship and linking one to another

Your paper must link each point in the argument. Without that the reader does not understand the logical and rational advance in your analysis. In a comparative analysis, you need to compare the ‘x’ and ‘y’ in your paper. (x and y mean the two-unit or things in your comparison). To do that you can use likewise, similarly, on the contrary, etc. For example, if we do a comparison between primitive society and modern society we can say that; ‘in the primitive society the division of labour is based on gender and age on the contrary (or the other hand), in modern society, the division of labour is based on skill and knowledge of a person.

Demerits of comparison

Comparative analysis is not always successful. It has some limitations. The broad utilization of comparative analysis can undoubtedly cause the feeling that this technique is a solidly settled, smooth, and unproblematic method of investigation, which because of its undeniable intelligent status can produce dependable information once some specialized preconditions are met acceptably.

Perhaps the most fundamental issue here respects the independence of the unit picked for comparison. As different types of substances are gotten to be analyzed, there is frequently a fundamental and implicit supposition about their independence and a quiet propensity to disregard the mutual influences and common impacts among the units.

One more basic issue with broad ramifications concerns the decision of the units being analyzed. The primary concern is that a long way from being a guiltless as well as basic assignment, the decision of comparison units is a basic and precarious issue. The issue with this sort of comparison is that in such investigations the depictions of the cases picked for examination with the principle one will in general turn out to be unreasonably streamlined, shallow, and stylised with contorted contentions and ends as entailment.

However, a comparative analysis is as yet a strategy with exceptional benefits, essentially due to its capacity to cause us to perceive the restriction of our psyche and check against the weaknesses and hurtful results of localism and provincialism. We may anyway have something to gain from history specialists’ faltering in utilizing comparison and from their regard for the uniqueness of settings and accounts of people groups. All of the above, by doing the comparison we discover the truths the underlying and undiscovered connection, differences that exist in society.

Also Read: How to write a Sociology Analysis? Explained with Examples

Sociology Group

We believe in sharing knowledge with everyone and making a positive change in society through our work and contributions. If you are interested in joining us, please check our 'About' page for more information

What is Comparative Analysis and How to Conduct It? (+ Examples)

Appinio Research · 30.10.2023 · 36min read

Have you ever faced a complex decision, wondering how to make the best choice among multiple options? In a world filled with data and possibilities, the art of comparative analysis holds the key to unlocking clarity amidst the chaos.

In this guide, we'll demystify the power of comparative analysis, revealing its practical applications, methodologies, and best practices. Whether you're a business leader, researcher, or simply someone seeking to make more informed decisions, join us as we explore the intricacies of comparative analysis and equip you with the tools to chart your course with confidence.

What is Comparative Analysis?

Comparative analysis is a systematic approach used to evaluate and compare two or more entities, variables, or options to identify similarities, differences, and patterns. It involves assessing the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats associated with each entity or option to make informed decisions.

The primary purpose of comparative analysis is to provide a structured framework for decision-making by:

• Facilitating Informed Choices: Comparative analysis equips decision-makers with data-driven insights, enabling them to make well-informed choices among multiple options.
• Identifying Trends and Patterns: It helps identify recurring trends, patterns, and relationships among entities or variables, shedding light on underlying factors influencing outcomes.
• Supporting Problem Solving: Comparative analysis aids in solving complex problems by systematically breaking them down into manageable components and evaluating potential solutions.
• Enhancing Transparency: By comparing multiple options, comparative analysis promotes transparency in decision-making processes, allowing stakeholders to understand the rationale behind choices.
• Mitigating Risks : It helps assess the risks associated with each option, allowing organizations to develop risk mitigation strategies and make risk-aware decisions.
• Optimizing Resource Allocation: Comparative analysis assists in allocating resources efficiently by identifying areas where resources can be optimized for maximum impact.
• Driving Continuous Improvement: By comparing current performance with historical data or benchmarks, organizations can identify improvement areas and implement growth strategies.

Importance of Comparative Analysis in Decision-Making

• Data-Driven Decision-Making: Comparative analysis relies on empirical data and objective evaluation, reducing the influence of biases and subjective judgments in decision-making. It ensures decisions are based on facts and evidence.
• Objective Assessment: It provides an objective and structured framework for evaluating options, allowing decision-makers to focus on key criteria and avoid making decisions solely based on intuition or preferences.
• Risk Assessment: Comparative analysis helps assess and quantify risks associated with different options. This risk awareness enables organizations to make proactive risk management decisions.
• Prioritization: By ranking options based on predefined criteria, comparative analysis enables decision-makers to prioritize actions or investments, directing resources to areas with the most significant impact.
• Strategic Planning: It is integral to strategic planning, helping organizations align their decisions with overarching goals and objectives. Comparative analysis ensures decisions are consistent with long-term strategies.
• Resource Allocation: Organizations often have limited resources. Comparative analysis assists in allocating these resources effectively, ensuring they are directed toward initiatives with the highest potential returns.
• Continuous Improvement: Comparative analysis supports a culture of continuous improvement by identifying areas for enhancement and guiding iterative decision-making processes.
• Stakeholder Communication: It enhances transparency in decision-making, making it easier to communicate decisions to stakeholders. Stakeholders can better understand the rationale behind choices when supported by comparative analysis.
• Competitive Advantage: In business and competitive environments , comparative analysis can provide a competitive edge by identifying opportunities to outperform competitors or address weaknesses.
• Informed Innovation: When evaluating new products , technologies, or strategies, comparative analysis guides the selection of the most promising options, reducing the risk of investing in unsuccessful ventures.

In summary, comparative analysis is a valuable tool that empowers decision-makers across various domains to make informed, data-driven choices, manage risks, allocate resources effectively, and drive continuous improvement. Its structured approach enhances decision quality and transparency, contributing to the success and competitiveness of organizations and research endeavors.

How to Prepare for Comparative Analysis?

1. define objectives and scope.

Before you begin your comparative analysis, clearly defining your objectives and the scope of your analysis is essential. This step lays the foundation for the entire process. Here's how to approach it:

• Identify Your Goals: Start by asking yourself what you aim to achieve with your comparative analysis. Are you trying to choose between two products for your business? Are you evaluating potential investment opportunities? Knowing your objectives will help you stay focused throughout the analysis.
• Define Scope: Determine the boundaries of your comparison. What will you include, and what will you exclude? For example, if you're analyzing market entry strategies for a new product, specify whether you're looking at a specific geographic region or a particular target audience.
• Stakeholder Alignment: Ensure that all stakeholders involved in the analysis understand and agree on the objectives and scope. This alignment will prevent misunderstandings and ensure the analysis meets everyone's expectations.

2. Gather Relevant Data and Information

The quality of your comparative analysis heavily depends on the data and information you gather. Here's how to approach this crucial step:

• Data Sources: Identify where you'll obtain the necessary data. Will you rely on primary sources , such as surveys and interviews, to collect original data? Or will you use secondary sources, like published research and industry reports, to access existing data? Consider the advantages and disadvantages of each source.
• Data Collection Plan: Develop a plan for collecting data. This should include details about the methods you'll use, the timeline for data collection, and who will be responsible for gathering the data.
• Data Relevance: Ensure that the data you collect is directly relevant to your objectives. Irrelevant or extraneous data can lead to confusion and distract from the core analysis.

3. Select Appropriate Criteria for Comparison

Choosing the right criteria for comparison is critical to a successful comparative analysis. Here's how to go about it:

• Relevance to Objectives: Your chosen criteria should align closely with your analysis objectives. For example, if you're comparing job candidates, your criteria might include skills, experience, and cultural fit.
• Measurability: Consider whether you can quantify the criteria. Measurable criteria are easier to analyze. If you're comparing marketing campaigns, you might measure criteria like click-through rates, conversion rates, and return on investment.
• Weighting Criteria : Not all criteria are equally important. You'll need to assign weights to each criterion based on its relative importance. Weighting helps ensure that the most critical factors have a more significant impact on the final decision.

4. Establish a Clear Framework

Once you have your objectives, data, and criteria in place, it's time to establish a clear framework for your comparative analysis. This framework will guide your process and ensure consistency. Here's how to do it:

• Comparative Matrix: Consider using a comparative matrix or spreadsheet to organize your data. Each row in the matrix represents an option or entity you're comparing, and each column corresponds to a criterion. This visual representation makes it easy to compare and contrast data.
• Timeline: Determine the time frame for your analysis. Is it a one-time comparison, or will you conduct ongoing analyses? Having a defined timeline helps you manage the analysis process efficiently.
• Define Metrics: Specify the metrics or scoring system you'll use to evaluate each criterion. For example, if you're comparing potential office locations, you might use a scoring system from 1 to 5 for factors like cost, accessibility, and amenities.

With your objectives, data, criteria, and framework established, you're ready to move on to the next phase of comparative analysis: data collection and organization.

Comparative Analysis Data Collection

Data collection and organization are critical steps in the comparative analysis process. We'll explore how to gather and structure the data you need for a successful analysis.

1. Utilize Primary Data Sources

Primary data sources involve gathering original data directly from the source. This approach offers unique advantages, allowing you to tailor your data collection to your specific research needs.

Some popular primary data sources include:

• Surveys and Questionnaires: Design surveys or questionnaires and distribute them to collect specific information from individuals or groups. This method is ideal for obtaining firsthand insights, such as customer preferences or employee feedback.
• Interviews: Conduct structured interviews with relevant stakeholders or experts. Interviews provide an opportunity to delve deeper into subjects and gather qualitative data, making them valuable for in-depth analysis.
• Observations: Directly observe and record data from real-world events or settings. Observational data can be instrumental in fields like anthropology, ethnography, and environmental studies.
• Experiments: In controlled environments, experiments allow you to manipulate variables and measure their effects. This method is common in scientific research and product testing.

When using primary data sources, consider factors like sample size , survey design, and data collection methods to ensure the reliability and validity of your data.

2. Harness Secondary Data Sources

Secondary data sources involve using existing data collected by others. These sources can provide a wealth of information and save time and resources compared to primary data collection.

Here are common types of secondary data sources:

• Public Records: Government publications, census data, and official reports offer valuable information on demographics, economic trends, and public policies. They are often free and readily accessible.
• Academic Journals: Scholarly articles provide in-depth research findings across various disciplines. They are helpful for accessing peer-reviewed studies and staying current with academic discourse.
• Industry Reports: Industry-specific reports and market research publications offer insights into market trends, consumer behavior, and competitive landscapes. They are essential for businesses making strategic decisions.
• Online Databases: Online platforms like Statista , PubMed , and Google Scholar provide a vast repository of data and research articles. They offer search capabilities and access to a wide range of data sets.

When using secondary data sources, critically assess the credibility, relevance, and timeliness of the data. Ensure that it aligns with your research objectives.

3. Ensure and Validate Data Quality

Data quality is paramount in comparative analysis. Poor-quality data can lead to inaccurate conclusions and flawed decision-making. Here's how to ensure data validation and reliability:

• Cross-Verification: Whenever possible, cross-verify data from multiple sources. Consistency among different sources enhances the reliability of the data.
• Sample Size : Ensure that your data sample size is statistically significant for meaningful analysis. A small sample may not accurately represent the population.
• Data Integrity: Check for data integrity issues, such as missing values, outliers, or duplicate entries. Address these issues before analysis to maintain data quality.
• Data Source Reliability: Assess the reliability and credibility of the data sources themselves. Consider factors like the reputation of the institution or organization providing the data.

4. Organize Data Effectively

Structuring your data for comparison is a critical step in the analysis process. Organized data makes it easier to draw insights and make informed decisions. Here's how to structure data effectively:

• Data Cleaning: Before analysis, clean your data to remove inconsistencies, errors, and irrelevant information. Data cleaning may involve data transformation, imputation of missing values, and removing outliers.
• Normalization: Standardize data to ensure fair comparisons. Normalization adjusts data to a standard scale, making comparing variables with different units or ranges possible.
• Variable Labeling: Clearly label variables and data points for easy identification. Proper labeling enhances the transparency and understandability of your analysis.
• Data Organization: Organize data into a format that suits your analysis methods. For quantitative analysis, this might mean creating a matrix, while qualitative analysis may involve categorizing data into themes.

By paying careful attention to data collection, validation, and organization, you'll set the stage for a robust and insightful comparative analysis. Next, we'll explore various methodologies you can employ in your analysis, ranging from qualitative approaches to quantitative methods and examples.

Comparative Analysis Methods

When it comes to comparative analysis, various methodologies are available, each suited to different research goals and data types. In this section, we'll explore five prominent methodologies in detail.

Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA)

Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) is a methodology often used when dealing with complex, non-linear relationships among variables. It seeks to identify patterns and configurations among factors that lead to specific outcomes.

• Case-by-Case Analysis: QCA involves evaluating individual cases (e.g., organizations, regions, or events) rather than analyzing aggregate data. Each case's unique characteristics are considered.
• Boolean Logic: QCA employs Boolean algebra to analyze data. Variables are categorized as either present or absent, allowing for the examination of different combinations and logical relationships.
• Necessary and Sufficient Conditions: QCA aims to identify necessary and sufficient conditions for a specific outcome to occur. It helps answer questions like, "What conditions are necessary for a successful product launch?"
• Fuzzy Set Theory: In some cases, QCA may use fuzzy set theory to account for degrees of membership in a category, allowing for more nuanced analysis.

QCA is particularly useful in fields such as sociology, political science, and organizational studies, where understanding complex interactions is essential.

Quantitative Comparative Analysis

Quantitative Comparative Analysis involves the use of numerical data and statistical techniques to compare and analyze variables. It's suitable for situations where data is quantitative, and relationships can be expressed numerically.

• Statistical Tools: Quantitative comparative analysis relies on statistical methods like regression analysis, correlation, and hypothesis testing. These tools help identify relationships, dependencies, and trends within datasets.
• Data Measurement: Ensure that variables are measured consistently using appropriate scales (e.g., ordinal, interval, ratio) for meaningful analysis. Variables may include numerical values like revenue, customer satisfaction scores, or product performance metrics.
• Data Visualization: Create visual representations of data using charts, graphs, and plots. Visualization aids in understanding complex relationships and presenting findings effectively.
• Statistical Significance: Assess the statistical significance of relationships. Statistical significance indicates whether observed differences or relationships are likely to be real rather than due to chance.

Quantitative comparative analysis is commonly applied in economics, social sciences, and market research to draw empirical conclusions from numerical data.

Case Studies

Case studies involve in-depth examinations of specific instances or cases to gain insights into real-world scenarios. Comparative case studies allow researchers to compare and contrast multiple cases to identify patterns, differences, and lessons.

• Narrative Analysis: Case studies often involve narrative analysis, where researchers construct detailed narratives of each case, including context, events, and outcomes.
• Contextual Understanding: In comparative case studies, it's crucial to consider the context within which each case operates. Understanding the context helps interpret findings accurately.
• Cross-Case Analysis: Researchers conduct cross-case analysis to identify commonalities and differences across cases. This process can lead to the discovery of factors that influence outcomes.
• Triangulation: To enhance the validity of findings, researchers may use multiple data sources and methods to triangulate information and ensure reliability.

Case studies are prevalent in fields like psychology, business, and sociology, where deep insights into specific situations are valuable.

SWOT Analysis

SWOT Analysis is a strategic tool used to assess the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats associated with a particular entity or situation. While it's commonly used in business, it can be adapted for various comparative analyses.

• Internal and External Factors: SWOT Analysis examines both internal factors (Strengths and Weaknesses), such as organizational capabilities, and external factors (Opportunities and Threats), such as market conditions and competition.
• Strategic Planning: The insights from SWOT Analysis inform strategic decision-making. By identifying strengths and opportunities, organizations can leverage their advantages. Likewise, addressing weaknesses and threats helps mitigate risks.
• Visual Representation: SWOT Analysis is often presented as a matrix or a 2x2 grid, making it visually accessible and easy to communicate to stakeholders.
• Continuous Monitoring: SWOT Analysis is not a one-time exercise. Organizations use it periodically to adapt to changing circumstances and make informed decisions.

SWOT Analysis is versatile and can be applied in business, healthcare, education, and any context where a structured assessment of factors is needed.

Benchmarking

Benchmarking involves comparing an entity's performance, processes, or practices to those of industry leaders or best-in-class organizations. It's a powerful tool for continuous improvement and competitive analysis.

• Identify Performance Gaps: Benchmarking helps identify areas where an entity lags behind its peers or industry standards. These performance gaps highlight opportunities for improvement.
• Data Collection: Gather data on key performance metrics from both internal and external sources. This data collection phase is crucial for meaningful comparisons.
• Comparative Analysis: Compare your organization's performance data with that of benchmark organizations. This analysis can reveal where you excel and where adjustments are needed.
• Continuous Improvement: Benchmarking is a dynamic process that encourages continuous improvement. Organizations use benchmarking findings to set performance goals and refine their strategies.

Benchmarking is widely used in business, manufacturing, healthcare, and customer service to drive excellence and competitiveness.

Each of these methodologies brings a unique perspective to comparative analysis, allowing you to choose the one that best aligns with your research objectives and the nature of your data. The choice between qualitative and quantitative methods, or a combination of both, depends on the complexity of the analysis and the questions you seek to answer.

How to Conduct Comparative Analysis?

Once you've prepared your data and chosen an appropriate methodology, it's time to dive into the process of conducting a comparative analysis. We will guide you through the essential steps to extract meaningful insights from your data.

1. Identify Key Variables and Metrics

Identifying key variables and metrics is the first crucial step in conducting a comparative analysis. These are the factors or indicators you'll use to assess and compare your options.

• Relevance to Objectives: Ensure the chosen variables and metrics align closely with your analysis objectives. When comparing marketing strategies, relevant metrics might include customer acquisition cost, conversion rate, and retention.
• Quantitative vs. Qualitative : Decide whether your analysis will focus on quantitative data (numbers) or qualitative data (descriptive information). In some cases, a combination of both may be appropriate.
• Data Availability: Consider the availability of data. Ensure you can access reliable and up-to-date data for all selected variables and metrics.
• KPIs: Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are often used as the primary metrics in comparative analysis. These are metrics that directly relate to your goals and objectives.

2. Visualize Data for Clarity

Data visualization techniques play a vital role in making complex information more accessible and understandable. Effective data visualization allows you to convey insights and patterns to stakeholders. Consider the following approaches:

• Charts and Graphs: Use various types of charts, such as bar charts, line graphs, and pie charts, to represent data. For example, a line graph can illustrate trends over time, while a bar chart can compare values across categories.
• Heatmaps: Heatmaps are particularly useful for visualizing large datasets and identifying patterns through color-coding. They can reveal correlations, concentrations, and outliers.
• Scatter Plots: Scatter plots help visualize relationships between two variables. They are especially useful for identifying trends, clusters, or outliers.
• Dashboards: Create interactive dashboards that allow users to explore data and customize views. Dashboards are valuable for ongoing analysis and reporting.
• Infographics: For presentations and reports, consider using infographics to summarize key findings in a visually engaging format.

Effective data visualization not only enhances understanding but also aids in decision-making by providing clear insights at a glance.

3. Establish Clear Comparative Frameworks

A well-structured comparative framework provides a systematic approach to your analysis. It ensures consistency and enables you to make meaningful comparisons. Here's how to create one:

• Comparison Matrices: Consider using matrices or spreadsheets to organize your data. Each row represents an option or entity, and each column corresponds to a variable or metric. This matrix format allows for side-by-side comparisons.
• Decision Trees: In complex decision-making scenarios, decision trees help map out possible outcomes based on different criteria and variables. They visualize the decision-making process.
• Scenario Analysis: Explore different scenarios by altering variables or criteria to understand how changes impact outcomes. Scenario analysis is valuable for risk assessment and planning.
• Checklists: Develop checklists or scoring sheets to systematically evaluate each option against predefined criteria. Checklists ensure that no essential factors are overlooked.

A well-structured comparative framework simplifies the analysis process, making it easier to draw meaningful conclusions and make informed decisions.

4. Evaluate and Score Criteria

Evaluating and scoring criteria is a critical step in comparative analysis, as it quantifies the performance of each option against the chosen criteria.

• Scoring System: Define a scoring system that assigns values to each criterion for every option. Common scoring systems include numerical scales, percentage scores, or qualitative ratings (e.g., high, medium, low).
• Consistency: Ensure consistency in scoring by defining clear guidelines for each score. Provide examples or descriptions to help evaluators understand what each score represents.
• Data Collection: Collect data or information relevant to each criterion for all options. This may involve quantitative data (e.g., sales figures) or qualitative data (e.g., customer feedback).
• Aggregation: Aggregate the scores for each option to obtain an overall evaluation. This can be done by summing the individual criterion scores or applying weighted averages.
• Normalization: If your criteria have different measurement scales or units, consider normalizing the scores to create a level playing field for comparison.

5. Assign Importance to Criteria

Not all criteria are equally important in a comparative analysis. Weighting criteria allows you to reflect their relative significance in the final decision-making process.

• Relative Importance: Assess the importance of each criterion in achieving your objectives. Criteria directly aligned with your goals may receive higher weights.
• Weighting Methods: Choose a weighting method that suits your analysis. Common methods include expert judgment, analytic hierarchy process (AHP), or data-driven approaches based on historical performance.
• Impact Analysis: Consider how changes in the weights assigned to criteria would affect the final outcome. This sensitivity analysis helps you understand the robustness of your decisions.
• Stakeholder Input: Involve relevant stakeholders or decision-makers in the weighting process. Their input can provide valuable insights and ensure alignment with organizational goals.
• Transparency: Clearly document the rationale behind the assigned weights to maintain transparency in your analysis.

By weighting criteria, you ensure that the most critical factors have a more significant influence on the final evaluation, aligning the analysis more closely with your objectives and priorities.

With these steps in place, you're well-prepared to conduct a comprehensive comparative analysis. The next phase involves interpreting your findings, drawing conclusions, and making informed decisions based on the insights you've gained.

Comparative Analysis Interpretation

Interpreting the results of your comparative analysis is a crucial phase that transforms data into actionable insights. We'll delve into various aspects of interpretation and how to make sense of your findings.

• Contextual Understanding: Before diving into the data, consider the broader context of your analysis. Understand the industry trends, market conditions, and any external factors that may have influenced your results.
• Drawing Conclusions: Summarize your findings clearly and concisely. Identify trends, patterns, and significant differences among the options or variables you've compared.
• Quantitative vs. Qualitative Analysis: Depending on the nature of your data and analysis, you may need to balance both quantitative and qualitative interpretations. Qualitative insights can provide context and nuance to quantitative findings.
• Comparative Visualization: Visual aids such as charts, graphs, and tables can help convey your conclusions effectively. Choose visual representations that align with the nature of your data and the key points you want to emphasize.
• Outliers and Anomalies: Identify and explain any outliers or anomalies in your data. Understanding these exceptions can provide valuable insights into unusual cases or factors affecting your analysis.
• Cross-Validation: Validate your conclusions by comparing them with external benchmarks, industry standards, or expert opinions. Cross-validation helps ensure the reliability of your findings.
• Implications for Decision-Making: Discuss how your analysis informs decision-making. Clearly articulate the practical implications of your findings and their relevance to your initial objectives.
• Actionable Insights: Emphasize actionable insights that can guide future strategies, policies, or actions. Make recommendations based on your analysis, highlighting the steps needed to capitalize on strengths or address weaknesses.
• Continuous Improvement: Encourage a culture of continuous improvement by using your analysis as a feedback mechanism. Suggest ways to monitor and adapt strategies over time based on evolving circumstances.

Comparative Analysis Applications

Comparative analysis is a versatile methodology that finds application in various fields and scenarios. Let's explore some of the most common and impactful applications.

Business Decision-Making

Comparative analysis is widely employed in business to inform strategic decisions and drive success. Key applications include:

Market Research and Competitive Analysis

• Objective: To assess market opportunities and evaluate competitors.
• Methods: Analyzing market trends, customer preferences, competitor strengths and weaknesses, and market share.
• Outcome: Informed product development, pricing strategies, and market entry decisions.

Product Comparison and Benchmarking

• Objective: To compare the performance and features of products or services.
• Methods: Evaluating product specifications, customer reviews, and pricing.
• Outcome: Identifying strengths and weaknesses, improving product quality, and setting competitive pricing.

Financial Analysis

• Objective: To evaluate financial performance and make investment decisions.
• Methods: Comparing financial statements, ratios, and performance indicators of companies.
• Outcome: Informed investment choices, risk assessment, and portfolio management.

Healthcare and Medical Research

In the healthcare and medical research fields, comparative analysis is instrumental in understanding diseases, treatment options, and healthcare systems.

Clinical Trials and Drug Development

• Objective: To compare the effectiveness of different treatments or drugs.
• Methods: Analyzing clinical trial data, patient outcomes, and side effects.
• Outcome: Informed decisions about drug approvals, treatment protocols, and patient care.

Health Outcomes Research

• Objective: To assess the impact of healthcare interventions.
• Methods: Comparing patient health outcomes before and after treatment or between different treatment approaches.
• Outcome: Improved healthcare guidelines, cost-effectiveness analysis, and patient care plans.

Healthcare Systems Evaluation

• Objective: To assess the performance of healthcare systems.
• Methods: Comparing healthcare delivery models, patient satisfaction, and healthcare costs.
• Outcome: Informed healthcare policy decisions, resource allocation, and system improvements.

Social Sciences and Policy Analysis

Comparative analysis is a fundamental tool in social sciences and policy analysis, aiding in understanding complex societal issues.

Educational Research

• Objective: To compare educational systems and practices.
• Methods: Analyzing student performance, curriculum effectiveness, and teaching methods.
• Outcome: Informed educational policies, curriculum development, and school improvement strategies.

Political Science

• Objective: To study political systems, elections, and governance.
• Methods: Comparing election outcomes, policy impacts, and government structures.
• Outcome: Insights into political behavior, policy effectiveness, and governance reforms.

Social Welfare and Poverty Analysis

• Objective: To evaluate the impact of social programs and policies.
• Methods: Comparing the well-being of individuals or communities with and without access to social assistance.
• Outcome: Informed policymaking, poverty reduction strategies, and social program improvements.

Environmental Science and Sustainability

Comparative analysis plays a pivotal role in understanding environmental issues and promoting sustainability.

Environmental Impact Assessment

• Objective: To assess the environmental consequences of projects or policies.
• Methods: Comparing ecological data, resource use, and pollution levels.
• Outcome: Informed environmental mitigation strategies, sustainable development plans, and regulatory decisions.

Climate Change Analysis

• Objective: To study climate patterns and their impacts.
• Methods: Comparing historical climate data, temperature trends, and greenhouse gas emissions.
• Outcome: Insights into climate change causes, adaptation strategies, and policy recommendations.

Ecosystem Health Assessment

• Objective: To evaluate the health and resilience of ecosystems.
• Methods: Comparing biodiversity, habitat conditions, and ecosystem services.
• Outcome: Conservation efforts, restoration plans, and ecological sustainability measures.

Technology and Innovation

Comparative analysis is crucial in the fast-paced world of technology and innovation.

Product Development and Innovation

• Objective: To assess the competitiveness and innovation potential of products or technologies.
• Methods: Comparing research and development investments, technology features, and market demand.
• Outcome: Informed innovation strategies, product roadmaps, and patent decisions.

User Experience and Usability Testing

• Objective: To evaluate the user-friendliness of software applications or digital products.
• Methods: Comparing user feedback, usability metrics, and user interface designs.
• Outcome: Improved user experiences, interface redesigns, and product enhancements.

Technology Adoption and Market Entry

• Objective: To analyze market readiness and risks for new technologies.
• Methods: Comparing market conditions, regulatory landscapes, and potential barriers.
• Outcome: Informed market entry strategies, risk assessments, and investment decisions.

These diverse applications of comparative analysis highlight its flexibility and importance in decision-making across various domains. Whether in business, healthcare, social sciences, environmental studies, or technology, comparative analysis empowers researchers and decision-makers to make informed choices and drive positive outcomes.

Comparative Analysis Best Practices

Successful comparative analysis relies on following best practices and avoiding common pitfalls. Implementing these practices enhances the effectiveness and reliability of your analysis.

• Clearly Defined Objectives: Start with well-defined objectives that outline what you aim to achieve through the analysis. Clear objectives provide focus and direction.
• Data Quality Assurance: Ensure data quality by validating, cleaning, and normalizing your data. Poor-quality data can lead to inaccurate conclusions.
• Transparent Methodologies: Clearly explain the methodologies and techniques you've used for analysis. Transparency builds trust and allows others to assess the validity of your approach.
• Consistent Criteria: Maintain consistency in your criteria and metrics across all options or variables. Inconsistent criteria can lead to biased results.
• Sensitivity Analysis: Conduct sensitivity analysis by varying key parameters, such as weights or assumptions, to assess the robustness of your conclusions.
• Stakeholder Involvement: Involve relevant stakeholders throughout the analysis process. Their input can provide valuable perspectives and ensure alignment with organizational goals.
• Critical Evaluation of Assumptions: Identify and critically evaluate any assumptions made during the analysis. Assumptions should be explicit and justifiable.
• Holistic View: Take a holistic view of the analysis by considering both short-term and long-term implications. Avoid focusing solely on immediate outcomes.
• Documentation: Maintain thorough documentation of your analysis, including data sources, calculations, and decision criteria. Documentation supports transparency and facilitates reproducibility.
• Continuous Learning: Stay updated with the latest analytical techniques, tools, and industry trends. Continuous learning helps you adapt your analysis to changing circumstances.
• Peer Review: Seek peer review or expert feedback on your analysis. External perspectives can identify blind spots and enhance the quality of your work.
• Ethical Considerations: Address ethical considerations, such as privacy and data protection, especially when dealing with sensitive or personal data.

By adhering to these best practices, you'll not only improve the rigor of your comparative analysis but also ensure that your findings are reliable, actionable, and aligned with your objectives.

Comparative Analysis Examples

To illustrate the practical application and benefits of comparative analysis, let's explore several real-world examples across different domains. These examples showcase how organizations and researchers leverage comparative analysis to make informed decisions, solve complex problems, and drive improvements:

Retail Industry - Price Competitiveness Analysis

Objective: A retail chain aims to assess its price competitiveness against competitors in the same market.

Methodology:

• Collect pricing data for a range of products offered by the retail chain and its competitors.
• Organize the data into a comparative framework, categorizing products by type and price range.
• Calculate price differentials, averages, and percentiles for each product category.
• Analyze the findings to identify areas where the retail chain's prices are higher or lower than competitors.

Outcome: The analysis reveals that the retail chain's prices are consistently lower in certain product categories but higher in others. This insight informs pricing strategies, allowing the retailer to adjust prices to remain competitive in the market.

Healthcare - Comparative Effectiveness Research

Objective: Researchers aim to compare the effectiveness of two different treatment methods for a specific medical condition.

• Recruit patients with the medical condition and randomly assign them to two treatment groups.
• Collect data on treatment outcomes, including symptom relief, side effects, and recovery times.
• Analyze the data using statistical methods to compare the treatment groups.
• Consider factors like patient demographics and baseline health status as potential confounding variables.

Outcome: The comparative analysis reveals that one treatment method is statistically more effective than the other in relieving symptoms and has fewer side effects. This information guides medical professionals in recommending the more effective treatment to patients.

Environmental Science - Carbon Emission Analysis

Objective: An environmental organization seeks to compare carbon emissions from various transportation modes in a metropolitan area.

• Collect data on the number of vehicles, their types (e.g., cars, buses, bicycles), and fuel consumption for each mode of transportation.
• Calculate the total carbon emissions for each mode based on fuel consumption and emission factors.
• Create visualizations such as bar charts and pie charts to represent the emissions from each transportation mode.
• Consider factors like travel distance, occupancy rates, and the availability of alternative fuels.

Outcome: The comparative analysis reveals that public transportation generates significantly lower carbon emissions per passenger mile compared to individual car travel. This information supports advocacy for increased public transit usage to reduce carbon footprint.

Technology Industry - Feature Comparison for Software Development Tools

Objective: A software development team needs to choose the most suitable development tool for an upcoming project.

• Create a list of essential features and capabilities required for the project.
• Research and compile information on available development tools in the market.
• Develop a comparative matrix or scoring system to evaluate each tool's features against the project requirements.
• Assign weights to features based on their importance to the project.

Outcome: The comparative analysis highlights that Tool A excels in essential features critical to the project, such as version control integration and debugging capabilities. The development team selects Tool A as the preferred choice for the project.

Educational Research - Comparative Study of Teaching Methods

Objective: A school district aims to improve student performance by comparing the effectiveness of traditional classroom teaching with online learning.

• Randomly assign students to two groups: one taught using traditional methods and the other through online courses.
• Administer pre- and post-course assessments to measure knowledge gain.
• Collect feedback from students and teachers on the learning experiences.
• Analyze assessment scores and feedback to compare the effectiveness and satisfaction levels of both teaching methods.

Outcome: The comparative analysis reveals that online learning leads to similar knowledge gains as traditional classroom teaching. However, students report higher satisfaction and flexibility with the online approach. The school district considers incorporating online elements into its curriculum.

These examples illustrate the diverse applications of comparative analysis across industries and research domains. Whether optimizing pricing strategies in retail, evaluating treatment effectiveness in healthcare, assessing environmental impacts, choosing the right software tool, or improving educational methods, comparative analysis empowers decision-makers with valuable insights for informed choices and positive outcomes.

Conclusion for Comparative Analysis

Comparative analysis is your compass in the world of decision-making. It helps you see the bigger picture, spot opportunities, and navigate challenges. By defining your objectives, gathering data, applying methodologies, and following best practices, you can harness the power of Comparative Analysis to make informed choices and drive positive outcomes.

Remember, Comparative analysis is not just a tool; it's a mindset that empowers you to transform data into insights and uncertainty into clarity. So, whether you're steering a business, conducting research, or facing life's choices, embrace Comparative Analysis as your trusted guide on the journey to better decisions. With it, you can chart your course, make impactful choices, and set sail toward success.

How to Conduct Comparative Analysis in Minutes?

Are you ready to revolutionize your approach to market research and comparative analysis? Appinio , a real-time market research platform, empowers you to harness the power of real-time consumer insights for swift, data-driven decisions. Here's why you should choose Appinio:

• Speedy Insights:  Get from questions to insights in minutes, enabling you to conduct comparative analysis without delay.
• User-Friendly:  No need for a PhD in research – our intuitive platform is designed for everyone, making it easy to collect and analyze data.
• Global Reach:  With access to over 90 countries and the ability to define your target group from 1200+ characteristics, Appinio provides a worldwide perspective for your comparative analysis

Get free access to the platform!

Join the loop 💌

Be the first to hear about new updates, product news, and data insights. We'll send it all straight to your inbox.

Get the latest market research news straight to your inbox! 💌

Wait, there's more

30.05.2024 | 29min read

Pareto Analysis: Definition, Pareto Chart, Examples

28.05.2024 | 32min read

What is Systematic Sampling? Definition, Types, Examples

16.05.2024 | 30min read

Time Series Analysis: Definition, Types, Techniques, Examples

Comparative Analysis

• First Online: 02 January 2023

Cite this chapter

• Kenisha Blair-Walcott 4  

Part of the book series: Springer Texts in Education ((SPTE))

4784 Accesses

Comparative analysis is a multidisciplinary method, which spans a wide cross-section of disciplines (Azarian, International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1(4), 113–125 (2014)). It is the process of comparing multiple units of study for the purpose of scientific discovery and for informing policy decisions (Rogers, Comparative effectiveness research, 2014). Even though there has been a renewed interest in comparative analysis as a research method over the last decade in fields such as education, it has been used in studies for decades.

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

Access this chapter

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

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Multilevel Structural Equation Modeling for Cross-National Comparative Research

Comparative Case Studies: Methodological Discussion

Ethical Frameworks and Comparative Effectiveness Research

Adiyia, M., & Ashton, W. (2017). Comparative research. Brandon University.

Google Scholar  

Azarian, R. (2011). Potentials and limitations of comparative method in social science. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1 (4), 113–125. http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol._1_No._4%3b_April_2011/15.pdf

Bray, M., Adamson, B., & Mason, M. (2014). Comparative education research: Approaches and methods . Springer.

Crossley, M. (2002). Comparative and international education: Contemporary challenges, reconceptualization and new directions for the field. Current Issues in Comparative Education, 4 (2), 81–86. https://www.tc.columbia.edu/cice/pdf/25691_4_2_Crossley.pdf

Esser, F., & Vliegenthart, R. (2017). Comparative research methods. The International Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods, 1 , 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118901731.iecrm0035

Article   Google Scholar  

Henry, I. (Ed.). (2007). Transnational and comparative research in sport globalisation, governance and sport policy. Routledge. https://doi-org.cyber.usask.ca/ https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203944738

Mills, M., Bunt, G., & Bruijn, J. (2006). Comparative research: Persistent problems and promising solutions. International Sociology, 21 (5), 619–631. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580906067833

Nóvoa, A., & Yariv-Mashal, T. (2003). Comparative research in education: A mode of governance or a historical journey? Comparative Education, 39 (4), 423–438. https://repositorio.ul.pt/bitstream/10451/680/1/21185_0305-0068_423-438.pdf

Peters, G. (2013). Strategies for comparative research in political science . Macmillan.

Book   Google Scholar  

Pickvance, C. (2005). The four varieties of comparative analysis: The case of environmental regulation. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 16 , 7–28.

Rogers, M. (2014). Comparative effectiveness research .

Rokkan, S. (1968). The structuring of mass politics in the smaller European democracies: A developmental typology. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 10 (2), 173–210. https://www.jstor.org/stable/177728

Tilly, C. (1984). Big structures, large processes, huge comparisons . SAGE.

Wang, G., & Huang, Y. (2016). Contextuality, commensurability, and comparability in comparative research: Learning from Chinese relationship research. Cross-Cultural Research, 50 (2), 154–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397116630241

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada

Kenisha Blair-Walcott

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kenisha Blair-Walcott .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Department of Educational Administration, College of Education, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada

Janet Mola Okoko

Scott Tunison

Department of Educational Administration, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada

Keith D. Walker

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Blair-Walcott, K. (2023). Comparative Analysis. In: Okoko, J.M., Tunison, S., Walker, K.D. (eds) Varieties of Qualitative Research Methods. Springer Texts in Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04394-9_13

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04394-9_13

Published : 02 January 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-04396-3

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-04394-9

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

What is comparative analysis? A complete guide

Last updated

18 April 2023

Reviewed by

Jean Kaluza

Comparative analysis is a valuable tool for acquiring deep insights into your organization’s processes, products, and services so you can continuously improve them. 

Similarly, if you want to streamline, price appropriately, and ultimately be a market leader, you’ll likely need to draw on comparative analyses quite often.

When faced with multiple options or solutions to a given problem, a thorough comparative analysis can help you compare and contrast your options and make a clear, informed decision.

If you want to get up to speed on conducting a comparative analysis or need a refresher, here’s your guide.

Make comparative analysis less tedious

Dovetail streamlines comparative analysis to help you uncover and share actionable insights

• What exactly is comparative analysis?

A comparative analysis is a side-by-side comparison that systematically compares two or more things to pinpoint their similarities and differences. The focus of the investigation might be conceptual—a particular problem, idea, or theory—or perhaps something more tangible, like two different data sets.

For instance, you could use comparative analysis to investigate how your product features measure up to the competition.

After a successful comparative analysis, you should be able to identify strengths and weaknesses and clearly understand which product is more effective.

You could also use comparative analysis to examine different methods of producing that product and determine which way is most efficient and profitable.

The potential applications for using comparative analysis in everyday business are almost unlimited. That said, a comparative analysis is most commonly used to examine

Emerging trends and opportunities (new technologies, marketing)

Competitor strategies

Financial health

Effects of trends on a target audience

Free AI content analysis generator

Make sense of your research by automatically summarizing key takeaways through our free content analysis tool.

• Why is comparative analysis so important? 

Comparative analysis can help narrow your focus so your business pursues the most meaningful opportunities rather than attempting dozens of improvements simultaneously.

A comparative approach also helps frame up data to illuminate interrelationships. For example, comparative research might reveal nuanced relationships or critical contexts behind specific processes or dependencies that wouldn’t be well-understood without the research.

For instance, if your business compares the cost of producing several existing products relative to which ones have historically sold well, that should provide helpful information once you’re ready to look at developing new products or features.

• Comparative vs. competitive analysis—what’s the difference?

Comparative analysis is generally divided into three subtypes, using quantitative or qualitative data and then extending the findings to a larger group. These include

Pattern analysis —identifying patterns or recurrences of trends and behavior across large data sets.

Data filtering —analyzing large data sets to extract an underlying subset of information. It may involve rearranging, excluding, and apportioning comparative data to fit different criteria. 

Decision tree —flowcharting to visually map and assess potential outcomes, costs, and consequences.

In contrast, competitive analysis is a type of comparative analysis in which you deeply research one or more of your industry competitors. In this case, you’re using qualitative research to explore what the competition is up to across one or more dimensions.

For example

Service delivery —metrics like the Net Promoter Scores indicate customer satisfaction levels.

Market position — the share of the market that the competition has captured.

Brand reputation —how well-known or recognized your competitors are within their target market.

• Tips for optimizing your comparative analysis

Conduct original research

Thorough, independent research is a significant asset when doing comparative analysis. It provides evidence to support your findings and may present a perspective or angle not considered previously. 

Make analysis routine

To get the maximum benefit from comparative research, make it a regular practice, and establish a cadence you can realistically stick to. Some business areas you could plan to analyze regularly include:

Profitability

Competition

Experiment with controlled and uncontrolled variables

In addition to simply comparing and contrasting, explore how different variables might affect your outcomes.

For example, a controllable variable would be offering a seasonal feature like a shopping bot to assist in holiday shopping or raising or lowering the selling price of a product.

Uncontrollable variables include weather, changing regulations, the current political climate, or global pandemics.

Put equal effort into each point of comparison

Most people enter into comparative research with a particular idea or hypothesis already in mind to validate. For instance, you might try to prove the worthwhileness of launching a new service. So, you may be disappointed if your analysis results don’t support your plan.

However, in any comparative analysis, try to maintain an unbiased approach by spending equal time debating the merits and drawbacks of any decision. Ultimately, this will be a practical, more long-term sustainable approach for your business than focusing only on the evidence that favors pursuing your argument or strategy.

Writing a comparative analysis in five steps

To put together a coherent, insightful analysis that goes beyond a list of pros and cons or similarities and differences, try organizing the information into these five components:

1. Frame of reference

Here is where you provide context. First, what driving idea or problem is your research anchored in? Then, for added substance, cite existing research or insights from a subject matter expert, such as a thought leader in marketing, startup growth, or investment

2. Grounds for comparison Why have you chosen to examine the two things you’re analyzing instead of focusing on two entirely different things? What are you hoping to accomplish?

3. Thesis What argument or choice are you advocating for? What will be the before and after effects of going with either decision? What do you anticipate happening with and without this approach?

For example, “If we release an AI feature for our shopping cart, we will have an edge over the rest of the market before the holiday season.” The finished comparative analysis will weigh all the pros and cons of choosing to build the new expensive AI feature including variables like how “intelligent” it will be, what it “pushes” customers to use, how much it takes off the plates of customer service etc.

Ultimately, you will gauge whether building an AI feature is the right plan for your e-commerce shop.

4. Organize the scheme Typically, there are two ways to organize a comparative analysis report. First, you can discuss everything about comparison point “A” and then go into everything about aspect “B.” Or, you alternate back and forth between points “A” and “B,” sometimes referred to as point-by-point analysis.

Using the AI feature as an example again, you could cover all the pros and cons of building the AI feature, then discuss the benefits and drawbacks of building and maintaining the feature. Or you could compare and contrast each aspect of the AI feature, one at a time. For example, a side-by-side comparison of the AI feature to shopping without it, then proceeding to another point of differentiation.

5. Connect the dots Tie it all together in a way that either confirms or disproves your hypothesis.

For instance, “Building the AI bot would allow our customer service team to save 12% on returns in Q3 while offering optimizations and savings in future strategies. However, it would also increase the product development budget by 43% in both Q1 and Q2. Our budget for product development won’t increase again until series 3 of funding is reached, so despite its potential, we will hold off building the bot until funding is secured and more opportunities and benefits can be proved effective.”

Should you be using a customer insights hub?

Do you want to discover previous research faster?

Do you share your research findings with others?

Do you analyze research data?

Start for free today, add your research, and get to key insights faster

Editor’s picks

Last updated: 13 April 2023

Last updated: 14 February 2024

Last updated: 27 January 2024

Last updated: 18 April 2023

Last updated: 8 February 2023

Last updated: 23 January 2024

Last updated: 30 January 2024

Last updated: 7 February 2023

Last updated: 18 May 2023

Last updated: 31 January 2024

Last updated: 13 May 2024

Latest articles

Related topics, .css-je19u9{-webkit-align-items:flex-end;-webkit-box-align:flex-end;-ms-flex-align:flex-end;align-items:flex-end;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:row;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;-webkit-box-flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-box-pack:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;justify-content:center;row-gap:0;text-align:center;max-width:671px;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}}@media (max-width: 799px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}} decide what to .css-1kiodld{max-height:56px;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-1kiodld{display:none;}} build next, decide what to build next.

Users report unexpectedly high data usage, especially during streaming sessions.

Users find it hard to navigate from the home page to relevant playlists in the app.

It would be great to have a sleep timer feature, especially for bedtime listening.

I need better filters to find the songs or artists I’m looking for.

Log in or sign up

Get started for free

How do I write a comparative analysis?

A comparative analysis is an essay in which two things are compared and contrasted. You may have done a "compare and contrast" paper in your English class, and a comparative analysis is the same general idea, but as a graduate student you are expected to produce a higher level of analysis in your writing. You can follow these guidelines to get started. 

• Conduct your research. Need help? Ask a Librarian!
• Brainstorm a list of similarities and differences. The Double Bubble  document linked below can be helpful for this step.
• Write your thesis. This will be based on what you have discovered regarding the weight of similarities and differences between the things you are comparing. 
• Alternating (point-by-point) method: Find similar points between each subject and alternate writing about each of them.
• Block (subject-by-subject) method: Discuss all of the first subject and then all of the second.
• This page from the University of Toronto gives some great examples of when each of these is most effective.
• Don't forget to cite your sources! 

Visvis, V., & Plotnik, J. (n.d.). The comparative essay . University of Toronto. https://advice.writing.utoronto.ca/types-of-writing/comparative-essay/

Walk, K. (1998). How to write a comparative analysis . Harvard University. https://writingcenter.fas.harvard.edu/pages/how-write-comparative-analysis

Links & Files

• Double_Bubble_Map.docx
• Health Sciences
• Reading and Writing
• Graduate Writing
• Last Updated Sep 06, 2023
• Views 129155
• Answered By Kerry Louvier

FAQ Actions

• Share on Facebook

Comments (0)

Hello! We're here to help! Please log in to ask your question.

Need an answer now? Search our FAQs !

How can I find my course textbook?

You can expect a prompt response, Monday through Friday, 8:00 AM-4:00 PM Central Time (by the next business day on weekends and holidays).

Questions may be answered by a Librarian, Learning Services Coordinator, Instructor, or Tutor. 

• Contact sales (+234) 08132546417
• Have a questions? [email protected]
• Latest Projects

Project Materials

A step-by-step guide to writing a comparative analysis.

Click Here to Download Now.

Do You Have New or Fresh Topic? Send Us Your Topic

How to write a comparative analysis.

Writing a comparative review in a research paper is not as difficult as many people might tend to think. With some tips, it is possible to write an outstanding comparative review. There are steps that must be utilized to attain this result. They are as detailed in this article.

Within the literary, academic, and journalistic world, analysis allows exposing ideas and arguments in front of a context, making it an important material for discussion within the professional work.

Within this genre, we can find a comparative analysis. For some authors, the comparative essay is defined as the text where two opposing positions are proposed or where two theses are verified. Through this comparison, the author intends to make the reader reflect on a specific topic. It consists of giving a written opinion about two positions, which are compared between them to conclude. Do you know how to write a comparative essay? In this article, we will explain step by step how to do it.

So, let’s see the guidelines that you must follow to achieve a good comparative analysis .

How to write a good comparative analysis

The structure.

In general, the approach is developed in the first paragraph or at the beginning of the work. Its objective is to propose the author’s position regarding a specific subject. Generally, this approach specifies the objective to be achieved. You must be clear about what topic you are going to deal with, what you want to explain, and what the perspectives will be to use in your comparative analysis, and you must also define who you write for.

As it is a comparative text, it begins with a general observation that can serve as a context for both approaches, then begins by establishing the arguments in each of the two cases. Do not forget to compare both objects of study according to each argument or idea to develop.

Let it be the reader himself who finds or defines his position in this essay and choose one of the two alternatives.

In this entry, there are two possibilities of approach: one deductive and the other inductive. The deductive method raises the issue, and you use your analysis of the variables leading, guiding the reader to draw their conclusions or fix a position on the issue. While the inductive method starts with argument, developing each of the variables until reaching the topic’s approach or problem. The two ways of approaching the subject are viable. Choose the one that is easiest for you to work with.

At the end of this section, your audience should:

• First of all, have a clear understanding of what topics you will cover in your essay, what you want to explain, and under what positions or perspectives you will do it. It begins with a general observation that establishes the similarity between the two subjects and then moves the essay’s focus to the concrete.
• The reader should understand which points will be examined and which points will not be examined in the comparison. At the end of the introduction, state your preference, or describe the two subjects’ meaning.
• Your readers should be able to describe the ideas you are going to treat. Make a detailed exposition of its characteristics, history, consequences, and development that you consider appropriate. Your comparative analysis should expose the characteristics of the second position on which you want to speak as much as in the first one.

Development of body

Generally, in the body of the essay, the author presents all the arguments that support his thesis, which gives him a reflective and justifying body of the author’s initial statement. Depending on the length of the work, which can range from two to 15 pages, each paragraph or before a title corresponds to an argument’s development.

After speaking on the subject, the author must close the essay, must conclude, must show the findings of his work, and/or show the conclusions he reached. You must write a final closing paragraph, as a conclusion, in which you expose a confrontation between the two positions. Try to create a fight between them so that the reader gets involved. The conclusion should give a brief and general summary of the most important similarities and differences. It should end with a personal statement, an opinion, and the “what then?” – what is important about the two things being compared.

Readers should be left feeling that all the different threads of this essay have been put together coherently, that they have learned something – and they must be sure that this is the end – that they do not look around for pages missing. And finally, your assessment must explain what position you stand in solidarity and why you prefer it to the other.

Examples of how to write a comparative analysis

Paragraph 1: Messi’s preferred position / Ronaldo’s preferred position.

Paragraph 2: Messi’s play style / Ronaldo’s play style.

Paragraph 3: Messi aerial game / Ronaldo aerial game.

Paragraph 1: Messi teamwork .

Paragraph 2: Ronaldo’s teamwork.

Paragraph 3: Messi stopped the ball.

Paragraph 4: Ronaldo’s stopped the ball.

Paragraph 5: Messi’s achievements.

Paragraph 6: Ronaldo’s achievements.

Few Important Rules for Comparative analysis

Even if the exercise sounds simple, there are a few rules that should be followed to help your audience as best as possible make the best decision.

1. Clearly state your position

The first question is, “Why are you doing a comparison analysis”? To highlight your view or ideas over another, or simply to compare two (or more) solutions that do not belong to you? It is imperative that you clearly state your position to your reader, so does your credibility.

Be honest and state, for example:

• The idea you are trying to espouse
• The framework you are using
• The reason why you are doing this comparison, the objective

In addition to the above, you must be consistent with the exposition of your ideas.

2. Stay objective

Even if you include your personal ideology in your comparison, stay as objective as possible. Your readers will not appreciate it when you point out all the disadvantages of one idea while you display the advantages of the other. Your comparison will turn into advertising. You have to raise weak points and strong points on both sides.

These analyses are always subjective, so you have to clarify which position convinces you the most.

3. Think about audience’ expectations

The research paper is intended for your readers, which means that you must take their expectations into account when writing your review. Put aside your desire to sell your desired idea, and take your readers’ perspective:

• What information are they interested in?
• What are their criteria?
• What do they want to know?
• What do they want from the product or service?

Again, it is about being objective in all your statements.

Do You Have New or Fresh Topic?  Send Us Your Topic 

4. Organize information

For your readers to want to read your comparative analysis, it is important to structure your comments. The idea is to make it easy for your readers to navigate your paper and get them to find the information that interests them quickly.

5. End with a conclusion

You’ve tried to be as objective as possible throughout your comparison, and now is the time to let go like we have mentioned many times in this post. In your conclusion, you can go directly to your readers and give your opinion. With a few tips, you can also encourage them to go towards one or the other idea.

Note: If time is not an issue, the best way to review the essay is to leave it for one day. Go for a walk, eat something, have fun, and forget. Then it’s time to go back to the text, find problems, and fix them. This must be done separately, that is, first find all the problems you can without correcting them. Although the idea of ​​doing it at the same time is tempting, it is smarter to do it separately. It is effective and fast.

Tips on Comparative analysis

Be concise or accurate in your analysis and dissertation of the topic.

Sometimes the authors believe that the more elaborate the language and the more extensive the writing, the better the writers or essayists. On the contrary, a good essay refers to the exact analysis of a topic, where the reader can dynamically advance the work and understand the author’s position.

Use only the arguments necessary for the explanation of the topic, do not talk too much. You run the risk of redundant or repetitive, which makes the text-heavy both when reading it and understanding it.

Write in Short Sentences

Just as we recommend that you do not redound in your texts, we also encourage you to write with short sentences. They give dynamism to the text. Communication is direct. The reader advances in the text and understands much more.

Include Reflections in Your Text

Supporting your approach with reflections or quotes from authors makes your essay more important. Above all, use those arguments that justify or give strength to your position regarding one thesis or the other.

Text Revision

Since comparative analysis can tend to be a subjective work, you must let it “sit” for a day or a few hours and read it again. This exercise will allow you to make corrections. Modify those aspects that are not clear enough for you. And you can improve it, in a few words. Once you do this exercise, just like this, you can submit it.

Not What You Were Looking For? Send Us Your Topic

INSTRUCTIONS AFTER PAYMENT

• 1.Your Full name
• 2. Your Active Email Address
• 3. Your Phone Number
• 4. Amount Paid
• 5. Project Topic
• 6. Location you made payment from

» Send the above details to our email; [email protected] or to our support phone number; (+234) 0813 2546 417 . As soon as details are sent and payment is confirmed, your project will be delivered to you within minutes.

Latest Updates

Design and implementation of an automated inventory control system for nigerian breweries plc, enugu, design and implementation of an automated payroll system, design and implementation of an automated student result processing system, leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Advertisements

• Hire A Writer
• Plagiarism Research Clinic
• International Students
• Project Categories
• WHY HIRE A PREMIUM RESEARCHER?
• UPGRADE PLAN
• PROFESSIONAL PLAN
• STANDARD PLAN
• MBA MSC STANDARD PLAN
• MBA MSC PROFESSIONAL PLAN

This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Published on 30.5.2024 in Vol 10 (2024)

An Accessible Web-Based Survey to Monitor the Mental Health of People With Mild Intellectual Disability or Low Literacy Skills During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Comparative Data Analysis

Authors of this article:

Original Paper

• Monique CJ Koks-Leensen 1, 2 * , PhD   ; 
• Anouk Menko 1, 3 * , MSc   ; 
• Fieke Raaijmakers 1, 3, 4 , MA, MSc   ; 
• Gerdine AJ Fransen-Kuppens 1, 3, 5 , Prof Dr   ; 
• Kirsten E Bevelander 1, 2, 3 , PhD  

1 Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, Netherlands

2 Academic Collaborative Intellectual Disability and Health - Sterker op Eigen Benen (SOEB), Nijmegen, Netherlands

3 Academic Collaborative AMPHI - Integrated Health Policy, Nijmegen, Netherlands

4 Safety and Health Region Gelderland-Midden, Arnhem, Netherlands

5 Municipal Health Service Gelderland Zuid, Nijmegen, Netherlands

*these authors contributed equally

Corresponding Author:

Monique CJ Koks-Leensen, PhD

Department of Primary and Community Care

Radboud university medical center

Geert Grooteplein 21

Nijmegen, 6525 EZ

Netherlands

Phone: 31 243618181

Email: [email protected]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic and related control measures affected the mental health of all populations. Particular subgroups are underrepresented in mainstream surveys because they are hard to reach, and study measurements are not adapted to their skills. These subgroups include people with lower cognitive and literacy skills, such as people with mild intellectual disability (MID), who were considered vulnerable during the COVID-19 pandemic given their low socioeconomic status, small social networks, increased risks of health problems, and difficulties understanding health-related information.

Objective: This study examines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health among people with MID or low literacy skills compared with those predominantly represented in national surveys.

Methods: A repeated cross-sectional study of people with MID or low literacy skills and a general population sample was conducted in the Netherlands. An easy-read web-based survey was co-designed with, and tested among, people with MID or low literacy skills and conducted in 3 rounds within 1 year of the COVID-19 pandemic (T1: November to December 2020, T2: March to April 2021, and T3: September to October 2021). The survey contained questions about demographics and 6 aspects of mental health: feeling happy, feeling energized, feeling stressed, worry, feeling lonely, and sleeping problems.

Results: Our adapted survey and recruitment procedure enabled 1059 persons with MID or low literacy skills to participate (T1: n=412, 38.9%; T2: n=351, 33.1%; and T3: n=296, 28%). They were significantly younger, had a lower level of education, and more often than not were born outside the Netherlands compared to the general population sample ( P <.001). Approximately half of them (604/1059, 57.03%) received professional care. They displayed poorer mental health scores than the general population sample. The percentages of people with MID or low literacy skills who reported more negative feelings in T1 ranged from 20.6% (85/412) reporting feeling lonely often or almost always to 57.8% (238/412) reporting feeling happy almost never or sometimes . The general population sample’s percentages were 5.4% (160/2930) and 32.2% (941/2918), respectively. Although scores improved over time in both populations, the disproportional effects remained.

Conclusions: General COVID-19–related restrictions for the entire Dutch population affected people with MID or low literacy skills more negatively than the general population. Our study underscores the relevance of including these subpopulations in public health research because they are often overlooked in regular health data. An accessible web-based survey particularly targeted at this population enabled us to do so, and we reached a group of respondents significantly different from regular survey participants. This survey’s results provided insights into the health of people with MID or low literacy skills and gained knowledge to be used by care organizations and policy makers to reduce health disparities during a pandemic and in general.

Introduction

Studying covid-19–related impact.

The COVID-19 pandemic and related disease control measures affected the entire world. People were advised to adhere to strict hygiene measures and to work from home (if possible), and public places and nonessential shops were closed. In addition, social distancing and visiting restrictions were in place during lockdowns. In general, these restrictions had a major impact on daily routines, social contacts, and mental health [ 1 - 3 ], affecting some individuals more than others [ 4 ]. In the Netherlands, the Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu (RIVM; National Institute for Public Health and the Environment) started conducting a national longitudinal survey to monitor the impact of COVID-19 and related measures on Dutch citizens [ 5 , 6 ]. The monitor is informative regarding disease control strategies and policy making [ 7 ]; however, there is an external validity bias because participant characteristics show that a majority of the participants have a high educational level and are middle-aged or older and women [ 6 , 8 , 9 ]. Indeed, studies have demonstrated that particular subgroups are often underrepresented and excluded from mainstream surveys because general recruitment strategies are unsuitable for reaching them, and study measurements are not adapted to their cognitive level or literacy skills [ 10 - 12 ]. These groups often comprise people with lower socioeconomic status and higher risks of health problems, and, in the case of the COVID-19 pandemic, more difficulties complying with preventive measures [ 13 - 15 ], given their housing or work situation.

This study examines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and related restrictions on mental health and well-being among people with lower cognitive and literacy skills in addition to those who are predominantly represented in the national survey. An accessible survey based on the national survey was developed, and alternative recruitment techniques were used to specifically include these underrepresented subgroups.

Subpopulations at Risk for Greater COVID-19–Related Impact

In the Netherlands, approximately 19% of the adult population (ie, 2.5 million adults) have limited reading, writing, or numeracy skills [ 16 ]. These limitations have various causes, such as a low level of educational attainment, migrant background, parents’ level of education and literacy, or low information-processing skills [ 17 ]. The last item plays an important role in people with mild intellectual disability (MID), who experience considerable limitations in both intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior and often need support in their daily life [ 18 ]. It is estimated that 4% to 8% of the Dutch population have an MID [ 19 ]. People with low literacy skills or MID often have limited work and income, poor health, and small social networks [ 20 - 24 ]. In general, studies have shown that people with low education and health literacy as well as those without social support, a stable income, a daily routine, and access to services are more at risk of mental health problems such as anxiety, general distress, and loneliness arising from the COVID-19 pandemic [ 1 , 3 , 5 , 14 , 25 , 26 ]. Therefore, it is likely that the COVID-19 pandemic had a higher impact on the mental health of people with MID or low literacy skills compared with the general population. However, during the first months of the pandemic, very limited knowledge was available about the impact on this subpopulation, and our study was set up to provide both these essential insights and practical recommendations for policy makers and care providers.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, studies on mental health specifically aimed at people with mild or more severe intellectual disability (ID) showed negative impacts as a result of social isolation or a lack of social support, the rapid changes in COVID-19–related measures and difficulty understanding these measures, difficulty accessing services, and disruption of daily routines [ 27 - 29 ]. Two European surveys among people with ID found that more than half reported stress or anxiety [ 30 , 31 ] or felt more anxious than usual because of the pandemic and subsequent lockdown [ 31 ]. A US survey found that 41% of the participants with ID had experienced more mental health problems or symptoms since the pandemic began; worry and stress were most often mentioned [ 32 ]. Similarly, people with low health literacy experienced more anxiety disorders, bouts of depression, and sleeping disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic than those showing sufficient health literacy [ 14 ]. Altogether, these studies—primarily conducted during the first lockdown periods—showed a great impact on the mental health of people with MID or low literacy skills, which contributed to an increase in preexisting inequalities in health and well-being [ 24 , 33 ].

The current underrepresentation in national surveillance and surveys of people with MID or low literacy skills, as well as the consequent lack of information about them, adds to existing health disparities. To better understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on people with MID or low literacy skills, the specific factors driving this impact, and their specific needs, more information is urgently needed. Knowledge acquired through monitoring population health in its local context can provide a basis for government and health organizations to develop appropriate strategies to reduce this impact accordingly. In addition, the course of the pandemic and the ever-changing COVID-19-disease control strategies over time are important aspects regarding the context in which people were affected. Due to the rapidly changing situation and regulations during the pandemic (eg, when vaccinations were offered or restrictions were lifted), a dynamic impact on mental health was expected, and more insight is needed into how people responded to this unpredictable course.

This study examines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on people with MID or low literacy skills in direct comparison with the general population and over the course of the pandemic at 3 different time points. A unique survey study was set up that complemented the RIVM national survey. This study developed an accessible version of the web-based survey together with representatives of the target population and used suitable techniques to reach people with MID or low literacy skills.

Study Design

A repeated cross-sectional study of people with MID or low literacy skills and a general population sample was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands. The inclusion criteria were people with reading and writing difficulties, aged ≥16 years, living in the Netherlands, and completion of the survey. No exclusion criteria were used. A control question to assess participants on literacy skills or intellectual ability was not included because this was expected to be too sensitive for the participants. For reasons of comparison, the same survey was presented to 2 panels used to represent the general Dutch population.

The survey was administered 3 times in a 1-year period between November 2020 and November 2021. The first survey (T1) was distributed during a nationwide second lockdown (November to December 2020), the second survey (T2) was administered after the second lockdown and when the Dutch vaccination program had started (April to May 2021), and the third survey (T3) was distributed after the summer when most COVID-19–related restrictions had been lifted (September to October 2021). Figure 1 shows the timeline and the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands by means of excess mortality rates. Data were derived from Statistics Netherlands [ 34 ].

Study Population and Recruitment

The surveys were disseminated via organizations working with people with MID or low literacy skills, such as advocacy organizations, care facilities for people with MID, language education organizations and libraries supporting and educating people with no or low literacy skills, social workplaces, the Dutch center of expertise on health disparities Pharos, Special Olympics, and a website offering accessible web-based information and programs for people with limited digital or literacy skills [ 35 ]. The surveys were open for between 4 and 6 weeks, giving the organizations time to distribute them within their network. Support was available to allow people who were anxious or unable to complete the survey independently to participate in this study. At the end of each survey, participants were asked to participate in future research, resulting in a panel of participants who could be contacted directly for the subsequent survey rounds.

Our easy-read survey was also distributed within the same time period to 2 municipal health service (MHS) panels: GGD Gelderland-Zuid (n=approximately 2500) and GGD Gelderland-Midden (n=approximately 7000). Each MHS panel consisted of residents in its service area who are regularly asked to complete health surveys. There is a known bias to these panels, in that they generally consist of older and more highly educated residents, with an overrepresentation of women [ 36 ]. We particularly used these panels in our study to obtain comparative data from a Dutch population sample and because these panels were also invited to participate in the national RIVM survey.

All participants received the same survey. Participation was voluntary, and participants could stop completing the survey at any time. Completion of a prior survey was not mandatory for participation in the next round. Data were obtained anonymously; therefore, matching between surveys and paired within-group analysis over time were not possible.

Web-Based Survey Development

The RIVM survey on Dutch citizens’ perception of the COVID-19-related measures, their impact on well-being, and whether people were complying formed the basis of this monitor but was adapted to provide an easy-read version for this study [ 6 ]. The national survey consisted of >100 questions (eg, about participants’ well-being, trust in the government, adherence to COVID-19–related measures, the risk of COVID-19 infection, and the understanding of COVID-19 information). Over time, new topics such as willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccinations and vaccine hesitancy were added to the survey. To create an easy-read version, we adapted the national survey in three steps by (1) shortening the survey (ie, we selected only a limited number of relevant topics), (2) reducing the number of response categories, and (3) adjusting the language level. This procedure was based on literature insights [ 37 ] and carried out in collaboration with professionals (researchers: n=2, care providers: n=3, and policy makers: n=2 working with people with MID or low literacy skills regarding health-related issues) as well as 2 experiential experts with MID or low literacy skills trained to advise, and experienced in advising, research projects. First, to shorten the survey, we discussed, prioritized, and selected the most relevant topics in light of our research objective to measure mental health, relevance to the target population, and the target population’s cognitive capacity to answer the questions. Second, we reduced the number of response categories, in terms of Likert-scale options [ 38 , 39 ], by verifying the distinctiveness between the response categories and checking the relevance of the categories [ 40 ]. During the third and final step, abstract concepts, time references, and the language level were adjusted [ 41 ].

The easy-read survey consisted of 40 to 60 questions, with the length depending on the answers given to previous questions. The survey was pilot-tested with people with MID or low literacy skills (n=6) using the think-aloud methodology in cognitive interviews [ 42 ]. We used this method to verify the intended constructions of the questions and to assess the language level and the fit of the questions and response categories. Next, a web-based version of the survey was created on a web-based platform (called I Coresearch ) designed with and for people with MID [ 43 ]. The platform has a clear layout, the possibility to enlarge font size, icons that can be added to response categories, and a speech-to-text and text-to-speech function. Additional pilot tests were carried out in which we observed participants (n=4-7 in each wave) while they were completing the survey to evaluate and improve the usability of the platform. The observation sessions were followed by retrospective interviews. The tests resulted in minor adjustments to the questions, the response categories, and the web-based platform. This procedure resulted in a final short easy-read web-based survey.

These same steps were followed to modify and revise the survey for the second and third rounds. After each survey round, the findings were discussed in 4 to 5 focus groups with either people with MID or low literacy skills or care and support professionals and policy makers concerned with these subgroups. This not only led to a quick dissemination of our findings accompanied by solutions or practical tips to put into practice, but the group discussions also provided input for the subsequent survey rounds in which questions that became less relevant over time (eg, adherence to specific measures and difficulty coping with changes in specific daily activities) were replaced by new questions (eg, about vaccination).

The easy-read survey consisted of various topics, and we report the measures used for this specific study only (for details, refer to Multimedia Appendix 1 ).

Demographics and Contextual Factors

Similar to the national survey, an extensive section on demographics was included, such as age, gender, educational level, country of birth, and living situation. Furthermore, contextual factors known to have a potential influence on mental well-being were selected from the national survey and included, such as health status (eg, a rating of physical health and whether the participant had experienced COVID-19 infection), having social contacts, and socioeconomic status (eg, work status and the cessation of main activities because of COVID-19–related restrictions) [ 24 , 25 ]. To fit our target group’s everyday experience, work status included paid work, volunteer work, school, and day care. In addition to the national survey questions, we included receiving professional care because this is an important characteristic describing the support needs of our target population, as well as survey completion methods (alone or with help), about which participants with MID or low literacy skills were asked (refer to Multimedia Appendix 1 for all questions listed in the easy-read questionnaire).

Mental Health

To gain a better understanding of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health, a final set of 6 outcome measures regarding mental health were defined. The RIVM survey incorporated a mix of newly developed and existing validated scales or items in its well-being module, including psychological well-being (the 5-item Mental Health Inventory [ 44 ]), loneliness (the 6-item De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale [ 45 ]), life satisfaction, resilience, positive and negative effects experienced due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and emotional response (ie, the extent of worry, stress, or fear people experience) to monitor various aspects of mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic [ 6 ]. The most relevant items for our target group and research aim were selected from this set in the first developmental step of item generation. Subsequently, the response format was evaluated. For reasons of uniformity, the response categories in this series of questions were all adapted to a 4-point Likert scale. All questions had to be revised in accordance with the language level and understanding of the target group, and we ensured that overlapping concepts were avoided. These steps resulted in the following questions: (1) “Did you feel happy in the last couple of days?” (2) “Did you feel full of energy in the last couple of days?” (3) “'Did you worry in the last couple of days?” (4) “Did you feel stressed in the last couple of days?” (5) “Did you feel lonely in the last couple of days?” and (6) “Did you have problems falling asleep in the last couple of days?” The outcomes were measured on a 4-point Likert scale: 1= yes, almost always ; 2= yes, often ; 3= yes, sometimes ; and 4= no, almost never ( Multimedia Appendix 1 ).

Statistical Analyses

Mental health was measured at 3 time points over a 1-year period among people with MID or low literacy skills (referred to as the target panel) as well as among members of the MHS panels. First, we calculated the frequencies and medians of the descriptive and contextual measures at each time point for the target panel and the MHS panels. To assess differences between the panels, in each round, Pearson chi-square tests were conducted for nominal or ordinal variables, and nonparametric t tests (2-tailed) were performed for age. Second, we calculated the differences in frequencies of mental health scores using Pearson chi-square tests between survey rounds within each panel and between panels for each survey round. Third, we analyzed the impact of the group differences on mental health using linear regression analyses, while controlling for gender- and age-related differences. Given the large number of participants in each round and the multitude of comparisons made in analysis, differences and associations were considered statistically significant if P values were <.01 [ 46 ]. Statistical analyses were conducted in SPSS (version 25.0; IBM Corp).

Ethical Considerations

The study was reviewed by the medical research ethics committee of Radboud University Medical Center, which ruled that this study did not fall under the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act and was therefore exempt from formal ethical review (2020-7033). We conducted the study in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation and standard operating procedures of our research center.

All participants received the survey after they had been fully informed, in plain language, about the purpose of this study. All participants provided web-based written informed consent regarding participation and the use of their data for this study and for future purposes before filling out each questionnaire. For each survey, 20 vouchers worth €50 (US $53.9) each were raffled among people with MID or low literacy skills as motivation for participation.

Contact information used for the purpose of this raffle or future research was obtained and saved in a separate environment so that survey data could be obtained anonymously. Therefore, matching between surveys and paired within-group analysis over time were not possible.

Participant Characteristics

Our web-based survey and adapted recruitment procedure enabled 1059 persons with MID or low literacy skills to participate (T1: n=412, 38.9%; T2: n=351, 33.1%; and T3: n=296, 28%). Background and contextual characteristics per survey round for the target panel and the MHS panels are presented in Table 1 . Over the 3 time periods, 46.6% (138/296) to 53.2% (219/412) of the participants with MID or low literacy skills were women, with median ages ranging from 42 (IQR at T1: 27-57; IQR at T3: 28-54) to 45 (IQR 30-57 at T2) years and >70% (T1: 292/412, 70.9%; T2: 253/351, 72.1% and T3: 221/296, 74.7%) reporting no education or a low educational level. The majority (299/412, 72.6% at T1; 295/351, 84% at T2 and to 253/296, 85.5% at T3) were born in the Netherlands, 49.5% (204/412) to 62.2% (184/296) received professional care, and 22.6% (93/412) to 31.8% (94/296) reported living in a residential setting. Approximately half of the respondents (217/412, 52.7% at T1; 164/351, 46.7% at T2 and 170/296, 57.4% at T3) in each round reported very good or good physical health.

A total of 9305 MHS panel members completed our survey (T1: n=2930, 31.49%; T2: n=3213, 34.53%; and T3: n=3162, 33.98%). On the MHS panels over the 3 survey rounds, 55.85% (1766/3162) to 62.53% (1832/2930) of the participants were women, with median ages ranging from 52 to 62 years, and 12.73% (373/2930 at T1) to 17.08% (540/3162 at T3) had no education or a low educational level (ie, >70% had an intermediate or advanced educational level). The majority (2790/2930, 95.22% at T1; 3073/3213, 95.64% at T2 and 3023/3162, 95.6% at T3) were born in the Netherlands, only 3.28% (96/2930 at T1; 92/3213, 2.86% at T2 and 105/3162, 3.32% at T3) received professional care, and <1% (6/2930, 0.2% at T1; 6/3213, 0.19% at T2 and 3/3162, 0.1% at T3) lived in a residential setting. In addition, 77.12% (2478/3213 at T2 and 2435/3162, 77% at T3) to 79.39% (2326/2930 at T1) reported having very good or good physical health.

Altogether, this suggests that we successfully included a sample that represented our target population (ie, people with MID or low literacy skills). In addition, the characteristics of the MHS panels resemble those of the national sample, which is often used to represent the general Dutch population [ 9 , 36 ].

a Category totals do not always add up to 100% because some categories (I don’t know and I don’t want to answer) and item nonresponse are not shown. Percentages are based on presented variable totals per category.

b T1: first survey (November to December 2020).

c T2: second survey (April to May 2021).

d T3: third survey (September to October 2021).

e Value for the target panel is significantly different from that for the regional panel ( P <.001). Italicized values emphasize significance.

f <1% indicated their gender as “other.”

g Value for the target panel is significantly different from that for the regional panel ( P =.001). Italicized values emphasize significance.

h Value for the target panel is not significantly different from that for the regional panel ( P =.15).

i The answer category “other” is chosen by respondents when it does not fit any of the provided options. This may be because they do not know their educational level, do not recognize their education category from the option list, or they were educated in a country other than the Netherlands.

j This question was added to the survey from T2.

k Value for the target panel is not significantly different from that for the regional panel ( P =.12).

l Value for the target panel is not significantly different from that for the regional panel ( P =.72).

m Respondents could provide multiple answers; the category total can therefore add up to than 100%.

n Value for the target panel is significantly different from that for the regional panel ( P =.005). Italicized values emphasize significance.

o Value for the target panel is not significantly different from that for the regional panel ( P =.16).

p Value for the target panel is not significantly different from that for the regional panel ( P =.73).

q Value for the target panel is not significantly different from that for the regional panel ( P =.38).

r Value for the target panel is not significantly different from that for the regional panel ( P =.04).

s Value for the target panel is not significantly different from that for the regional panel ( P =.18).

t Value for the target panel is not significantly different from that of the regional panel ( P =.03).

u Value for the target panel is not significantly different from that for the regional panel ( P =.01).

v This variable is constructed concerning the daily activities of paid work, volunteer work, and day care.

w Value for the target panel is not significantly different from that for the regional panel ( P =.02).

The analyses of the distributions of the frequencies of mental health scores within the target panel show no differences between T1 and T2. There are significant differences between T1 and T3 regarding feeling happy, feeling energized, feeling stressed, worry, feeling lonely, and sleeping problems among people with MID or low literacy skills ( Figure 2 ) and between T2 and T3 for these aspects, except for worry and feeling lonely; the percentage of people reporting positive feelings often or almost always increased, and the percentage of people reporting negative feelings often or almost always decreased over time. There were no differences observed regarding sleeping problems.

Regarding the MHS panels, there were significant differences between each survey round for feeling happy, feeling energized, and feeling stressed. For worry and feeling lonely, significant differences were observed only between T3 and the 2 previous rounds. The direction of the differences is similar to that observed in the target panels. Similar to the target panels, the MHS panels did not report differences regarding sleeping problems.

The analyses between the different panels within the survey rounds show that the percentage of participants in the target panel reporting negative feelings on mental health outcomes was significantly higher compared with the members of the MHS panels, especially within T1 and T2 ( Figure 2 ); for example, looking at the 6 outcome measures within T1, the percentages of people who reported more negative feelings range from 20.8% (85/408) feeling lonely often or almost always to 58.3% (238/408) feeling happy almost never or only sometimes . The MHS panels show a different and more positive distribution on all outcome measures. The percentages of people on the MHS panels who reported more negative feelings range from 5.5% (160/2904) feeling lonely often or almost always to 32.2% (941/2918) feeling happy almost never or only sometimes . Figure 2 presents more details on the distribution of all mental health outcomes for the target panel and the MHS panels.

Impact of Literacy Skills on Mental Health

Regression analyses adjusted for age and gender by using them as covariates show that the differences found between the 2 panels exist for almost all mental health outcomes in each survey round, except feeling stressed in T3 ( P =.07). In addition, the differences between the panels during T1 (age- and gender-adjusted β ranging from −0.376 to 0.525) are larger than those observed in T3 (age- and gender-adjusted β ranging from −0.257 to 0.509), except for sleeping problems. Table 2 presents details for all time periods and outcome measures.

a T1: first survey (November to December 2020).

b T2: second survey (April to May 2021).

c T3: third survey (September to October 2021).

d Italicized values indicate significant regression results, with P <.01 level.

Principal Findings

This is the first study to monitor the mental health and well-being of people with MID or low literacy skills and a general population sample over the course of 1 year during the COVID-19 pandemic. With our adapted web-based survey co-designed with representatives from our target population, we were able to reach subgroups that are usually underrepresented in surveys. Our study showed that feelings of happiness, energy, worry, stress, and loneliness improved in both populations over the course of the pandemic. However, the COVID-19 pandemic and related restrictions had a much bigger impact on the mental health of people with MID or low literacy skills than on that of the general population.

In general, our findings show that, during the second lockdown in the Netherlands (ie, at the time of the first survey round), people with MID or low literacy skills as well as the general population sample reported poorer mental well-being than 1 year later when all restrictions were lifted, and the COVID-19 infections became less severe (ie, at the time of the third survey round). These findings are in line with research on people in vulnerable positions [ 1 ] as well as the general population who experienced fewer negative feelings over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic [ 5 ]. Previous literature has shown that the impact on mental health and well-being is correlated to the stringency of disease control measures [ 25 , 47 ]; for example, the closure of social care services, workplaces, and day care activities negatively influenced daily structure and social interactions [ 29 - 31 , 48 , 49 ], thereby increasing stress and anxiety [ 50 ], and quarantines and social isolation were found to have an effect on loneliness, fear, and boredom [ 27 , 28 , 51 ]. When these measures were relaxed, there was a partial improvement in mental health [ 47 ]. Although our study was not designed to prove any causation between the stringency of disease control measures and mental health impact, our findings show a similar pattern of decreasing worries, stress, and loneliness whereas feelings of happiness and energy increased over time. Notably, this was also the case in our general population sample [ 1 , 3 , 5 , 14 , 25 , 26 ]; however, the pandemic disproportionately impacted people with MID or low literacy skills, who reported more negative mental health outcomes in all survey rounds.

Qualitative studies among people with MID show that long-term social restrictions in particular had an extensive impact on their daily life by limiting social connections and work activities [ 27 , 29 ]. Our target population reported these limitations in daytime activities to a greater extent than the general population sample. Interviews by Voermans et al [ 29 ] provide more in-depth assessment of the consequences of these limitations for people with MID, showing a major impact in terms of social isolation, difficulties coping with negative thoughts, struggles with autonomy in society, stigmatization, a lack of routine and purpose, boredom, and lower self-worth. As awareness is raised about the significant value of meaningful social contacts and daytime activities, professionals and policy makers should provide tailored policies that consider both health risks and the risks of social isolation. Societal participation initiatives should be organized and sustained for people with MID or low literacy skills, both during and outside of a pandemic.

Besides the disruptive impact of disease control measures on the target population’s daily routines and social contacts, the high levels of confusion and uncertainty that resulted from the rapidly changing measures as well as fear and loss of control may have played a role in their reduced mental health [ 32 ] in periods of both stringent measures and relaxation of control measures [ 14 ]. In addition, people with lower health literacy skills are known to have less resilience, which affects their feelings of anxiety, stress, or worry [ 52 , 53 ], thereby putting them at greater risk of mental health problems. Ongoing support should be provided to enhance resources of resilience and coping strategies in people with MID or low literacy skills through either formal or informal caregivers.

Our findings highlight the need to prioritize the mental health consequences of the pandemic and the disease control measures for people with MID or low literacy skills [ 1 , 54 , 55 ]. The majority of our sample received support from formal and informal caregivers, who are an important source of support. Studies have shown detrimental effects on the mental health of these caregivers as well [ 28 , 56 ]. Therefore, we suggest tailoring generic disease control measures to the specific situations of groups considered vulnerable and their support system, instead of widely implementing measures such as social distancing, visiting restrictions, and closure of schools or day care facilities (eg, by developing strategies to maintain social inclusion during pandemic challenges through a combination of supportive carers, assisted digital communication technologies, and safe social activities) [ 57 , 58 ]. Hence, engaging groups considered vulnerable and their support system in policy making and decision-making is essential in the tailoring process [ 59 ].

This study underscores the relevance of including people with MID or low literacy skills in health research and therefore endorses current calls to action in practice and science [ 60 ]. Health information systems are crucial for providing data for policy making and decision-making, but the underrepresentation of people with MID or low literacy skills in health data may lead to biased policy decisions, with adverse and detrimental effects on existing health disparities [ 13 , 33 ]. Previous research has suggested that, to reduce disparities and guide policy, researchers should evaluate how health outcomes are distributed among specific demographic groups and compare these distributions with those of the overall population [ 61 ], as was done in our study. Collecting information about people with MID or low literacy skills should become routine in demographic and public health data collection. We have shown that, by co-designing an adapted survey and using an accessible web-based platform and specific recruitment procedures, it is possible to collect information among people with MID or low literacy skills, even during lockdown periods; for example, the sample characteristics showed that participants with MID or low literacy skills differed from the general population in educational level, country of birth, and daily activities. With our adjusted approach to data collection, we were quickly able to obtain relevant information about people with MID or low literacy skills and disseminate our findings and recommendations, thereby facilitating policy makers to guide disease control measures and health promotion activities that address the immediate as well as longer-term health needs of people with MID or low literacy skills or other populations considered vulnerable.

Limitations of the Study

Executing a repeated cross-sectional survey among people with MID or low literacy skills during a pandemic is fraught with challenges. Therefore, our study has some limitations. First, we did not collect longitudinal data because we wanted to lower the threshold for participation by choosing an anonymous design. In addition, people were not obliged to complete all 3 surveys. As a result, it was impossible to track individual participants over time. Second, inevitably, the validated questions had to be revised to include people with MID or low literacy skills in our survey. However, we tested the questions in cognitive interviews, and the project team worked as inclusively as possible together with the target population to create a valid survey to obtain reliable data. More than half of the participants over all survey rounds (558/1059, 52.69%) were able to complete the web-based survey themselves, and support was arranged for the remaining group of respondents (497/1059, 46.93%). This should encourage future researchers to consider easy-read web-based surveys among people with MID or low literacy skills as long as target group representatives are closely involved in designing and testing these surveys. Third, our study started after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and lacks a baseline measurement of mental health before the pandemic. Therefore, it remains inconclusive as to whether people with MID or low literacy skills experienced greater mental health problems during the COVID-19 pandemic than before the pandemic. Fourth, we relied mostly on organizations in our network (eg, health care organizations and public libraries with special literacy programs) to contact and recruit people with MID or low literacy skills. Besides the possible sampling bias that this may have caused, we could not track how many people were approached to take part in the survey. Therefore, we were unable to report information about response rates. Fifth, because the survey was conducted on the web, those without access to the internet or sufficient digital literacy skills may have been excluded. Sixth and last, there was also a bias in our general population sample. However, although the sample was not representative of the Dutch general population in terms of age, gender, and educational level, it allowed us to contextualize our findings and gain a deeper understanding of the challenges faced by people with MID or low literacy skills compared with the general population sample, while controlling for differences in gender and age. We were able to do so because we used the same easy-read questionnaire in both groups to prevent survey bias. An open-ended question about the experience of members of the MHS panels with this type of questionnaire at T3 revealed that the majority of participants (1829/2337, 78.26%) appreciated this approach, given that a broader population was enabled to participate. Although this may indicate that easy-read questionnaires can be used for broader purposes and other populations, rather than being aimed specifically at people with low literacy skills alone, this single question does not provide sufficient information regarding a broad survey approach, and more research is required.

Conclusions

In conclusion, our study enabled insight into the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and related control measures on the mental health of people with MID or low literacy skills. General disease control measures for the entire Dutch population had a more negative impact on people with MID or low literacy skills than on the general population. Although mental health improved over the course of the pandemic in both populations as the COVID-19–related restrictions were gradually lifted, and the severity of the disease decreased over time, the disproportional effect remained. Professionals should be aware of this and pay attention to the needs of people with MID or low literacy skills in research, practice, and policy by tailoring measures that consider physical, social, and mental health effects and providing support to overcome such effects.

This study underscores the relevance of including people with MID or low literacy skills in public health research because they are often overlooked in regular health data. An accessible and structural web-based monitor for people with MID or low literacy skills enabled us to do so and provides better knowledge for care providers and policy makers to react to unexpected events such as a pandemic. To prevent existing health disparities from increasing, greater account should be taken of the impact of control measures on people who are relatively more vulnerable.

Acknowledgments

The authors offer grateful thanks to their coresearchers Anneke van der Cruijsen and Paméla Melkert who were involved during all steps of the study as well as to all experts by experience who participated in the development, testing, or evaluation of the web-based survey and supported survey completion or the discussion of the survey results. The authors thank all organizations that participated in the recruitment of participants and, in particular, MEE Gelderse Poort, GGD Gelderland-Zuid, GGD Gelderland-Midden, and Pharos for their valuable contributions and cooperation during the execution of the study. This study was supported by a grant from the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw; grant 1043002201000). The funder had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, the writing of the manuscript, and the decision to publish.

Data Availability

The data sets generated and analyzed during this study are available in the Radboud Data Repository.

Authors' Contributions

MCJKL, FR, and GAJFK participated in the study conception and design. AM and MCJKL conducted the literature search and coordinated survey development and participant recruitment. KEB, AM, and MCJKL performed survey development, AM was involved in survey programming, and KEB facilitated the implementation of the survey on the web-based platform. AM, FR, and MCJKL contributed to the acquisition of data. AM accessed and verified the data; and KEB, AM, and MCJKL analyzed the data and plotted the tables and figures. AM and MCJKL drafted the manuscript. All authors participated in interpreting the data and study findings, critically reviewing and contributing to the revision of the manuscript, and approving the final version.

Conflicts of Interest

None declared.

Overview of all questions of the easy-read survey included in this study and response categories provided, separated into demographics and contextual measures, and in mental health items.

• Tackling the mental health impact of the COVID-19 crisis: an integrated, whole-of-society response. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2021. URL: https:/​/www.​oecd.org/​coronavirus/​policy-responses/​tackling-the-mental-health-impact-of-the-covid-19-crisis-an-integrated-whole-of-society-response-0ccafa0b/​ [accessed 2024-04-05]
• Glover RE, van Schalkwyk MC, Akl EA, Kristjannson E, Lotfi T, Petkovic J, et al. A framework for identifying and mitigating the equity harms of COVID-19 policy interventions. J Clin Epidemiol. Dec 2020;128:35-48. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Gloster AT, Lamnisos D, Lubenko J, Presti G, Squatrito V, Constantinou M, et al. Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on mental health: an international study. PLoS One. 2020;15(12):e0244809. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• van der Ven LG, Duinhof EL, Dückers ML, Jambroes M, van Bon-Martens MJ. Conceptualizing Vulnerability for Health Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated measures in Utrecht and Zeist: a concept map. Int J Environ Res Public Health. Nov 19, 2021;18(22):12163. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• RIVM Behavioral Unit . Welbevinden en leefstijl tijdens de coronacrisis. National Institute for Public Health and the Environment. Utrecht. RIVM; 2022. URL: https://www.rivm.nl/gedragsonderzoek/maatregelen-welbevinden/welbevinden-en-leefstijl
• van den Boom W, van Dijk M, Snijders B, Luijben G, van der Laan J, Euser S, et al. Cohort profile: the Corona Behavioral Unit cohort, a longitudinal mixed-methods study on COVID-19-related behavior, well-being and policy support in the Netherlands. PLoS One. Jul 31, 2023;18(7):e0289294. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• RIVM Behavioral Unit. Applying behavioural science to COVID-19. National Institute for Public Health and the Environment. Utrecht. RIVM; 2022. URL: https://www.rivm.nl/en/behavioural-science/results-of-study-behavioural-measures-and-well-being
• RIVM Behavioral Unit. Gedragwetenschappelijk onderzoek COVID-19: over dit onderzoek. National Institute for Public Health and the Environment. Utrecht. RIVM; 2023. URL: https://www.rivm.nl/gedragsonderzoek/maatregelen-welbevinden/resultaten-21e-ronde/over-dit-onderzoek
• Sanders JG, Spruijt P, van Dijk M, Elberse J, Lambooij MS, Kroese FM, et al. Understanding a national increase in COVID-19 vaccination intention, the Netherlands, November 2020-March 2021. Euro Surveill. Sep 2021;26(36):2100792. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Rosencrans M, Tassé MJ, Kim M, Krahn GL, Bonardi A, Rabidoux P, et al. Ohio State University Nisonger RRTC on HealthFunction. Invisible populations: Who is missing from research in intellectual disability? Res Dev Disabil. Dec 2021;119:104117. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Krahn GL. A call for better data on prevalence and health surveillance of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Intellect Dev Disabil. Oct 2019;57(5):357-375. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Jahagirdar D, Kroll T, Ritchie K, Wyke S. Patient-reported outcome measures for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease : the exclusion of people with low literacy skills and learning disabilities. Patient. Feb 16, 2013;6(1):11-21. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Stormacq C, Van den Broucke S, Wosinski J. Does health literacy mediate the relationship between socioeconomic status and health disparities? Integrative review. Health Promot Int. Oct 01, 2019;34(5):e1-17. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Hermans L, Van den Broucke S, Gisle L, Demarest S, Charafeddine R. Mental health, compliance with measures and health prospects during the COVID-19 epidemic: the role of health literacy. BMC Public Health. Jul 10, 2021;21(1):1365. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Hawkins RB, Charles EJ, Mehaffey JH. Socio-economic status and COVID-19-related cases and fatalities. Public Health. Dec 2020;189:129-134. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Algemene Rekenkamer. Aanpak van laaggeletterdheid. The Hague.; 2016. URL: https://www.rekenkamer.nl/publicaties/rapporten/2016/04/20/aanpak-van-laaggeletterdheid [accessed 2024-04-05]
• Grotlüschen A, Mallows D, Reder S, Sabatini J. Adults with Low Proficiency in Literacy or Numeracy. OECD Education Working Papers. Paris. OECD Publishing; 2016. URL: https:/​/www.​oecd-ilibrary.org/​docserver/​5jm0v44bnmnx-en.​pdf?expires=1713940220&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=A4CB65144AB89FB2F111EB6CA7EF5F06 [accessed 2024-05-07]
• Schalock R, Luckasson R, Tassé MJ. An overview of intellectual disability: definition, diagnosis, classification, and systems of supports (12th ed.). Am J Intellect Dev Disabil. Nov 01, 2021;126(6):439-442. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Woittiez I, Eggink EM. Het aantal mensen met een licht verstandelijke beperking: een schatting. Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau. The Hague.; 2019. URL: https:/​/www.​scp.nl/​publicaties/​publicaties/​2019/​10/​01/​het-aantal-mensen-met-een-licht-verstandelijke-beperking-een-schatting [accessed 2024-04-05]
• Emerson E, Parish S. Intellectual disability and poverty: introduction to the special section. J Intellect Dev Disabil. Dec 30, 2010;35(4):221-223. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Europe Monitor: How low literacy impacts us all. Macroeconomic update Europe. PwC. 2018. URL: https://www.pwc.nl/nl/themas/europe-monitor/documents/pwc-europe-monitor-april-2018.pdf [accessed 2024-05-07]
• van der Heide I, Rademakers J. Laaggeletterdheid en gezondheid: stand van zaken. Utrecht. Nivel; 2015. URL: https://www.nivel.nl/nl/publicatie/laaggeletterdheid-en-gezondheid-stand-van-zaken [accessed 2024-04-05]
• van der Velden PG, Contino C, Das M, van Loon P, Bosmans MW. Anxiety and depression symptoms, and lack of emotional support among the general population before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. A prospective national study on prevalence and risk factors. J Affect Disord. Dec 01, 2020;277:540-548. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• van der Heide I, Wang J, Droomers M, Spreeuwenberg P, Rademakers J, Uiters E. The relationship between health, education, and health literacy: results from the Dutch adult literacy and life skills survey. J Health Commun. 2013;18 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):172-184. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Scholz N. Mental health and the pandemic. European Parliamentary Research Service. 2021. URL: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/696164/EPRS_BRI(2021)696164_EN.pdf
• COVID-19: protecting people and societies. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2020. URL: https://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy-responses/covid-19-protecting-people-and-societies-e5c9de1a/ [accessed 2024-04-05]
• Embregts PJ, van den Bogaard KJ, Frielink N, Voermans MA, Thalen M, Jahoda A. A thematic analysis into the experiences of people with a mild intellectual disability during the COVID-19 lockdown period. Int J Dev Disabil. Oct 05, 2022;68(4):578-582. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Fisher MH, Sung C, Kammes RR, Okyere C, Park J. Social support as a mediator of stress and life satisfaction for people with intellectual or developmental disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. Jan 11, 2022;35(1):243-251. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Voermans MA, den Boer MC, Wilthagen T, Embregts PJ. Long-term social restrictions and lack of work activities during the COVID-19 pandemic: impact on the daily lives of people with intellectual disabilities. Disabil Rehabil. Dec 18, 2023;45(24):4122-4132. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• McCarron M, McCausland D, Luus R, Allen A, Sheerin F, Burke E, et al. The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on older adults with an intellectual disability during the first wave of the pandemic in Ireland. HRB Open Res. 2021;4:93. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Amor AM, Navas P, Verdugo MÁ, Crespo M. Perceptions of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities about COVID-19 in Spain: a cross-sectional study. J Intellect Disabil Res. May 08, 2021;65(5):381-396. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Rosencrans M, Arango P, Sabat C, Buck A, Brown C, Tenorio M, et al. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the health, wellbeing, and access to services of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Res Dev Disabil. Jul 2021;114:103985. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Krahn GL, Hammond L, Turner A. A cascade of disparities: health and health care access for people with intellectual disabilities. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev. Jan 24, 2006;12(1):70-82. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Gezondheid in coronatijd. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. URL: https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/visualisaties/welvaart-in-coronatijd/gezondheid-in-coronatijd [accessed 2024-04-29]
• Steffie. URL: https://www.steffie.nl/ [accessed 2024-04-29]
• Tabellenboek gezondheidsmonitor volwassenen regio gelderland-zuid. GGD Gelderland-Zuid. 2021. URL: https://gezondheidincijfers.ggdgelderlandzuid.nl/handlers/ballroom.ashx?function=download&id=99 [accessed 2024-05-07]
• Kooijmans R, Mercera G, Langdon PE, Moonen X. The adaptation of self-report measures to the needs of people with intellectual disabilities: A systematic review. Clin Psychol Sci Pract. Sep 2022;29(3):250-271. [ CrossRef ]
• Rivera-Riquelme M, Piqueras JA, Cuijpers P. The revised Mental Health Inventory-5 (MHI-5) as an ultra-brief screening measure of bidimensional mental health in children and adolescents. Psychiatry Res. Apr 2019;274:247-253. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Fang J, Fleck MP, Green A, McVilly K, Hao Y, Tan W, et al. The response scale for the intellectual disability module of the WHOQOL: 5-point or 3-point? J Intellect Disabil Res. Jun 25, 2011;55(6):537-549. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Hartley SL, MacLean Jr WE. A review of the reliability and validity of likert-type scales for people with intellectual disability. J Intellect Disabil Res. Nov 25, 2006;50(Pt 11):813-827. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Finlay WM, Lyons E. Methodological issues in interviewing and using self-report questionnaires with people with mental retardation. Psychol Assess. Sep 2001;13(3):319-335. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Wolcott MD, Lobczowski NG. Using cognitive interviews and think-aloud protocols to understand thought processes. Curr Pharm Teach Learn. Feb 2021;13(2):181-188. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Ik onderzoek mee. URL: https://www.ikonderzoekmee.nl/ [accessed 2024-04-29]
• Berwick DM, Murphy JM, Goldman PA, Ware Jr JE, Barsky AJ, Weinstein MC. Performance of a five-item mental health screening test. Med Care. Feb 1991;29(2):169-176. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Gierveld JD, Tilburg TV. A 6-item scale for overall, emotional, and social loneliness: confirmatory tests on survey data. Res Aging. Aug 18, 2016;28(5):582-598. [ CrossRef ]
• Benjamin DJ, Berger JO, Johannesson M, Nosek BA, Wagenmakers EJ, Berk R, et al. Redefine statistical significance. Nat Hum Behav. Jan 1, 2018;2(1):6-10. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• RIVM Behavioral Unit. Gedrag, Welzijn en vertrouwen tijdens de COVID-19 pandemie: trends, verklaringen en geleerde lessen. National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Netherlands. 2023. URL: https:/​/www.​rivm.nl/​documenten/​gedrag-welzijn-en-vertrouwen-tijdens-covid-19-pandemie-trends-verklaringen-en-geleerde [accessed 2024-05-07]
• Scheffers F, van Vugt E, Moonen X. Resilience in the face of adversity in adults with an intellectual disability: a literature review. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. Sep 09, 2020;33(5):828-838. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Courtenay K, Perera B. COVID-19 and people with intellectual disability: impacts of a pandemic. Ir J Psychol Med. Sep 2020;37(3):231-236. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Navas P, Amor AM, Crespo M, Wolowiec Z, Verdugo MÁ. Supports for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic from their own perspective. Res Dev Disabil. Jan 2021;108:103813. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Brooks SK, Webster RK, Smith LE, Woodland L, Wessely S, Greenberg N, et al. The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. Lancet. Mar 14, 2020;395(10227):912-920. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Xiao X, Xiao J, Yao J, Chen Y, Saligan L, Reynolds NR, et al. The role of resilience and gender in relation to infectious-disease-specific health literacy and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2020;16:3011-3021. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Zlotnick C, Dryjanska L, Suckerman S. Health literacy, resilience and perceived stress of migrants in Israel during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychol Health. Sep 12, 2022;37(9):1076-1092. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Torales J, O'Higgins M, Castaldelli-Maia JM, Ventriglio A. The outbreak of COVID-19 coronavirus and its impact on global mental health. Int J Soc Psychiatry. Jun 31, 2020;66(4):317-320. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Latoo J, Haddad PM, Mistry M, Wadoo O, Islam SM, Jan F, et al. The COVID-19 pandemic: an opportunity to make mental health a higher public health priority. BJPsych Open. Sep 20, 2021;7(5):e172. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Zonneveld E, van Schelven F, Boeije H. Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on quality of life among relatives of individuals with intellectual disabilities: a longitudinal study. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. Jan 22, 2023;36(1):68-77. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Tromans S, Kinney M, Chester V, Alexander R, Roy A, Sander JW, et al. Priority concerns for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic. BJPsych Open. Oct 29, 2020;6(6):e128. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Lunsky Y, Jahoda A, Navas P, Campanella S, Havercamp SM. The mental health and well-being of adults with intellectual disability during the COVID-19 pandemic: a narrative review. J Policy Pract Intellect Disabil. Mar 25, 2022;19(1):35-47. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Stadnick NA, Cain KL, Oswald W, Watson P, Ibarra M, Lagoc R, et al. Co-creating a theory of change to advance COVID-19 testing and vaccine uptake in underserved communities. Health Serv Res. Jun 04, 2022;57 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):149-157. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Landes SD, Turk MA. Health equity for people with intellectual and developmental disability requires vast improvements to data collection: lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic. Disabil Health J. Jan 2024;17(1):101539. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Almeida C, Braveman P, Gold MR, Szwarcwald CL, Ribeiro JM, Miglionico A, et al. Methodological concerns and recommendations on policy consequences of the World Health Report 2000. Lancet. May 26, 2001;357(9269):1692-1697. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]

Abbreviations

Edited by A Mavragani; submitted 23.12.22; peer-reviewed by J Gamble, S Gordon; comments to author 08.12.23; revised version received 30.01.24; accepted 20.03.24; published 30.05.24.

©Monique CJ Koks-Leensen, Anouk Menko, Fieke Raaijmakers, Gerdine AJ Fransen-Kuppens, Kirsten E Bevelander. Originally published in JMIR Public Health and Surveillance (https://publichealth.jmir.org), 30.05.2024.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Public Health and Surveillance, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://publichealth.jmir.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

Business basics: what is comparative advantage?

Professor, Australian National University

Disclosure statement

Martin Richardson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Australian National University provides funding as a member of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

For the best part of two centuries, the principle of “comparative advantage” has been a foundation stone of economists’ understanding of international trade, both of why it occurs in the first place and how it can be mutually beneficial to participants.

The principle largely aims to explain which countries produce and trade what, and why.

And yet, even 207 years on from political economist David Ricardo’s first exposition of the idea, it is still frequently misunderstood and mischaracterised.

One common oversimplification is that comparative advantage is just about countries making what they’re best at.

This is a bit like saying Macbeth is a play about murder – yes, but there’s quite a bit more to it.

Costs represent missed opportunities

Comparative advantage does suggest that a country should produce and export the goods it can produce at a lower cost than its trading partners can.

But the most important detail of the principle is that cost is not measured simply in terms of resources used. Rather, it is in terms of other goods and services given up: the opportunity cost of production.

An asset like land used for agriculture has an enormous range of other potential productive purposes – such as growing timber, housing or recreation. A production decision’s opportunity cost is the value forgone by not choosing the next best option.

Ricardo’s deep insight was to see that focusing on relative costs explains why all countries can gain from comparative advantage based trade, even a hypothetical country that might be more efficient, in resource-use terms, in the production of everything .

Imagine a country rich in capital and advanced technology that can produce anything using very few resources. It has an absolute advantage in all goods. How can it possibly gain from trading with some far less efficient country?

The answer is that it can still specialise in those goods at which it is “most best” at producing. That’s where its advantage relative to other countries is greatest.

Who’s best at producing wheat?

Here’s an example. In 2023, Canada’s wheat industry produced about three tonnes of wheat per hectare. But across the Atlantic, the United Kingdom yielded much more per hectare – 8.1 tonnes . So which country has a comparative advantage in wheat production?

The answer is actually that we can’t say, because these numbers are about absolute efficiency in terms of land used. They tell us nothing about what has been given up to use that land for wheat production.

The plains of Saskatchewan, Alberta and Manitoba are great for growing wheat but have few other uses, so the opportunity cost of producing wheat there is likely to be pretty low, compared with scarce land in crowded Britain.

It’s therefore very likely that Canada has the comparative advantage in wheat production, which is indeed borne out by its export data.

Why does it matter?

We have recently seen a lot in the news about industrial policy: governments actively intervening in markets to direct what is produced and traded. Current examples include the Future Made in Australia proposals and the US Inflation Reduction Act. Why is comparative advantage relevant to these discussions?

Well, to the extent that a policy moves a country away from the pattern of production and trade governed by its existing comparative advantage, it will involve efficiency losses – at least in the short term.

Resources are allocated away from the goods the country produces “best” (in the terms discussed above), and towards less efficient industries.

It’s important to note, however, that comparative advantage is not some god-given, immutable state of affairs.

Certainly, some sources of it – such as having a lot of natural gas or mineral ore – are given. But innovation and technical advances can affect costs. A country’s comparative advantage can therefore change or be created over time – either through “natural” changes or through policy actions.

The big hard-to-answer question concerns how good governments are at doing that: will claimed future gains be big enough to offset the losses?

Does everybody gain from international trade?

Supporters of free trade are often accused of arguing that everybody gains from trade. This was true in Ricardo’s early model, but pretty much only there. It has been understood for centuries that within a country there will typically be gainers and losers from international trade.

When economists talk of the mutual gains from comparative-advantage-based trade, they’re referring to aggregate gains – a country’s gainers gain more than its losers lose.

In principle, the winners could compensate the losers, leaving everybody better off. But this compensation can be politically difficult and seldom occurs.

But the concept can’t explain everything

The theory of comparative advantage is a powerful tool for economic analysis. It can easily be extended to comparisons of many goods in many countries, and it helps explain why there can be more than one country that specialises in the same good.

But it isn’t economists’ only basis for understanding international trade. A great deal of international trade in recent decades, particularly among developed nations, has been “intra-industry” trade.

For example, Germany and France both import cars from and export cars to each other, which cannot be explained by comparative advantage.

Economists have developed many other models to understand this phenomenon, and comparative-advantage-based trade is now only one of a suite of tools we use to explain and understand why trade happens the way it does.

Read more: Australia is playing catch-up with the Future Made in Australia Act. Will it be enough?

• Manufacturing
• Comparative advantage
• goods and services
• Inflation Reduction Act
• Future Made in Australia Act
• Business basics
• future made in australia

Data Manager

Research Support Officer

Director, Social Policy

Head, School of Psychology

Senior Research Fellow - Women's Health Services