is quantitative research explanatory

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

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

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

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

Edward barroga.

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

Glafera Janet Matanguihan

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

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

INTRODUCTION

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

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

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

DEFINITIONS AND RELATIONSHIP OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

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

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

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

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

CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

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

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

TYPES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

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

Research questions in quantitative research

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

Hypotheses in quantitative research

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

Research questions in qualitative research

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

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

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

Hypotheses in qualitative research

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

FRAMEWORKS FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CONSTRUCTING RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

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

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

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

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

EXAMPLES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS FROM PUBLISHED ARTICLES

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

EXAMPLES OF HYPOTHESES IN PUBLISHED ARTICLES

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

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

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

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

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

Author Contributions:

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

What is explanatory research?

Last updated

12 June 2023

Reviewed by

Miroslav Damyanov

The search for knowledge and understanding never stops in the field of research. Researchers are always finding new techniques to help analyze and make sense of the world. Explanatory research is one such technique. It provides a new perspective on various areas of study.

So, what exactly is explanatory research? This article will provide an in-depth overview of everything you need to know about explanatory research and its purpose. You’ll also get to know the different types of explanatory research and how they’re conducted.

Analyze explanatory research

Get a deeper understanding of your explanatory research when you analyze it in Dovetail

• Explanatory research: definition

Explanatory research is a technique used to gain a deeper understanding of the underlying reasons for, causes of, and relationships behind a particular phenomenon that has yet to be extensively studied.

Researchers use this method to understand why and how a particular phenomenon occurs the way it does. Since there is limited information regarding the phenomenon being studied, it’s up to the researcher to develop fresh ideas and collect more data.

The results and conclusions drawn from explanatory research give researchers a deeper understanding and help predict future occurrences.

• Descriptive research vs. explanatory research

Descriptive research aims to define or summarize an event or population without explaining why it exists. It focuses on acquiring and conveying facts.

On the other hand, explanatory research aims to explain why a phenomenon occurs by working to understand the causes and correlations between variables.

Unlike descriptive research, which focuses on providing descriptions and characteristics of a given phenomenon, explanatory research goes a step further to explain different mechanisms and the reasons behind them. Explanatory research is never concerned with producing new knowledge or solving problems. Instead, it aims to explain why and how something happens.

• Exploratory research vs. explanatory research

Explanatory research explains why specific phenomena function as they do. Meanwhile, exploratory research examines and investigates an issue that is not clearly defined. Both methods are crucial for problem analysis.

Researchers use exploratory research at the outset to discover new ideas, concepts, and opportunities. Once exploratory research has identified a potential area of interest or problem, researchers employ explanatory research to delve further into the specific subject matter.

Researchers employ the explanatory research technique when they want to explain why and how something occurs in a certain way. Researchers who employ this approach usually have an outcome in mind, and carrying it out is their top priority.

• When to use explanatory research

Explanatory research may be helpful in the following situations:

When testing a theoretical model: explanatory research can help researchers develop a theory. It can provide sufficient evidence to validate or refine existing theories based on the available data.

When establishing causality: this research method can determine the cause-and-effect relationships between study variables and determine which variable influences the predicted outcome most. Explanatory research explores all the factors that lead to a certain outcome or phenomenon.

When making informed decisions: the results and conclusions drawn from explanatory research can provide a basis for informed decision-making. It can be helpful in different industries and sectors. For example, entrepreneurs in the business sector can use explanatory research to implement informed marketing strategies to increase sales and generate more revenue.

When addressing research gaps: a research gap is an unresolved problem or unanswered question due to inadequate research in that space. Researchers can use explanatory research to gather information about a certain phenomenon and fill research gaps. It also enables researchers to answer previously unanswered questions and explain different mechanisms that haven’t yet been studied.

When conducting program evaluation: researchers can also use the technique to determine the effectiveness of a particular program and identify all the factors that are likely to contribute to its success or failure.

• Types of explanatory research

Here are the different types of explanatory research:

Case study research: this method involves the in-depth analysis of a given individual, company, organization, or event. It allows researchers to study individuals or organizations that have faced the same situation. This way, they can determine what worked for them and what didn’t.

Experimental research: this involves manipulating independent variables and observing how they affect dependent variables. This method allows researchers to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between different variables.

Quasi-experimental research: this type of research is quite similar to experimental research, but it lacks complete control over variables. It’s best suited to situations where manipulating certain variables is difficult or impossible.

Correlational research: this involves identifying underlying relationships between two or more variables without manipulating them. It determines the strength and direction of the relationship between different variables.

Historical research: this method involves studying past events to gain a better understanding of their causes and effects. It’s mostly used in fields like history and sociology.

Survey research: this type of explanatory research involves collecting data using a set of structured questionnaires or interviews given to a representative sample of participants. It helps researchers gather information about individuals’ attitudes, opinions, and behaviors toward certain phenomena.

Observational research: this involves directly observing and recording people in their natural setting, like the home, the office, or a shop. By studying their actions, needs, and challenges, researchers can gain valuable insights into their behavior, preferences, and pain points. This results in explanatory conclusions.

• How to conduct explanatory research

Take the following steps when conducting explanatory research:

Develop the research question

The first step is to familiarize yourself with the topic you’re interested in and clearly articulate your specific goals. This will help you define the research question you want to answer or the problem you want to solve. Doing this will guide your research and ensure you collect the right data.

Formulate a hypothesis

The next step is to formulate a hypothesis that will address your expectations. Some researchers find that literature material has already covered their topic in the past. If this is the case with you, you can use such material as the main foundation of your hypothesis. However, if it doesn’t exist, you must formulate a hypothesis based on your own instincts or literature material on closely related topics.

Select the research type

Choose an appropriate research type based on your research questions, available resources, and timeline. Consider the level of control you need over the variables.

Next, design and develop instruments such as surveys, interview guides, or observation guidelines to gather relevant data.

Collect the data

Collecting data involves implementing the research instruments and gathering information from a representative sample of your target audience. Ensure proper data collection protocol, ethical considerations , and appropriate documentation for the data you collect.

Analyze the data

Once you have collected the data you need for your research, you’ll need to organize, code, and interpret it.

Use appropriate analytical methods, such as statistical analysis or thematic coding , to uncover patterns, relationships, and explanations that address your research goals and questions. You may have to suggest or conduct further research based on the results to elaborate on certain areas.

Communicate the results

Finally, communicate your results to relevant stakeholders , such as team members, clients, or other involved partners. Present your insights clearly and concisely through reports, slides, or visualizations. Provide actionable recommendations and avenues for future research.

• Examples of explanatory research

Here are some real-life examples of explanatory research:

Understanding what causes high crime rates in big cities

Law enforcement organizations use explanatory research to pinpoint what causes high crime rates in particular cities. They gather information about various influencing factors, such as gang involvement, drug misuse, family structures, and firearm availability.

They then use regression analysis to examine the data further to understand the factors contributing to the high crime rates.

Factors that influence students’ academic performance

Educators and stakeholders in the Department of Education use questionnaires and interviews to gather data on factors that affect academic performance. These factors include parental engagement, learning styles, motivation, teaching quality, and peer pressure.

The data is used to ascertain how these variables affect students’ academic performance.

Examining what causes economic disparity in certain areas

Researchers use correlational and experimental research approaches to gather information on variables like education levels, household income, and employment rates. They use the information to examine the causes of economic disparity in certain regions.

• Advantages of explanatory research

Here are some of the benefits you can expect from explanatory research:

Deeper understanding : the technique helps fill research gaps in previous studies by explaining the reasons, causes, and relationships behind particular behaviors or phenomena.

Competitive edge: by understanding the underlying factors that drive customer satisfaction and behavior, companies can create more engaging products and desirable services.

Predictable capabilities: it helps researchers and teams make predictions regarding certain phenomena like user behavior or future iterations of product features.

Informed decision-making: explanatory research generates insights that can help individuals make informed decisions in various sectors.

• Disadvantages of explanatory research

Explanatory research is a great approach for better understanding various phenomena, but it has some limitations.

It’s time-consuming: explanatory research can be a time-consuming process, requiring careful planning, data collection, analysis, and interpretation. The technique might extend your timeline.

It’s resource intensive: explanatory research often requires a significant allocation of resources, including financial, human, and technological. This could pose challenges for organizations with limited budgets or constraints.

You have limited control over real-world factors: this type of research often takes place in controlled environments. Researchers may find this limits their ability to capture real-world complexities and variables that influence a particular behavior or phenomenon.

Depth and breadth are difficult to balance : explanatory research mainly focuses on a narrow hypothesis, which can limit the scope of the research and prevent researchers from understanding a problem more broadly.

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: 11 January 2024

Last updated: 15 January 2024

Last updated: 17 January 2024

Last updated: 12 May 2023

Last updated: 30 April 2024

Last updated: 18 May 2023

Last updated: 25 November 2023

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

• 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

Explanatory Research: Definition, Types & Guide

There are many types of research, but today, we want to talk to you about one, in particular, that will give you a new perspective on your objects of study; for that, we have created this guide with everything you need to know about explanatory research . After all, w hat is the purpose of explanatory research?

What is Explanatory Research?

Explanatory research is a method developed to investigate a phenomenon that has not been studied or explained properly. Its main intention is to provide details about where to find a small amount of information.

With this method, the researcher gets a general idea and uses research as a tool to guide them quicker to the issues that we might address in the future. Its goal is to find the why and what of an object of study.

Explanatory research is responsible for finding the why of the events by establishing cause-effect relationships. Its results and conclusions constitute the deepest level of knowledge, according to author Fidias G. Arias. In this sense, explanatory studies can deal with the determination of causes (post-facto research) and effects ( experimental research ) through hypothesis testing.

Characteristics of Explanatory Research 

Among the most critical characteristics of explanatory research are:

• It allows for an increased understanding of a specific topic. Although it does not offer conclusive results, the researcher can find out why a phenomenon occurs.
• It uses secondary research as a source of information, such as literature or published articles, that are carefully chosen to have a broad and balanced understanding of the topic.
• It allows the researcher to have a broad understanding of the topic and refine subsequent research questions to augment the study’s conclusions.
• Researchers can distinguish the causes why phenomena arising during the research design process and anticipate changes.
• Explanatory research allows them to replicate studies to give them greater depth and gain new insights into the phenomenon.

Types of Explanatory Research

The most popular methods of explanatory research:

• Literature research: It is one of the fastest and least expensive means of determining the hypothesis of the phenomenon and collecting information. It involves searching for literature on the internet and in libraries. It can, of course, be in magazines, newspapers, commercial and academic articles.
• In-depth interview: The process involves talking to a knowledgeable person about the topic under investigation. The in-depth interview is used to take advantage of the information offered by people and their experience, whether they are professionals within or outside the organization.
• Focus groups: Focus groups consist of bringing together 8 to 12 people who have information about the phenomenon under study and organizing sessions to obtain from these people various data that will help the research.
• Case studies: This method allows researchers to deal with carefully selected cases. Case analysis allows the organization to observe companies that have faced the same issue and deal with it more efficiently.

Check out our library of QuestionPro Case Studies to learn more about how we help organizations conduct market research.

Importance of explanatory research

Explanatory research is conducted to help researchers study the research problem in greater depth and understand the phenomenon efficiently.

The primary use for explanatory research is problem-solving by finding the overlooked data that we had never investigated before. At the same time, it might not bring out conclusive data; it will allow us to understand the issue more efficiently.

In carrying out the research process, it is necessary to adapt to new findings and knowledge about the subject. Although it is impossible to conclude, it is possible to explore the variables with a high level of depth.

Explanatory research allows the researcher to become familiar with the topic to be examined and design theories to test them.

Explanatory Reseach Quick Guide

Explanatory research is a great method to use if you’re looking to understand why something is happening. Here’s a quick guide on how to conduct explanatory research:

• Clearly define your research question and objectives. This will help guide your research and ensure that you collect the right data.
• Choose your research methods. Explanatory research can be done using both qualitative and quantitative methods. Some popular methods include surveys, interviews, experiments, and observational studies.
• Collect and analyze your data. Once you’ve chosen your methods, it’s time to collect your data. Make sure to keep accurate records and organize your data so it’s easy to analyze.
• Draw conclusions and make recommendations. After analyzing your data, it’s time to draw conclusions and make recommendations based on your findings. Be sure to present your conclusions clearly and concisely and ensure your data supports them.
• Communicate your findings. Share your research findings with others, including your colleagues, stakeholders, or clients. Also, make sure to communicate your findings in a way that is easy for others to understand and act upon.

Remember that explanatory research is about understanding the relationship between variables, so be sure to keep that in mind when designing your research, collecting and analyzing your data, and communicating your findings.

Advantages and Conclusions

This method is precious for social research . It a llows researchers to find a phenomenon we did not study in depth. Although it does not conclude such a study, it helps to understand the problem efficiently. It’s essential to convey new data about a point of view on the study.

People who conduct explanatory research do so to study the interaction of the phenomenon in detail. Therefore, it is vital to have enough information to carry it out.

Finally, we invite you to refer to our market research guide . You can do incredible research and collect data free with our survey software . Get started now!

FREE TRIAL         LEARN MORE

MORE LIKE THIS

Data Information vs Insight: Essential differences

May 14, 2024

Pricing Analytics Software: Optimize Your Pricing Strategy

May 13, 2024

Relationship Marketing: What It Is, Examples & Top 7 Benefits

May 8, 2024

The Best Email Survey Tool to Boost Your Feedback Game

May 7, 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

The Plagiarism Checker Online For Your Academic Work

Start Plagiarism Check

Editing & Proofreading for Your Research Paper

Get it proofread now

Online Printing & Binding with Free Express Delivery

Configure binding now

• Academic essay overview
• The writing process
• Structuring academic essays
• Types of academic essays
• Academic writing overview
• Sentence structure
• Academic writing process
• Improving your academic writing
• Titles and headings
• APA style overview
• APA citation & referencing
• APA structure & sections
• Citation & referencing
• Structure and sections
• APA examples overview
• Commonly used citations
• Other examples
• British English vs. American English
• Chicago style overview
• Chicago citation & referencing
• Chicago structure & sections
• Chicago style examples
• Citing sources overview
• Citation format
• Citation examples
• College essay overview
• Application
• How to write a college essay
• Types of college essays
• Commonly confused words
• Definitions
• Dissertation overview
• Dissertation structure & sections
• Dissertation writing process
• Graduate school overview
• Application & admission
• Study abroad
• Master degree
• Harvard referencing overview
• Language rules overview
• Grammatical rules & structures
• Parts of speech
• Punctuation
• Methodology overview
• Analyzing data
• Experiments
• Observations
• Inductive vs. Deductive
• Qualitative vs. Quantitative
• Types of validity
• Types of reliability
• Sampling methods
• Theories & Concepts
• Types of research studies
• Types of variables
• MLA style overview
• MLA examples
• MLA citation & referencing
• MLA structure & sections
• Plagiarism overview
• Plagiarism checker
• Types of plagiarism
• Printing production overview
• Research bias overview
• Types of research bias
• Example sections
• Types of research papers
• Research process overview
• Problem statement
• Research proposal
• Research topic
• Statistics overview
• Levels of measurment
• Frequency distribution
• Measures of central tendency
• Measures of variability
• Hypothesis testing
• Parameters & test statistics
• Types of distributions
• Correlation
• Effect size
• Hypothesis testing assumptions
• Types of ANOVAs
• Types of chi-square
• Statistical data
• Statistical models
• Spelling mistakes
• Tips overview
• Academic writing tips
• Dissertation tips
• Sources tips
• Working with sources overview
• Evaluating sources
• Finding sources
• Including sources
• Types of sources

Your Step to Success

Plagiarism Check within 10min

Printing & Binding with 3D Live Preview

Explanatory Research – Guide with Definition & Examples

How do you like this article cancel reply.

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

Explanatory research, a vital part of research methodology , is dedicated to providing a deep understanding of a phenomenon through the explanation of causal relationships among variables. Unlike exploratory research that seeks to generate new insights or ideas, explanatory research dives deeper to identify why and how certain situations occur. This methodology is often employed when there is a clear understanding of the problem but the reasons behind it remain obscure, thereby necessitating a comprehensive explanation.

Inhaltsverzeichnis

• 1 Explanatory Research – In a Nutshell
• 2 Definition: Explanatory Research
• 3 The usage of explanatory research
• 4 Explanatory research questions
• 5 Explanatory research: Data collection
• 6 Explanatory research: Data analysis
• 7 The 5 Steps of explanatory research with examples
• 8 Explanatory vs. exploratory research
• 9 Advantages vs. disadvantages

Explanatory Research – In a Nutshell

• Explanatory research is a cornerstone of other research.
• Without an explanatory study, your future research will be incomplete and inefficient.
• This research improves survey and study design and reduces unintended bias.

Definition: Explanatory Research

Explanatory research is a study method that investigates the causes of a phenomenon when only limited data is presented. It can help you better grasp a topic, determine why a phenomenon is happening, and forecast future events.

This research can be described as a “cause and effect” model, researching previously unexplored patterns and trends in current data. Consequently, it is sometimes considered a sort of causal research .

The usage of explanatory research

Explanatory research investigates how or why something happens. Therefore, this type of research is one of the first steps in the research process , serving as a beginning point for future work. Your topic may have data, but the causal relationship you’re interested in may not.

This research helps evaluate patterns and generate hypotheses for future work. An explanatory study can help you comprehend a variable’s relationship. However, don’t expect conclusive outcomes.

Explanatory research questions

This research answers “why” and “how” inquiries, resulting in a better knowledge of a previously unsolved topic or clarification for relevant future research.

• Why do bilingual individuals exhibit more risky behavior than monolingual individuals during commercial negotiations?
• How does a child’s capacity to resist gratification predict their future success?
• Why are adolescents more prone to litter in highly littered areas than in clean areas?

Explanatory research: Data collection

After deciding on your research subject, you have numerous alternatives for research and data collection methods.

The following are some of the most prevalent research methods:

• Literature reviews
• Interviews and focus groups
• Pilot studies

Explanatory research: Data analysis

Ensure that your explanatory research is conducted appropriately and that your analysis is causal and not merely correlative.

Correlated variables are merely linked: when one changes, so does the other . There is no direct or indirect causal relationship.

Causation means independent variable changes cause dependent variable changes. The link between variables is direct.

The requirements for causal evidence are:

• Temporal : Cause must precede effect.
• Variation : Independent and dependent variable intervention must be systematic.
• Non-spurious : Be sure no mitigating factors or third hidden variables contradict your results.

The 5 Steps of explanatory research with examples

The data collection approach determines your explanatory research design. In most circumstances, you’ll utilize an experiment to test causality. The steps are illustrated in the following.

Step 1 of explanatory research: Research question

The initial stage in the research is familiarizing yourself with the topic of interest to formulate a research question.

Suppose you are interested in adult language retention rates.

You’ve examined language retention in adoptees. People who learned a foreign language as infants had an easier time learning it again than those who weren’t exposed.

You want to know how language exposure affects long-term retention. You’re designing an experiment to answer this question: How does early language exposure affect language retention in adoptees?

Step 2 of explanatory research: Hypothesis

Next, set your expectations. In some circumstances, you can use relevant literature to build your hypothesis. In other cases, the topic isn’t well-studied; therefore, you must create your theory based on instincts or literature on distant themes.

You hypothesize that individuals exposed to a language in infancy for a shorter duration will be less likely to retain features of this language than adults exposed for a longer time.

You express your predictions in terms of the null (H 0 ) and alternative (H 1 ) hypotheses:

• H 0 : Infancy language exposure does not affect language retention in adopted adults.
• H 1 : Exposure to a language in infancy improves language retention in adult adoptees.

Step 3 of explanatory research: Methodology and data collection

Next, choose your data collecting and data analysis methodologies and document them. After meticulously planning your research, you can begin data collection.

To test a causal relationship, you run an experiment. You gather a group of adults adopted from Colombia and raised in the U.S.

You compare:

• 0-6-month-old Colombian adoptees.
• 6-12 month-old Colombian adoptees
• 12-18-month-old Colombian adoptees.
• Unexposed monolingual adults.

Using a three-stage research design, you administer two tests of their Spanish language skills during the study:

• Pre-test : Several language proficiency tests are administered to identify group variations before instruction.
• Intervention : You deliver eight hours of Spanish lessons to each group.
• Post-test : After the intervention, you administer multiple language proficiency tests to determine whether there are any differences between the groups.

Step 4 of explanatory research: Analysis and results

After data collection, assess and report results.

After experimenting, you examine the data and observe that:

• The pre-exposed adults demonstrated more excellent Spanish language skills than individuals who were not pre-exposed. The post-test reveals an even more significant disparity.
• Adults adopted between 12 and 18 months had higher Spanish competence than those adopted between 0 and 6 months or 6 and 12 months, but there was no difference between the latter two groups.

For significance, use a mixed ANOVA . ANOVA indicates that pre-test differences aren’t significant, while post-test differences are.

You report your findings following the criteria of your chosen citation style between the groups.

Step 5 of explanatory research: Interpretation and recommendation

Try to explain unexpected results as you interpret them. In most circumstances, you’ll need to provide recommendations for future research.

Your findings were per your expectations. Adopted individuals who were pre-exposed to a language in infancy for a longer time have preserved more of this knowledge than people who weren’t pre-exposed.

After the intervention, this difference becomes large.

You decide to do more research and suggest some topics:

• Replicate the study with a larger sample
• Study other mother tongues (e.g., Korean, Lingala, Arabic)
• Study other linguistic features, like accent nativeness.

Explanatory vs. exploratory research

Explanatory and exploratory research are often confused. Remember, exploratory research establishes the framework for explanatory research.

Many exploratory research inquiries begin with “what.” They are intended to guide future studies and typically lack definite conclusions. The research is frequently employed as the initial step in the research process to assist you in refining your study topic and ideas.

Explanatory research questions begin with “why” or “how.” They assist you in understanding why and how something happens.

Advantages vs. disadvantages

As with any other study methodology, this research involves trade-offs: while it offers a unique set of benefits, it also has major drawbacks.

What is explanatory research?

An explanatory study investigates how or why something happens with limited information. It helps you understand a topic.

Is explanatory research quantitative or qualitative?

The explanatory research model is a quantitative strategy used to examine a hypothesis by gathering evidence that either supports or contradicts it.

When should I use explanatory research?

Explanatory research aims to explain a phenomenon. Consequently, this form of research is frequently one of the initial steps of the research process, acting as a springboard for subsequent analysis.

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential, while others help us to improve this website and your experience.

• External Media

Individual Privacy Preferences

Cookie Details Privacy Policy Imprint

Here you will find an overview of all cookies used. You can give your consent to whole categories or display further information and select certain cookies.

Accept all Save

Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the proper function of the website.

Show Cookie Information Hide Cookie Information

Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us to understand how our visitors use our website.

Content from video platforms and social media platforms is blocked by default. If External Media cookies are accepted, access to those contents no longer requires manual consent.

Privacy Policy Imprint

Ohio State nav bar

The Ohio State University

• BuckeyeLink
• Find People
• Search Ohio State

Basic Research Design

What is research design.

• Definition of Research Design : A procedure for generating answers to questions, crucial in determining the reliability and relevance of research outcomes.
• Importance of Strong Designs : Strong designs lead to answers that are accurate and close to their targets, while weak designs may result in misleading or irrelevant outcomes.
• Criteria for Assessing Design Strength : Evaluating a design’s strength involves understanding the research question and how the design will yield reliable empirical information.

The Four Elements of Research Design (Blair et al., 2023)

• The MIDA Framework : Research designs consist of four interconnected elements – Model (M), Inquiry (I), Data strategy (D), and Answer strategy (A), collectively referred to as MIDA.
• Theoretical Side (M and I): This encompasses the researcher’s beliefs about the world (Model) and the target of inference or the primary question to be answered (Inquiry).
• Empirical Side (D and A): This includes the strategies for collecting (Data strategy) and analyzing or summarizing information (Answer strategy).
• Interplay between Theoretical and Empirical Sides : The theoretical side sets the research challenges, while the empirical side represents the researcher’s responses to these challenges.
• Relation among MIDA Components: The diagram above shows how the four elements of a design are interconnected and how they relate to both real-world and simulated quantities.
• Parallelism in Design Representation: The illustration highlights two key parallelisms in research design – between actual and simulated processes, and between the theoretical (M, I) and empirical (D, A) sides.
• Importance of Simulated Processes: The parallelism between actual and simulated processes is crucial for understanding and evaluating research designs.
• Balancing Theoretical and Empirical Aspects : Effective research design requires a balance between theoretical considerations (models and inquiries) and empirical methodologies (data and answer strategies).

Research Design Principles (Blair et al., 2023)

• Integration of Components: Designs are effective not merely due to their individual components but how these components work together.
• Focus on Entire Design: Assessing a design requires examining how each part, such as the question, estimator, and sampling method, fits into the overall design.
• Importance of Diagnosis: The evaluation of a design’s strength lies in diagnosing the whole design, not just its parts.
• Strong Design Characteristics: Designs with parallel theoretical and empirical aspects tend to be stronger.
• The M:I:D:A Analogy: Effective designs often align data strategies with models and answer strategies with inquiries.
• Flexibility in Models: Good designs should perform well even under varying world scenarios, not just under expected conditions.
• Broadening Model Scope: Designers should consider a wide range of models, assessing the design’s effectiveness across these.
• Robustness of Inquiries and Strategies: Inquiries should yield answers and strategies should be applicable regardless of variations in real-world events.
• Diagnosis Across Models: It’s important to understand for which models a design excels and for which it falters.
• Specificity of Purpose: A design is deemed good when it aligns with a specific purpose or goal.
• Balancing Multiple Criteria: Designs should balance scientific precision, logistical constraints, policy goals, and ethical considerations.
• Diverse Goals and Assessments: Different designs may be optimal for different goals; the purpose dictates the design evaluation.
• Early Planning Benefits: Designing early allows for learning and improving design properties before data collection.
• Avoiding Post-Hoc Regrets: Early design helps avoid regrets related to data collection or question formulation.
• Iterative Improvement: The process of declaration, diagnosis, and redesign improves designs, ideally done before data collection.
• Adaptability to Changes: Designs should be flexible to adapt to unforeseen circumstances or new information.
• Expanding or Contracting Feasibility: The scope of feasible designs may change due to various practical factors.
• Continual Redesign: The principle advocates for ongoing design modification, even post research completion, for robustness and response to criticism.
• Improvement Through Sharing: Sharing designs via a formalized declaration makes it easier for others to understand and critique.
• Enhancing Scientific Communication: Well-documented designs facilitate better communication and justification of research decisions.
• Building a Design Library: The idea is to contribute designs to a shared library, allowing others to learn from and build upon existing work.

The Basics of Social Science Research Designs (Panke, 2018)

Deductive and inductive research.

• Starting Point: Begins with empirical observations or exploratory studies.
• Development of Hypotheses: Hypotheses are formulated after initial empirical analysis.
• Case Study Analysis: Involves conducting explorative case studies and analyzing dynamics at play.
• Generalization of Findings: Insights are then generalized across multiple cases to verify their applicability.
• Application: Suitable for novel phenomena or where existing theories are not easily applicable.
• Example Cases: Exploring new events like Donald Trump’s 2016 nomination or Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014.
• Theory-Based: Starts with existing theories to develop scientific answers to research questions.
• Hypothesis Development: Hypotheses are specified and then empirically examined.
• Empirical Examination: Involves a thorough empirical analysis of hypotheses using sound methods.
• Theory Refinement: Results can refine existing theories or contribute to new theoretical insights.
• Application: Preferred when existing theories relate to the research question.
• Example Projects: Usually explanatory projects asking ‘why’ questions to uncover relationships.

Explanatory and Interpretative Research Designs

• Definition: Explanatory research aims to explain the relationships between variables, often addressing ‘why’ questions. It is primarily concerned with identifying cause-and-effect dynamics and is typically quantitative in nature. The goal is to test hypotheses derived from theories and to establish patterns that can predict future occurrences.
• Definition: Interpretative research focuses on understanding the deeper meaning or underlying context of social phenomena. It often addresses ‘how is this possible’ questions, seeking to comprehend how certain outcomes or behaviors are produced within specific contexts. This type of research is usually qualitative and prioritizes individual experiences and perceptions.
• Explanatory Research: Poses ‘why’ questions to explore causal relationships and understand what factors influence certain outcomes.
• Interpretative Research: Asks ‘how is this possible’ questions to delve into the processes and meanings behind social phenomena.
• Explanatory Research: Relies on established theories to form hypotheses about causal relationships between variables. These theories are then tested through empirical research.
• Interpretative Research: Uses theories to provide a framework for understanding the social context and meanings. The focus is on constitutive relationships rather than causal ones.
• Explanatory Research: Often involves studying multiple cases to allow for comparison and generalization. It seeks patterns across different scenarios.
• Interpretative Research: Typically concentrates on single case studies, providing an in-depth understanding of that particular case without necessarily aiming for generalization.
• Explanatory Research: Aims to produce findings that can be generalized to other similar cases or populations. It seeks universal or broad patterns.
• Interpretative Research: Offers detailed insights specific to a single case or context. These findings are not necessarily intended to be generalized but to provide a deep understanding of the particular case.

Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed-method Projects

• Definition: Qualitative research is exploratory and aims to understand human behavior, beliefs, feelings, and experiences. It involves collecting non-numerical data, often through interviews, focus groups, or textual analysis. This method is ideal for gaining in-depth insights into specific phenomena.
• Example in Education: A qualitative study might involve conducting in-depth interviews with teachers to explore their experiences and challenges with remote teaching during the pandemic. This research would aim to understand the nuances of their experiences, challenges, and adaptations in a detailed and descriptive manner.
• Definition: Quantitative research seeks to quantify data and generalize results from a sample to the population of interest. It involves measurable, numerical data and often uses statistical methods for analysis. This approach is suitable for testing hypotheses or examining relationships between variables.
• Example in Education: A quantitative study could involve surveying a large number of students to determine the correlation between the amount of time spent on homework and their academic achievement. This would involve collecting numerical data (hours of homework, grades) and applying statistical analysis to examine relationships or differences.
• Definition: Mixed-method research combines both qualitative and quantitative approaches, providing a more comprehensive understanding of the research problem. It allows for the exploration of complex research questions by integrating numerical data analysis with detailed narrative data.
• Example in Education: A mixed-method study might investigate the impact of a new teaching method. The research could start with quantitative methods, like administering standardized tests to measure learning outcomes, followed by qualitative methods, such as conducting focus groups with students and teachers to understand their perceptions and experiences with the new teaching method. This combination provides both statistical results and in-depth understanding.
• Research Questions: What kind of information is needed to answer the questions? Qualitative for “how” and “why”, quantitative for “how many” or “how much”, and mixed methods for a comprehensive understanding of both the breadth and depth of a phenomenon.
• Nature of the Study: Is the study aiming to explore a new area (qualitative), confirm hypotheses (quantitative), or achieve both (mixed-method)?
• Resources Available: Time, funding, and expertise available can influence the choice. Qualitative research can be more time-consuming, while quantitative research may require specific statistical skills.
• Data Sources: Availability and type of data also guide the methodology. Existing numerical data might lean towards quantitative, while studies requiring personal experiences or opinions might be qualitative.

References:

Blair, G., Coppock, A., & Humphreys, M. (2023).  Research Design in the Social Sciences: Declaration, Diagnosis, and Redesign . Princeton University Press.

Panke, D. (2018). Research design & method selection: Making good choices in the social sciences.  Research Design & Method Selection , 1-368.

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

8.3: Quantitative research questions

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 25644

• Matthew DeCarlo
• Radford University via Open Social Work Education

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

Learning Objectives

• Describe how research questions for exploratory, descriptive, and explanatory quantitative questions differ and how to phrase them
• Identify the differences between and provide examples of strong and weak explanatory research questions

Quantitative descriptive questions

The type of research you are conducting will impact the research question that you ask. Probably the easiest questions to think of are quantitative descriptive questions. For example, “What is the average student debt load of MSW students?” is a descriptive question—and an important one. We aren’t trying to build a causal relationship here. We’re simply trying to describe how much debt MSW students carry. Quantitative descriptive questions like this one are helpful in social work practice as part of community scans, in which human service agencies survey the various needs of the community they serve. If the scan reveals that the community requires more services related to housing, child care, or day treatment for people with disabilities, a nonprofit office can use the community scan to create new programs that meet a defined community need.

Quantitative descriptive questions will often ask for percentage, count the number of instances of a phenomenon, or determine an average. Descriptive questions may only include one variable, such as ours about debt load, or they may include multiple variables. Because these are descriptive questions, we cannot investigate causal relationships between variables. To do that, we need to use a quantitative explanatory question.

Quantitative explanatory questions

Most studies you read in the academic literature will be quantitative and explanatory. Why is that? If you recall from Chapter 7, explanatory research tries to build nomothetic causal relationships. They are generalizable across space and time, so they are applicable to a wide audience. The editorial board of a journal wants to make sure their content will be useful to as many people as possible, so it’s not surprising that quantitative research dominates the academic literature.

Structurally, quantitative explanatory questions must contain an independent variable and dependent variable. Questions should ask about the relationship between these variables. My standard format for an explanatory quantitative research question is: “What is the relationship between [independent variable] and [dependent variable] for [target population]?” You should play with the wording for your research question, revising it as you see fit. The goal is to make the research question reflect what you really want to know in your study.

Let’s take a look at a few more examples of possible research questions and consider the relative strengths and weaknesses of each. Table 8.1 does just that. While reading the table, keep in mind that I have only noted what I view to be the most relevant strengths and weaknesses of each question. Certainly each question may have additional strengths and weaknesses not noted in the table.

Making it more specific

A good research question should also be specific and clear about the concepts it addresses. A student investigating gender and household tasks knows what they mean by “household tasks.” You likely also have an impression of what “household tasks” means. But are your definition and the student’s definition the same? A participant in their study may think that managing finances and performing home maintenance are household tasks, but the researcher may be interested in other tasks like childcare or cleaning. The only way to ensure your study stays focused and clear is to be specific about what you mean by a concept. The student in our example could pick a specific household task that was interesting to them or that the literature indicated was important—for example, childcare. Or, the student could have a broader view of household tasks, one that encompasses childcare, food preparation, financial management, home repair, and care for relatives. Any option is probably okay, as long as the researcher is clear on what they mean by “household tasks.”

Table 8.2 contains some “watch words” that indicate you may need to be more specific about the concepts in your research question.

It can be challenging in social work research to be this specific, particularly when you are just starting out your investigation of the topic. If you’ve only read one or two articles on the topic, it can be hard to know what you are interested in studying. Broad questions like “What are the causes of chronic homelessness, and what can be done to prevent it?” are common at the beginning stages of a research project. However, social work research demands that you examine the literature on the topic and refine your question over time to be more specific and clear before you begin your study. Perhaps you want to study the effect of a specific anti-homelessness program that you found in the literature. Maybe there is a particular model to fighting homelessness, like Housing First or transitional housing that you want to investigate further. You may want to focus on a potential cause of homelessness such as LGBTQ discrimination that you find interesting or relevant to your practice. As you can see, the possibilities for making your question more specific are almost infinite.

Quantitative exploratory questions

In exploratory research, the researcher doesn’t quite know the lay of the land yet. If someone is proposing to conduct an exploratory quantitative project, the watch words highlighted in Table 8.2 are not problematic at all. In fact, questions such as “What factors influence the removal of children in child welfare cases?” are good because they will explore a variety of factors or causes. In this question, the independent variable is less clearly written, but the dependent variable, family preservation outcomes, is quite clearly written. The inverse can also be true. If we were to ask, “What outcomes are associated with family preservation services in child welfare?”, we would have a clear independent variable, family preservation services, but an unclear dependent variable, outcomes. Because we are only conducting exploratory research on a topic, we may not have an idea of what concepts may comprise our “outcomes” or “factors.” Only after interacting with our participants will we be able to understand which concepts are important.

Key Takeaways

• Quantitative descriptive questions are helpful for community scans but cannot investigate causal relationships between variables.
• Quantitative explanatory questions must include an independent and dependent variable.

Image attributions

Ask by terimakasih0 CC-0

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology
• Explanatory Research | Definition, Guide, & Examples

Explanatory Research | Definition, Guide & Examples

Published on 7 May 2022 by Tegan George and Julia Merkus. Revised on 20 January 2023.

Explanatory research is a research method that explores why something occurs when limited information is available. It can help you increase your understanding of a given topic, ascertain how or why a particular phenomenon is occurring, and predict future occurrences.

Explanatory research can also be explained as a ’cause and effect’ model, investigating patterns and trends in existing data that haven’t been previously investigated. For this reason, it is often considered a type of causal research .

Table of contents

When to use explanatory research, explanatory research questions, explanatory research data collection, explanatory research data analysis, step-by-step example of explanatory research, explanatory vs exploratory research, advantages and disadvantages of exploratory research, frequently asked questions about explanatory research.

Explanatory research is used to investigate how or why a phenomenon takes place. Therefore, this type of research is often one of the first stages in the research process, serving as a jumping-off point for future research. While there is often data available about your topic, it’s possible the particular causal relationship you are interested in has not been robustly studied.

Explanatory research helps you analyse these patterns, formulating hypotheses that can guide future endeavors. If you are seeking a more complete understanding of a relationship between variables, explanatory research is a great place to start. However, keep in mind that it will likely not yield conclusive results.

You analysed their final grades and noticed that the students who take your course in the first semester always obtain higher grades than students who take the same course in the second semester.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Explanatory research answers ‘why’ and ‘what’ questions, leading to an improved understanding of a previously unresolved problem or providing clarity for related future research initiatives.

Here are a few examples:

• Why do undergraduate students obtain higher average grades in the first semester than in the second semester?
• How does marital status affect labour market participation?
• Why do multilingual individuals show more risky behaviour during business negotiations than monolingual individuals?
• How does a child’s ability to delay immediate gratification predict success later in life?
• Why are teenagers more likely to litter in a highly littered area than in a clean area?

After choosing your research question, there is a variety of options for research and data collection methods to choose from.

A few of the most common research methods include:

• Literature reviews
• Interviews and focus groups
• Pilot studies
• Observations
• Experiments

The method you choose depends on several factors, including your timeline, your budget, and the structure of your question.

If there is already a body of research on your topic, a literature review is a great place to start. If you are interested in opinions and behaviour, consider an interview or focus group format. If you have more time or funding available, an experiment or pilot study may be a good fit for you.

In order to ensure you are conducting your explanatory research correctly, be sure your analysis is definitively causal in nature, and not just correlated.

Always remember the phrase ‘correlation doesn’t imply causation’. Correlated variables are merely associated with one another: when one variable changes, so does the other. However, this isn’t necessarily due to a direct or indirect causal link.

Causation means that changes in the independent variable bring about changes in the dependent variable. In other words, there is a direct cause-and-effect relationship between variables.

Causal evidence must meet three criteria:

• Temporal : What you define as the ’cause’ must precede what you define as the ‘effect’.
• Variation : Intervention must be systematic between your independent variable and dependent variable.
• Non-spurious : Be careful that there are no mitigating factors or hidden third variables that confound your results.

Correlation doesn’t imply causation, but causation always implies correlation. In order to get conclusive causal results, you’ll need to conduct a full experimental design .

Your explanatory research design depends on the research method you choose to collect your data . In most cases, you’ll use an experiment to investigate potential causal relationships. We’ll walk you through the steps using an example.

Step 1: Develop the research question

The first step in conducting explanatory research is getting familiar with the topic you’re interested in, so that you can develop a research question .

Let’s say you’re interested in language retention rates in adults.

You are interested in finding out how the duration of exposure to language influences language retention ability later in life.

Step 2: Formulate a hypothesis

The next step is to address your expectations. In some cases, there is literature available on your subject or on a closely related topic that you can use as a foundation for your hypothesis . In other cases, the topic isn’t well studied, and you’ll have to develop your hypothesis based on your instincts or on existing literature on more distant topics.

• H 0 : The duration of exposure to a language in infancy does not influence language retention in adults who were adopted from abroad as children.
• H 1 : The duration of exposure to a language in infancy has a positive effect on language retention in adults who were adopted from abroad as children.

Step 3: Design your methodology and collect your data

Next, decide what data collection and data analysis methods you will use and write them up. After carefully designing your research, you can begin to collect your data.

• Adults who were adopted from Colombia between 0 and 6 months of age
• Adults who were adopted from Colombia between 6 and 12 months of age
• Adults who were adopted from Colombia between 12 and 18 months of age
• Monolingual adults who have not been exposed to a different language

During the study, you test their Spanish language proficiency twice in a research design that has three stages:

• Pretest : You conduct several language proficiency tests to establish any differences between groups pre-intervention.
• Intervention : You provide all groups with 8 hours of Spanish class.
• Posttest : You again conduct several language proficiency tests to establish any differences between groups post-intervention.

You made sure to control for any confounding variables , such as age, gender, and proficiency in other languages.

Step 4: Analyse your data and report results

After data collection is complete, proceed to analyse your data and report the results.

• The pre-exposed adults showed higher language proficiency in Spanish than those who had not been pre-exposed. The difference is even greater for the posttest.
• The adults who were adopted between 12 and 18 months of age had a higher Spanish language proficiency level than those who were adopted between 0 and 6 months or 6 and 12 months of age, but there was no difference found between the latter two groups.

To determine whether these differences are significant, you conduct a mixed ANOVA. The ANOVA shows that all differences are not significant for the pretest, but they are significant for the posttest.

Step 5: Interpret your results and provide suggestions for future research

As you interpret the results, try to come up with explanations for the results that you did not expect. In most cases, you want to provide suggestions for future research.

However, this difference is only significant after the intervention (the Spanish class).

You decide it’s worth it to further research the matter, and propose a few additional research ideas:

• Replicate the study with a larger sample
• Replicate the study for other maternal languages (e.g., Korean, Lingala, Arabic)
• Replicate the study for other language aspects, such as nativeness of the accent

It can be easy to confuse explanatory research with exploratory research. If you’re in doubt about the relationship between exploratory and explanatory research, just remember that exploratory research lays the groundwork for later explanatory research.

Exploratory research questions often begin with ‘what’. They are designed to guide future research and do not usually have conclusive results. Exploratory research is often utilised as a first step in your research process, to help you focus your research question and fine-tune your hypotheses.

Explanatory research questions often start with ‘why’ or ‘how’. They help you study why and how a previously studied phenomenon takes place.

Like any other research design , exploratory research has its trade-offs: while it provides a unique set of benefits, it also has significant downsides:

• It gives more meaning to previous research. It helps fill in the gaps in existing analyses and provides information on the reasons behind phenomena.
• It is very flexible and often replicable, since the internal validity tends to be high when done correctly.
• As you can often use secondary research, explanatory research is often very cost- and time-effective, allowing you to utilise pre-existing resources to guide your research before committing to heavier analyses.

Disadvantages

• While explanatory research does help you solidify your theories and hypotheses, it usually lacks conclusive results.
• Results can be biased or inadmissible to a larger body of work and are not generally externally valid . You will likely have to conduct more robust (often quantitative ) research later to bolster any possible findings gleaned from explanatory research.
• Coincidences can be mistaken for causal relationships , and it can sometimes be challenging to ascertain which is the causal variable and which is the effect.

Explanatory research is a research method used to investigate how or why something occurs when only a small amount of information is available pertaining to that topic. It can help you increase your understanding of a given topic.

Explanatory research is used to investigate how or why a phenomenon occurs. Therefore, this type of research is often one of the first stages in the research process , serving as a jumping-off point for future research.

Exploratory research explores the main aspects of a new or barely researched question.

Explanatory research explains the causes and effects of an already widely researched question.

Quantitative research deals with numbers and statistics, while qualitative research deals with words and meanings.

Quantitative methods allow you to test a hypothesis by systematically collecting and analysing data, while qualitative methods allow you to explore ideas and experiences in depth.

Cite this Scribbr article

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

George, T. & Merkus, J. (2023, January 20). Explanatory Research | Definition, Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 14 May 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/explanatory-research-design/

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Other students also liked, exploratory research | definition, guide, & examples, descriptive research design | definition, methods & examples, a quick guide to experimental design | 5 steps & examples.

• Privacy Policy

Home » Exploratory Vs Explanatory Research

Exploratory Vs Explanatory Research

Table of Contents

Exploratory research and explanatory research are two fundamental types of research studies, and they have different objectives, approaches, and outcomes.

Exploratory Research

Exploratory research is usually conducted when the researcher is trying to gain a deeper understanding of a particular phenomenon, situation, or problem. The primary purpose of exploratory research is to explore and generate ideas, hypotheses, and theories about a topic or issue that is not well understood. The researcher typically uses qualitative research methods, such as in-depth interviews, focus groups, or observational studies, to collect data. The data collected in exploratory research is usually descriptive and helps the researcher to identify patterns and trends, generate hypotheses, and develop a deeper understanding of the research problem. Exploratory research is usually the first step in a larger research project, and its results are used to guide the design of subsequent studies.

Explanatory Research

Explanatory research , on the other hand, is conducted when the researcher is trying to explain the relationship between variables or to test hypotheses that have been generated through exploratory research. The primary purpose of explanatory research is to explain why and how things happen. The researcher typically uses quantitative research methods, such as surveys or experiments, to collect data. The data collected in explanatory research is usually analyzed statistically to test hypotheses and to establish cause-and-effect relationships between variables.

Differences Between Exploratory and Explanatory Research

In summary, exploratory research is used to gain a deeper understanding of a research problem, while explanatory research is used to explain the relationship between variables or to test hypotheses. Both types of research are important and complement each other in the research process. Exploratory research is usually the first step in a larger research project, while explanatory research is conducted after exploratory research to test hypotheses and to establish cause-and-effect relationships between variables.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Inductive Vs Deductive Research

Basic Vs Applied Research

Generative Vs Evaluative Research

Reliability Vs Validity

Longitudinal Vs Cross-Sectional Research

Qualitative Vs Quantitative Research

The potential of working hypotheses for deductive exploratory research

• Open access
• Published: 08 December 2020
• Volume 55 , pages 1703–1725, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Mattia Casula   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7081-8153 1 ,
• Nandhini Rangarajan 2 &
• Patricia Shields   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0960-4869 2  

63k Accesses

79 Citations

4 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

While hypotheses frame explanatory studies and provide guidance for measurement and statistical tests, deductive, exploratory research does not have a framing device like the hypothesis. To this purpose, this article examines the landscape of deductive, exploratory research and offers the working hypothesis as a flexible, useful framework that can guide and bring coherence across the steps in the research process. The working hypothesis conceptual framework is introduced, placed in a philosophical context, defined, and applied to public administration and comparative public policy. Doing so, this article explains: the philosophical underpinning of exploratory, deductive research; how the working hypothesis informs the methodologies and evidence collection of deductive, explorative research; the nature of micro-conceptual frameworks for deductive exploratory research; and, how the working hypothesis informs data analysis when exploratory research is deductive.

Similar content being viewed by others

Reflections on Methodological Issues

Research: Meaning and Purpose

Research Design and Methodology

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Exploratory research is generally considered to be inductive and qualitative (Stebbins 2001 ). Exploratory qualitative studies adopting an inductive approach do not lend themselves to a priori theorizing and building upon prior bodies of knowledge (Reiter 2013 ; Bryman 2004 as cited in Pearse 2019 ). Juxtaposed against quantitative studies that employ deductive confirmatory approaches, exploratory qualitative research is often criticized for lack of methodological rigor and tentativeness in results (Thomas and Magilvy 2011 ). This paper focuses on the neglected topic of deductive, exploratory research and proposes working hypotheses as a useful framework for these studies.

To emphasize that certain types of applied research lend themselves more easily to deductive approaches, to address the downsides of exploratory qualitative research, and to ensure qualitative rigor in exploratory research, a significant body of work on deductive qualitative approaches has emerged (see for example, Gilgun 2005 , 2015 ; Hyde 2000 ; Pearse 2019 ). According to Gilgun ( 2015 , p. 3) the use of conceptual frameworks derived from comprehensive reviews of literature and a priori theorizing were common practices in qualitative research prior to the publication of Glaser and Strauss’s ( 1967 ) The Discovery of Grounded Theory . Gilgun ( 2015 ) coined the terms Deductive Qualitative Analysis (DQA) to arrive at some sort of “middle-ground” such that the benefits of a priori theorizing (structure) and allowing room for new theory to emerge (flexibility) are reaped simultaneously. According to Gilgun ( 2015 , p. 14) “in DQA, the initial conceptual framework and hypotheses are preliminary. The purpose of DQA is to come up with a better theory than researchers had constructed at the outset (Gilgun 2005 , 2009 ). Indeed, the production of new, more useful hypotheses is the goal of DQA”.

DQA provides greater level of structure for both the experienced and novice qualitative researcher (see for example Pearse 2019 ; Gilgun 2005 ). According to Gilgun ( 2015 , p. 4) “conceptual frameworks are the sources of hypotheses and sensitizing concepts”. Sensitizing concepts frame the exploratory research process and guide the researcher’s data collection and reporting efforts. Pearse ( 2019 ) discusses the usefulness for deductive thematic analysis and pattern matching to help guide DQA in business research. Gilgun ( 2005 ) discusses the usefulness of DQA for family research.

Given these rationales for DQA in exploratory research, the overarching purpose of this paper is to contribute to that growing corpus of work on deductive qualitative research. This paper is specifically aimed at guiding novice researchers and student scholars to the working hypothesis as a useful a priori framing tool. The applicability of the working hypothesis as a tool that provides more structure during the design and implementation phases of exploratory research is discussed in detail. Examples of research projects in public administration that use the working hypothesis as a framing tool for deductive exploratory research are provided.

In the next section, we introduce the three types of research purposes. Second, we examine the nature of the exploratory research purpose. Third, we provide a definition of working hypothesis. Fourth, we explore the philosophical roots of methodology to see where exploratory research fits. Fifth, we connect the discussion to the dominant research approaches (quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods) to see where deductive exploratory research fits. Sixth, we examine the nature of theory and the role of the hypothesis in theory. We contrast formal hypotheses and working hypotheses. Seven, we provide examples of student and scholarly work that illustrates how working hypotheses are developed and operationalized. Lastly, this paper synthesizes previous discussion with concluding remarks.

2 Three types of research purposes

The literature identifies three basic types of research purposes—explanation, description and exploration (Babbie 2007 ; Adler and Clark 2008 ; Strydom 2013 ; Shields and Whetsell 2017 ). Research purposes are similar to research questions; however, they focus on project goals or aims instead of questions.

Explanatory research answers the “why” question (Babbie 2007 , pp. 89–90), by explaining “why things are the way they are”, and by looking “for causes and reasons” (Adler and Clark 2008 , p. 14). Explanatory research is closely tied to hypothesis testing. Theory is tested using deductive reasoning, which goes from the general to the specific (Hyde 2000 , p. 83). Hypotheses provide a frame for explanatory research connecting the research purpose to other parts of the research process (variable construction, choice of data, statistical tests). They help provide alignment or coherence across stages in the research process and provide ways to critique the strengths and weakness of the study. For example, were the hypotheses grounded in the appropriate arguments and evidence in the literature? Are the concepts imbedded in the hypotheses appropriately measured? Was the best statistical test used? When the analysis is complete (hypothesis is tested), the results generally answer the research question (the evidence supported or failed to support the hypothesis) (Shields and Rangarajan 2013 ).

Descriptive research addresses the “What” question and is not primarily concerned with causes (Strydom 2013 ; Shields and Tajalli 2006 ). It lies at the “midpoint of the knowledge continuum” (Grinnell 2001 , p. 248) between exploration and explanation. Descriptive research is used in both quantitative and qualitative research. A field researcher might want to “have a more highly developed idea of social phenomena” (Strydom 2013 , p. 154) and develop thick descriptions using inductive logic. In science, categorization and classification systems such as the periodic table of chemistry or the taxonomies of biology inform descriptive research. These baseline classification systems are a type of theorizing and allow researchers to answer questions like “what kind” of plants and animals inhabit a forest. The answer to this question would usually be displayed in graphs and frequency distributions. This is also the data presentation system used in the social sciences (Ritchie and Lewis 2003 ; Strydom 2013 ). For example, if a scholar asked, what are the needs of homeless people? A quantitative approach would include a survey that incorporated a “needs” classification system (preferably based on a literature review). The data would be displayed as frequency distributions or as charts. Description can also be guided by inductive reasoning, which draws “inferences from specific observable phenomena to general rules or knowledge expansion” (Worster 2013 , p. 448). Theory and hypotheses are generated using inductive reasoning, which begins with data and the intention of making sense of it by theorizing. Inductive descriptive approaches would use a qualitative, naturalistic design (open ended interview questions with the homeless population). The data could provide a thick description of the homeless context. For deductive descriptive research, categories, serve a purpose similar to hypotheses for explanatory research. If developed with thought and a connection to the literature, categories can serve as a framework that inform measurement, link to data collection mechanisms and to data analysis. Like hypotheses they can provide horizontal coherence across the steps in the research process.

Table  1 demonstrated these connections for deductive, descriptive and explanatory research. The arrow at the top emphasizes the horizontal or across the research process view we emphasize. This article makes the case that the working hypothesis can serve the same purpose as the hypothesis for deductive, explanatory research and categories for deductive descriptive research. The cells for exploratory research are filled in with question marks.

The remainder of this paper focuses on exploratory research and the answers to questions found in the table:

What is the philosophical underpinning of exploratory, deductive research?

What is the Micro-conceptual framework for deductive exploratory research? [ As is clear from the article title we introduce the working hypothesis as the answer .]

How does the working hypothesis inform the methodologies and evidence collection of deductive exploratory research?

How does the working hypothesis inform data analysis of deductive exploratory research?

3 The nature of exploratory research purpose

Explorers enter the unknown to discover something new. The process can be fraught with struggle and surprises. Effective explorers creatively resolve unexpected problems. While we typically think of explorers as pioneers or mountain climbers, exploration is very much linked to the experience and intention of the explorer. Babies explore as they take their first steps. The exploratory purpose resonates with these insights. Exploratory research, like reconnaissance, is a type of inquiry that is in the preliminary or early stages (Babbie 2007 ). It is associated with discovery, creativity and serendipity (Stebbins 2001 ). But the person doing the discovery, also defines the activity or claims the act of exploration. It “typically occurs when a researcher examines a new interest or when the subject of study itself is relatively new” (Babbie 2007 , p. 88). Hence, exploration has an open character that emphasizes “flexibility, pragmatism, and the particular, biographically specific interests of an investigator” (Maanen et al. 2001 , p. v). These three purposes form a type of hierarchy. An area of inquiry is initially explored . This early work lays the ground for, description which in turn becomes the basis for explanation . Quantitative, explanatory studies dominate contemporary high impact journals (Twining et al. 2017 ).

Stebbins ( 2001 ) makes the point that exploration is often seen as something like a poor stepsister to confirmatory or hypothesis testing research. He has a problem with this because we live in a changing world and what is settled today will very likely be unsettled in the near future and in need of exploration. Further, exploratory research “generates initial insights into the nature of an issue and develops questions to be investigated by more extensive studies” (Marlow 2005 , p. 334). Exploration is widely applicable because all research topics were once “new.” Further, all research topics have the possibility of “innovation” or ongoing “newness”. Exploratory research may be appropriate to establish whether a phenomenon exists (Strydom 2013 ). The point here, of course, is that the exploratory purpose is far from trivial.

Stebbins’ Exploratory Research in the Social Sciences ( 2001 ), is the only book devoted to the nature of exploratory research as a form of social science inquiry. He views it as a “broad-ranging, purposive, systematic prearranged undertaking designed to maximize the discovery of generalizations leading to description and understanding of an area of social or psychological life” (p. 3). It is science conducted in a way distinct from confirmation. According to Stebbins ( 2001 , p. 6) the goal is discovery of potential generalizations, which can become future hypotheses and eventually theories that emerge from the data. He focuses on inductive logic (which stimulates creativity) and qualitative methods. He does not want exploratory research limited to the restrictive formulas and models he finds in confirmatory research. He links exploratory research to Glaser and Strauss’s ( 1967 ) flexible, immersive, Grounded Theory. Strydom’s ( 2013 ) analysis of contemporary social work research methods books echoes Stebbins’ ( 2001 ) position. Stebbins’s book is an important contribution, but it limits the potential scope of this flexible and versatile research purpose. If we accepted his conclusion, we would delete the “Exploratory” row from Table  1 .

Note that explanatory research can yield new questions, which lead to exploration. Inquiry is a process where inductive and deductive activities can occur simultaneously or in a back and forth manner, particularly as the literature is reviewed and the research design emerges. Footnote 1 Strict typologies such as explanation, description and exploration or inductive/deductive can obscures these larger connections and processes. We draw insight from Dewey’s ( 1896 ) vision of inquiry as depicted in his seminal “Reflex Arc” article. He notes that “stimulus” and “response” like other dualities (inductive/deductive) exist within a larger unifying system. Yet the terms have value. “We need not abandon terms like stimulus and response, so long as we remember that they are attached to events based upon their function in a wider dynamic context, one that includes interests and aims” (Hildebrand 2008 , p. 16). So too, in methodology typologies such as deductive/inductive capture useful distinctions with practical value and are widely used in the methodology literature.

We argue that there is a role for exploratory, deductive, and confirmatory research. We maintain all types of research logics and methods should be in the toolbox of exploratory research. First, as stated above, it makes no sense on its face to identify an extremely flexible purpose that is idiosyncratic to the researcher and then basically restrict its use to qualitative, inductive, non-confirmatory methods. Second, Stebbins’s ( 2001 ) work focused on social science ignoring the policy sciences. Exploratory research can be ideal for immediate practical problems faced by policy makers, who could find a framework of some kind useful. Third, deductive, exploratory research is more intentionally connected to previous research. Some kind of initial framing device is located or designed using the literature. This may be very important for new scholars who are developing research skills and exploring their field and profession. Stebbins’s insights are most pertinent for experienced scholars. Fourth, frameworks and deductive logic are useful for comparative work because some degree of consistency across cases is built into the design.

As we have seen, the hypotheses of explanatory and categories of descriptive research are the dominate frames of social science and policy science. We certainly concur that neither of these frames makes a lot of sense for exploratory research. They would tend to tie it down. We see the problem as a missing framework or missing way to frame deductive, exploratory research in the methodology literature. Inductive exploratory research would not work for many case studies that are trying to use evidence to make an argument. What exploratory deductive case studies need is a framework that incorporates flexibility. This is even more true for comparative case studies. A framework of this sort could be usefully applied to policy research (Casula 2020a ), particularly evaluative policy research, and applied research generally. We propose the Working Hypothesis as a flexible conceptual framework and as a useful tool for doing exploratory studies. It can be used as an evaluative criterion particularly for process evaluation and is useful for student research because students can develop theorizing skills using the literature.

Table  1 included a column specifying the philosophical basis for each research purpose. Shifting gears to the philosophical underpinning of methodology provides useful additional context for examination of deductive, exploratory research.

4 What is a working hypothesis

The working hypothesis is first and foremost a hypothesis or a statement of expectation that is tested in action. The term “working” suggest that these hypotheses are subject to change, are provisional and the possibility of finding contradictory evidence is real. In addition, a “working” hypothesis is active, it is a tool in an ongoing process of inquiry. If one begins with a research question, the working hypothesis could be viewed as a statement or group of statements that answer the question. It “works” to move purposeful inquiry forward. “Working” also implies some sort of community, mostly we work together in relationship to achieve some goal.

Working Hypothesis is a term found in earlier literature. Indeed, both pioneering pragmatists, John Dewey and George Herbert Mead use the term working hypothesis in important nineteenth century works. For both Dewey and Mead, the notion of a working hypothesis has a self-evident quality and it is applied in a big picture context. Footnote 2

Most notably, Dewey ( 1896 ), in one of his most pivotal early works (“Reflex Arc”), used “working hypothesis” to describe a key concept in psychology. “The idea of the reflex arc has upon the whole come nearer to meeting this demand for a general working hypothesis than any other single concept (Italics added)” (p. 357). The notion of a working hypothesis was developed more fully 42 years later, in Logic the Theory of Inquiry , where Dewey developed the notion of a working hypothesis that operated on a smaller scale. He defines working hypotheses as a “provisional, working means of advancing investigation” (Dewey 1938 , pp. 142). Dewey’s definition suggests that working hypotheses would be useful toward the beginning of a research project (e.g., exploratory research).

Mead ( 1899 ) used working hypothesis in a title of an American Journal of Sociology article “The Working Hypothesis and Social Reform” (italics added). He notes that a scientist’s foresight goes beyond testing a hypothesis.

Given its success, he may restate his world from this standpoint and get the basis for further investigation that again always takes the form of a problem. The solution of this problem is found over again in the possibility of fitting his hypothetical proposition into the whole within which it arises. And he must recognize that this statement is only a working hypothesis at the best, i.e., he knows that further investigation will show that the former statement of his world is only provisionally true, and must be false from the standpoint of a larger knowledge, as every partial truth is necessarily false over against the fuller knowledge which he will gain later (Mead 1899 , p. 370).

Cronbach ( 1975 ) developed a notion of working hypothesis consistent with inductive reasoning, but for him, the working hypothesis is a product or result of naturalistic inquiry. He makes the case that naturalistic inquiry is highly context dependent and therefore results or seeming generalizations that may come from a study and should be viewed as “working hypotheses”, which “are tentative both for the situation in which they first uncovered and for other situations” (as cited in Gobo 2008 , p. 196).

A quick Google scholar search using the term “working hypothesis” show that it is widely used in twentieth and twenty-first century science, particularly in titles. In these articles, the working hypothesis is treated as a conceptual tool that furthers investigation in its early or transitioning phases. We could find no explicit links to exploratory research. The exploratory nature of the problem is expressed implicitly. Terms such as “speculative” (Habib 2000 , p. 2391) or “rapidly evolving field” (Prater et al. 2007 , p. 1141) capture the exploratory nature of the study. The authors might describe how a topic is “new” or reference “change”. “As a working hypothesis, the picture is only new, however, in its interpretation” (Milnes 1974 , p. 1731). In a study of soil genesis, Arnold ( 1965 , p. 718) notes “Sequential models, formulated as working hypotheses, are subject to further investigation and change”. Any 2020 article dealing with COVID-19 and respiratory distress would be preliminary almost by definition (Ciceri et al. 2020 ).

5 Philosophical roots of methodology

According to Kaplan ( 1964 , p. 23) “the aim of methodology is to help us understand, in the broadest sense not the products of scientific inquiry but the process itself”. Methods contain philosophical principles that distinguish them from other “human enterprises and interests” (Kaplan 1964 , p. 23). Contemporary research methodology is generally classified as quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods. Leading scholars of methodology have associated each with a philosophical underpinning—positivism (or post-positivism), interpretivism or constructivist and pragmatism, respectively (Guba 1987 ; Guba and Lincoln 1981 ; Schrag 1992 ; Stebbins 2001 ; Mackenzi and Knipe 2006 ; Atieno 2009 ; Levers 2013 ; Morgan 2007 ; O’Connor et al. 2008 ; Johnson and Onwuegbuzie 2004 ; Twining et al. 2017 ). This section summarizes how the literature often describes these philosophies and informs contemporary methodology and its literature.

Positivism and its more contemporary version, post-positivism, maintains an objectivist ontology or assumes an objective reality, which can be uncovered (Levers 2013 ; Twining et al. 2017 ). Footnote 3 Time and context free generalizations are possible and “real causes of social scientific outcomes can be determined reliably and validly (Johnson and Onwuegbunzie 2004 , p. 14). Further, “explanation of the social world is possible through a logical reduction of social phenomena to physical terms”. It uses an empiricist epistemology which “implies testability against observation, experimentation, or comparison” (Whetsell and Shields 2015 , pp. 420–421). Correspondence theory, a tenet of positivism, asserts that “to each concept there corresponds a set of operations involved in its scientific use” (Kaplan 1964 , p. 40).

The interpretivist, constructivists or post-modernist approach is a reaction to positivism. It uses a relativist ontology and a subjectivist epistemology (Levers 2013 ). In this world of multiple realities, context free generalities are impossible as is the separation of facts and values. Causality, explanation, prediction, experimentation depend on assumptions about the correspondence between concepts and reality, which in the absence of an objective reality is impossible. Empirical research can yield “contextualized emergent understanding rather than the creation of testable theoretical structures” (O’Connor et al. 2008 , p. 30). The distinctively different world views of positivist/post positivist and interpretivist philosophy is at the core of many controversies in methodology, social and policy science literature (Casula 2020b ).

With its focus on dissolving dualisms, pragmatism steps outside the objective/subjective debate. Instead, it asks, “what difference would it make to us if the statement were true” (Kaplan 1964 , p. 42). Its epistemology is connected to purposeful inquiry. Pragmatism has a “transformative, experimental notion of inquiry” anchored in pluralism and a focus on constructing conceptual and practical tools to resolve “problematic situations” (Shields 1998 ; Shields and Rangarajan 2013 ). Exploration and working hypotheses are most comfortably situated within the pragmatic philosophical perspective.

6 Research approaches

Empirical investigation relies on three types of methodology—quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods.

6.1 Quantitative methods

Quantitative methods uses deductive logic and formal hypotheses or models to explain, predict, and eventually establish causation (Hyde 2000 ; Kaplan 1964 ; Johnson and Onwuegbunzie 2004 ; Morgan 2007 ). Footnote 4 The correspondence between the conceptual and empirical world make measures possible. Measurement assigns numbers to objects, events or situations and allows for standardization and subtle discrimination. It also allows researchers to draw on the power of mathematics and statistics (Kaplan 1964 , pp. 172–174). Using the power of inferential statistics, quantitative research employs research designs, which eliminate competing hypotheses. It is high in external validity or the ability to generalize to the whole. The research results are relatively independent of the researcher (Johnson & Onwuegbunzie 2004 ).

Quantitative methods depend on the quality of measurement and a priori conceptualization, and adherence to the underlying assumptions of inferential statistics. Critics charge that hypotheses and frameworks needlessly constrain inquiry (Johnson and Onwuegbunzie 2004 , p. 19). Hypothesis testing quantitative methods support the explanatory purpose.

6.2 Qualitative methods

Qualitative researchers who embrace the post-modern, interpretivist view, Footnote 5 question everything about the nature of quantitative methods (Willis et al. 2007 ). Rejecting the possibility of objectivity, correspondence between ideas and measures, and the constraints of a priori theorizing they focus on “unique impressions and understandings of events rather than to generalize the findings” (Kolb 2012 , p. 85). Characteristics of traditional qualitative research include “induction, discovery, exploration, theory/hypothesis generation and the researcher as the primary ‘instrument’ of data collection” (Johnson and Onwuegbunzie 2004 , p. 18). It also concerns itself with forming “unique impressions and understandings of events rather than to generalize findings” (Kolb 2012 , p. 85). The data of qualitative methods are generated via interviews, direct observation, focus groups and analysis of written records or artifacts.

Qualitative methods provide for understanding and “description of people’s personal experiences of phenomena”. They enable descriptions of detailed “phenomena as they are situated and embedded in local contexts.” Researchers use naturalistic settings to “study dynamic processes” and explore how participants interpret experiences. Qualitative methods have an inherent flexibility, allowing researchers to respond to changes in the research setting. They are particularly good at narrowing to the particular and on the flipside have limited external validity (Johnson and Onwuegbunzie 2004 , p. 20). Instead of specifying a suitable sample size to draw conclusions, qualitative research uses the notion of saturation (Morse 1995 ).

Saturation is used in grounded theory—a widely used and respected form of qualitative research, and a well-known interpretivist qualitative research method. Introduced by Glaser and Strauss ( 1967 ), this “grounded on observation” (Patten and Newhart 2000 , p. 27) methodology, focuses on “the creation of emergent understanding” (O’Connor et al. 2008 , p. 30). It uses the Constant Comparative method, whereby researchers develop theory from data as they code and analyze at the same time. Data collection, coding and analysis along with theoretical sampling are systematically combined to generate theory (Kolb 2012 , p. 83). The qualitative methods discussed here support exploratory research.

A close look at the two philosophies and assumptions of quantitative and qualitative research suggests two contradictory world views. The literature has labeled these contradictory views the Incompatibility Theory, which sets up a quantitative versus qualitative tension similar to the seeming separation of art and science or fact and values (Smith 1983a , b ; Guba 1987 ; Smith and Heshusius 1986 ; Howe 1988 ). The incompatibility theory does not make sense in practice. Yin ( 1981 , 1992 , 2011 , 2017 ), a prominent case study scholar, showcases a deductive research methodology that crosses boundaries using both quantaitive and qualitative evidence when appropriate.

6.3 Mixed methods

Turning the “Incompatibility Theory” on its head, Mixed Methods research “combines elements of qualitative and quantitative research approaches … for the broad purposes of breadth and depth of understanding and corroboration” (Johnson et al. 2007 , p. 123). It does this by partnering with philosophical pragmatism. Footnote 6 Pragmatism is productive because “it offers an immediate and useful middle position philosophically and methodologically; it offers a practical and outcome-oriented method of inquiry that is based on action and leads, iteratively, to further action and the elimination of doubt; it offers a method for selecting methodological mixes that can help researchers better answer many of their research questions” (Johnson and Onwuegbunzie 2004 , p. 17). What is theory for the pragmatist “any theoretical model is for the pragmatist, nothing more than a framework through which problems are perceived and subsequently organized ” (Hothersall 2019 , p. 5).

Brendel ( 2009 ) constructed a simple framework to capture the core elements of pragmatism. Brendel’s four “p”’s—practical, pluralism, participatory and provisional help to show the relevance of pragmatism to mixed methods. Pragmatism is purposeful and concerned with the practical consequences. The pluralism of pragmatism overcomes quantitative/qualitative dualism. Instead, it allows for multiple perspectives (including positivism and interpretivism) and, thus, gets around the incompatibility problem. Inquiry should be participatory or inclusive of the many views of participants, hence, it is consistent with multiple realities and is also tied to the common concern of a problematic situation. Finally, all inquiry is provisional . This is compatible with experimental methods, hypothesis testing and consistent with the back and forth of inductive and deductive reasoning. Mixed methods support exploratory research.

Advocates of mixed methods research note that it overcomes the weaknesses and employs the strengths of quantitative and qualitative methods. Quantitative methods provide precision. The pictures and narrative of qualitative techniques add meaning to the numbers. Quantitative analysis can provide a big picture, establish relationships and its results have great generalizability. On the other hand, the “why” behind the explanation is often missing and can be filled in through in-depth interviews. A deeper and more satisfying explanation is possible. Mixed-methods brings the benefits of triangulation or multiple sources of evidence that converge to support a conclusion. It can entertain a “broader and more complete range of research questions” (Johnson and Onwuegbunzie 2004 , p. 21) and can move between inductive and deductive methods. Case studies use multiple forms of evidence and are a natural context for mixed methods.

One thing that seems to be missing from mixed method literature and explicit design is a place for conceptual frameworks. For example, Heyvaert et al. ( 2013 ) examined nine mixed methods studies and found an explicit framework in only two studies (transformative and pragmatic) (p. 663).

7 Theory and hypotheses: where is and what is theory?

Theory is key to deductive research. In essence, empirical deductive methods test theory. Hence, we shift our attention to theory and the role and functions of the hypotheses in theory. Oppenheim and Putnam ( 1958 ) note that “by a ‘theory’ (in the widest sense) we mean any hypothesis, generalization or law (whether deterministic or statistical) or any conjunction of these” (p. 25). Van Evera ( 1997 ) uses a similar and more complex definition “theories are general statements that describe and explain the causes of effects of classes of phenomena. They are composed of causal laws or hypotheses, explanations, and antecedent conditions” (p. 8). Sutton and Staw ( 1995 , p. 376) in a highly cited article “What Theory is Not” assert the that hypotheses should contain logical arguments for “why” the hypothesis is expected. Hypotheses need an underlying causal argument before they can be considered theory. The point of this discussion is not to define theory but to establish the importance of hypotheses in theory.

Explanatory research is implicitly relational (A explains B). The hypotheses of explanatory research lay bare these relationships. Popular definitions of hypotheses capture this relational component. For example, the Cambridge Dictionary defines a hypothesis a “an idea or explanation for something that is based on known facts but has not yet been proven”. Vocabulary.Com’s definition emphasizes explanation, a hypothesis is “an idea or explanation that you then test through study and experimentation”. According to Wikipedia a hypothesis is “a proposed explanation for a phenomenon”. Other definitions remove the relational or explanatory reference. The Oxford English Dictionary defines a hypothesis as a “supposition or conjecture put forth to account for known facts.” Science Buddies defines a hypothesis as a “tentative, testable answer to a scientific question”. According to the Longman Dictionary the hypothesis is “an idea that can be tested to see if it is true or not”. The Urban Dictionary states a hypothesis is “a prediction or educated-guess based on current evidence that is yet be tested”. We argue that the hypotheses of exploratory research— working hypothesis — are not bound by relational expectations. It is this flexibility that distinguishes the working hypothesis.

Sutton and Staw (1995) maintain that hypotheses “serve as crucial bridges between theory and data, making explicit how the variables and relationships that follow from a logical argument will be operationalized” (p. 376, italics added). The highly rated journal, Computers and Education , Twining et al. ( 2017 ) created guidelines for qualitative research as a way to improve soundness and rigor. They identified the lack of alignment between theoretical stance and methodology as a common problem in qualitative research. In addition, they identified a lack of alignment between methodology, design, instruments of data collection and analysis. The authors created a guidance summary, which emphasized the need to enhance coherence throughout elements of research design (Twining et al. 2017 p. 12). Perhaps the bridging function of the hypothesis mentioned by Sutton and Staw (1995) is obscured and often missing in qualitative methods. Working hypotheses can be a tool to overcome this problem.

For reasons, similar to those used by mixed methods scholars, we look to classical pragmatism and the ideas of John Dewey to inform our discussion of theory and working hypotheses. Dewey ( 1938 ) treats theory as a tool of empirical inquiry and uses a map metaphor (p. 136). Theory is like a map that helps a traveler navigate the terrain—and should be judged by its usefulness. “There is no expectation that a map is a true representation of reality. Rather, it is a representation that allows a traveler to reach a destination (achieve a purpose). Hence, theories should be judged by how well they help resolve the problem or achieve a purpose ” (Shields and Rangarajan 2013 , p. 23). Note that we explicitly link theory to the research purpose. Theory is never treated as an unimpeachable Truth, rather it is a helpful tool that organizes inquiry connecting data and problem. Dewey’s approach also expands the definition of theory to include abstractions (categories) outside of causation and explanation. The micro-conceptual frameworks Footnote 7 introduced in Table  1 are a type of theory. We define conceptual frameworks as the “way the ideas are organized to achieve the project’s purpose” (Shields and Rangarajan 2013 p. 24). Micro-conceptual frameworks do this at the very close to the data level of analysis. Micro-conceptual frameworks can direct operationalization and ways to assess measurement or evidence at the individual research study level. Again, the research purpose plays a pivotal role in the functioning of theory (Shields and Tajalli 2006 ).

8 Working hypothesis: methods and data analysis

We move on to answer the remaining questions in the Table  1 . We have established that exploratory research is extremely flexible and idiosyncratic. Given this, we will proceed with a few examples and draw out lessons for developing an exploratory purpose, building a framework and from there identifying data collection techniques and the logics of hypotheses testing and analysis. Early on we noted the value of the Working Hypothesis framework for student empirical research and applied research. The next section uses a masters level student’s work to illustrate the usefulness of working hypotheses as a way to incorporate the literature and structure inquiry. This graduate student was also a mature professional with a research question that emerged from his job and is thus an example of applied research.

Master of Public Administration student, Swift ( 2010 ) worked for a public agency and was responsible for that agency’s sexual harassment training. The agency needed to evaluate its training but had never done so before. He also had never attempted a significant empirical research project. Both of these conditions suggest exploration as a possible approach. He was interested in evaluating the training program and hence the project had a normative sense. Given his job, he already knew a lot about the problem of sexual harassment and sexual harassment training. What he did not know much about was doing empirical research, reviewing the literature or building a framework to evaluate the training (working hypotheses). He wanted a framework that was flexible and comprehensive. In his research, he discovered Lundvall’s ( 2006 ) knowledge taxonomy summarized with four simple ways of knowing ( Know - what, Know - how, Know - why, Know - who ). He asked whether his agency’s training provided the participants with these kinds of knowledge? Lundvall’s categories of knowing became the basis of his working hypotheses. Lundvall’s knowledge taxonomy is well suited for working hypotheses because it is so simple and is easy to understand intuitively. It can also be tailored to the unique problematic situation of the researcher. Swift ( 2010 , pp. 38–39) developed four basic working hypotheses:

WH1: Capital Metro provides adequate know - what knowledge in its sexual harassment training

WH2: Capital Metro provides adequate know - how knowledge in its sexual harassment training

WH3: Capital Metro provides adequate know - why knowledge in its sexual harassment training

WH4: Capital Metro provides adequate know - who knowledge in its sexual harassment training

From here he needed to determine what would determine the different kinds of knowledge. For example, what constitutes “know what” knowledge for sexual harassment training. This is where his knowledge and experience working in the field as well as the literature come into play. According to Lundvall et al. ( 1988 , p. 12) “know what” knowledge is about facts and raw information. Swift ( 2010 ) learned through the literature that laws and rules were the basis for the mandated sexual harassment training. He read about specific anti-discrimination laws and the subsequent rules and regulations derived from the laws. These laws and rules used specific definitions and were enacted within a historical context. Laws, rules, definitions and history became the “facts” of Know-What knowledge for his working hypothesis. To make this clear, he created sub-hypotheses that explicitly took these into account. See how Swift ( 2010 , p. 38) constructed the sub-hypotheses below. Each sub-hypothesis was defended using material from the literature (Swift 2010 , pp. 22–26). The sub-hypotheses can also be easily tied to evidence. For example, he could document that the training covered anti-discrimination laws.

WH1: Capital Metro provides adequate know - what knowledge in its sexual Harassment training

WH1a: The sexual harassment training includes information on anti-discrimination laws (Title VII).

WH1b: The sexual harassment training includes information on key definitions.

WH1c: The sexual harassment training includes information on Capital Metro’s Equal Employment Opportunity and Harassment policy.

WH1d: Capital Metro provides training on sexual harassment history.

Know-How knowledge refers to the ability to do something and involves skills (Lundvall and Johnson 1994 , p. 12). It is a kind of expertise in action. The literature and his experience allowed James Smith to identify skills such as how to file a claim or how to document incidents of sexual harassment as important “know-how” knowledge that should be included in sexual harassment training. Again, these were depicted as sub-hypotheses.

WH2: Capital Metro provides adequate know - how knowledge in its sexual Harassment training

WH2a: Training is provided on how to file and report a claim of harassment

WH2b: Training is provided on how to document sexual harassment situations.

WH2c: Training is provided on how to investigate sexual harassment complaints.

WH2d: Training is provided on how to follow additional harassment policy procedures protocol

Note that the working hypotheses do not specify a relationship but rather are simple declarative sentences. If “know-how” knowledge was found in the sexual harassment training, he would be able to find evidence that participants learned about how to file a claim (WH2a). The working hypothesis provides the bridge between theory and data that Sutton and Staw (1995) found missing in exploratory work. The sub-hypotheses are designed to be refined enough that the researchers would know what to look for and tailor their hunt for evidence. Figure  1 captures the generic sub-hypothesis design.

A Common structure used in the development of working hypotheses

When expected evidence is linked to the sub-hypotheses, data, framework and research purpose are aligned. This can be laid out in a planning document that operationalizes the data collection in something akin to an architect’s blueprint. This is where the scholar explicitly develops the alignment between purpose, framework and method (Shields and Rangarajan 2013 ; Shields et al. 2019b ).

Table  2 operationalizes Swift’s working hypotheses (and sub-hypotheses). The table provide clues as to what kind of evidence is needed to determine whether the hypotheses are supported. In this case, Smith used interviews with participants and trainers as well as a review of program documents. Column one repeats the sub-hypothesis, column two specifies the data collection method (here interviews with participants/managers and review of program documents) and column three specifies the unique questions that focus the investigation. For example, the interview questions are provided. In the less precise world of qualitative data, evidence supporting a hypothesis could have varying degrees of strength. This too can be specified.

For Swift’s example, neither the statistics of explanatory research nor the open-ended questions of interpretivist, inductive exploratory research is used. The deductive logic of inquiry here is somewhat intuitive and similar to a detective (Ulriksen and Dadalauri 2016 ). It is also a logic used in international law (Worster 2013 ). It should be noted that the working hypothesis and the corresponding data collection protocol does not stop inquiry and fieldwork outside the framework. The interviews could reveal an unexpected problem with Smith’s training program. The framework provides a very loose and perhaps useful ways to identify and make sense of the data that does not fit the expectations. Researchers using working hypotheses should be sensitive to interesting findings that fall outside their framework. These could be used in future studies, to refine theory or even in this case provide suggestions to improve sexual harassment training. The sensitizing concepts mentioned by Gilgun ( 2015 ) are free to emerge and should be encouraged.

Something akin to working hypotheses are hidden in plain sight in the professional literature. Take for example Kerry Crawford’s ( 2017 ) book Wartime Sexual Violence. Here she explores how basic changes in the way “advocates and decision makers think about and discuss conflict-related sexual violence” (p. 2). She focused on a subsequent shift from silence to action. The shift occurred as wartime sexual violence was reframed as a “weapon of war”. The new frame captured the attention of powerful members of the security community who demanded, initiated, and paid for institutional and policy change. Crawford ( 2017 ) examines the legacy of this key reframing. She develops a six-stage model of potential international responses to incidents of wartime violence. This model is fairly easily converted to working hypotheses and sub-hypotheses. Table  3 shows her model as a set of (non-relational) working hypotheses. She applied this model as a way to gather evidence among cases (e.g., the US response to sexual violence in the Democratic Republic of the Congo) to show the official level of response to sexual violence. Each case study chapter examined evidence to establish whether the case fit the pattern formalized in the working hypotheses. The framework was very useful in her comparative context. The framework allowed for consistent comparative analysis across cases. Her analysis of the three cases went well beyond the material covered in the framework. She freely incorporated useful inductively informed data in her analysis and discussion. The framework, however, allowed for alignment within and across cases.

9 Conclusion

In this article we argued that the exploratory research is also well suited for deductive approaches. By examining the landscape of deductive, exploratory research, we proposed the working hypothesis as a flexible conceptual framework and a useful tool for doing exploratory studies. It has the potential to guide and bring coherence across the steps in the research process. After presenting the nature of exploratory research purpose and how it differs from two types of research purposes identified in the literature—explanation, and description. We focused on answering four different questions in order to show the link between micro-conceptual frameworks and research purposes in a deductive setting. The answers to the four questions are summarized in Table  4 .

Firstly, we argued that working hypothesis and exploration are situated within the pragmatic philosophical perspective. Pragmatism allows for pluralism in theory and data collection techniques, which is compatible with the flexible exploratory purpose. Secondly, after introducing and discussing the four core elements of pragmatism (practical, pluralism, participatory, and provisional), we explained how the working hypothesis informs the methodologies and evidence collection of deductive exploratory research through a presentation of the benefits of triangulation provided by mixed methods research. Thirdly, as is clear from the article title, we introduced the working hypothesis as the micro-conceptual framework for deductive explorative research. We argued that the hypotheses of explorative research, which we call working hypotheses are distinguished from those of the explanatory research, since they do not require a relational component and are not bound by relational expectations. A working hypothesis is extremely flexible and idiosyncratic, and it could be viewed as a statement or group of statements of expectations tested in action depending on the research question. Using examples, we concluded by explaining how working hypotheses inform data collection and analysis for deductive exploratory research.

Crawford’s ( 2017 ) example showed how the structure of working hypotheses provide a framework for comparative case studies. Her criteria for analysis were specified ahead of time and used to frame each case. Thus, her comparisons were systemized across cases. Further, the framework ensured a connection between the data analysis and the literature review. Yet the flexible, working nature of the hypotheses allowed for unexpected findings to be discovered.

The evidence required to test working hypotheses is directed by the research purpose and potentially includes both quantitative and qualitative sources. Thus, all types of evidence, including quantitative methods should be part of the toolbox of deductive, explorative research. We show how the working hypotheses, as a flexible exploratory framework, resolves many seeming dualisms pervasive in the research methods literature.

To conclude, this article has provided an in-depth examination of working hypotheses taking into account philosophical questions and the larger formal research methods literature. By discussing working hypotheses as applied, theoretical tools, we demonstrated that working hypotheses fill a unique niche in the methods literature, since they provide a way to enhance alignment in deductive, explorative studies.

In practice, quantitative scholars often run multivariate analysis on data bases to find out if there are correlations. Hypotheses are tested because the statistical software does the math, not because the scholar has an a priori, relational expectation (hypothesis) well-grounded in the literature and supported by cogent arguments. Hunches are just fine. This is clearly an inductive approach to research and part of the large process of inquiry.

In 1958 , Philosophers of Science, Oppenheim and Putnam use the notion of Working Hypothesis in their title “Unity of Science as Working Hypothesis.” They too, use it as a big picture concept, “unity of science in this sense, can be fully realized constitutes an over-arching meta-scientific hypothesis, which enables one to see a unity in scientific activities that might otherwise appear disconnected or unrelated” (p. 4).

It should be noted that the positivism described in the research methods literature does not resemble philosophical positivism as developed by philosophers like Comte (Whetsell and Shields 2015 ). In the research methods literature “positivism means different things to different people….The term has long been emptied of any precise denotation …and is sometimes affixed to positions actually opposed to those espoused by the philosophers from whom the name derives” (Schrag 1992 , p. 5). For purposes of this paper, we are capturing a few essential ways positivism is presented in the research methods literature. This helps us to position the “working hypothesis” and “exploratory” research within the larger context in contemporary research methods. We are not arguing that the positivism presented here is anything more. The incompatibility theory discussed later, is an outgrowth of this research methods literature…

It should be noted that quantitative researchers often use inductive reasoning. They do this with existing data sets when they run correlations or regression analysis as a way to find relationships. They ask, what does the data tell us?

Qualitative researchers are also associated with phenomenology, hermeneutics, naturalistic inquiry and constructivism.

See Feilzer ( 2010 ), Howe ( 1988 ), Johnson and Onwuegbunzie ( 2004 ), Morgan ( 2007 ), Onwuegbuzie and Leech ( 2005 ), Biddle and Schafft ( 2015 ).

The term conceptual framework is applicable in a broad context (see Ravitch and Riggan 2012 ). The micro-conceptual framework narrows to the specific study and informs data collection (Shields and Rangarajan 2013 ; Shields et al. 2019a ) .

Adler, E., Clark, R.: How It’s Done: An Invitation to Social Research, 3rd edn. Thompson-Wadsworth, Belmont (2008)

Google Scholar  

Arnold, R.W.: Multiple working hypothesis in soil genesis. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 29 (6), 717–724 (1965)

Article   Google Scholar  

Atieno, O.: An analysis of the strengths and limitation of qualitative and quantitative research paradigms. Probl. Educ. 21st Century 13 , 13–18 (2009)

Babbie, E.: The Practice of Social Research, 11th edn. Thompson-Wadsworth, Belmont (2007)

Biddle, C., Schafft, K.A.: Axiology and anomaly in the practice of mixed methods work: pragmatism, valuation, and the transformative paradigm. J. Mixed Methods Res. 9 (4), 320–334 (2015)

Brendel, D.H.: Healing Psychiatry: Bridging the Science/Humanism Divide. MIT Press, Cambridge (2009)

Bryman, A.: Qualitative research on leadership: a critical but appreciative review. Leadersh. Q. 15 (6), 729–769 (2004)

Casula, M.: Under which conditions is cohesion policy effective: proposing an Hirschmanian approach to EU structural funds, Regional & Federal Studies, https://doi.org/10.1080/13597566.2020.1713110 (2020a)

Casula, M.: Economic gowth and cohesion policy implementation in Italy and Spain, Palgrave Macmillan, Cham (2020b)

Ciceri, F., et al.: Microvascular COVID-19 lung vessels obstructive thromboinflammatory syndrome (MicroCLOTS): an atypical acute respiratory distress syndrome working hypothesis. Crit. Care Resusc. 15 , 1–3 (2020)

Crawford, K.F.: Wartime sexual violence: From silence to condemnation of a weapon of war. Georgetown University Press (2017)

Cronbach, L.: Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology American Psychologist. 30 116–127 (1975)

Dewey, J.: The reflex arc concept in psychology. Psychol. Rev. 3 (4), 357 (1896)

Dewey, J.: Logic: The Theory of Inquiry. Henry Holt & Co, New York (1938)

Feilzer, Y.: Doing mixed methods research pragmatically: implications for the rediscovery of pragmatism as a research paradigm. J. Mixed Methods Res. 4 (1), 6–16 (2010)

Gilgun, J.F.: Qualitative research and family psychology. J. Fam. Psychol. 19 (1), 40–50 (2005)

Gilgun, J.F.: Methods for enhancing theory and knowledge about problems, policies, and practice. In: Katherine Briar, Joan Orme., Roy Ruckdeschel., Ian Shaw. (eds.) The Sage handbook of social work research pp. 281–297. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage (2009)

Gilgun, J.F.: Deductive Qualitative Analysis as Middle Ground: Theory-Guided Qualitative Research. Amazon Digital Services LLC, Seattle (2015)

Glaser, B.G., Strauss, A.L.: The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine, Chicago (1967)

Gobo, G.: Re-Conceptualizing Generalization: Old Issues in a New Frame. In: Alasuutari, P., Bickman, L., Brannen, J. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Social Research Methods, pp. 193–213. Sage, Los Angeles (2008)

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Grinnell, R.M.: Social work research and evaluation: quantitative and qualitative approaches. New York: F.E. Peacock Publishers (2001)

Guba, E.G.: What have we learned about naturalistic evaluation? Eval. Pract. 8 (1), 23–43 (1987)

Guba, E., Lincoln, Y.: Effective Evaluation: Improving the Usefulness of Evaluation Results Through Responsive and Naturalistic Approaches. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco (1981)

Habib, M.: The neurological basis of developmental dyslexia: an overview and working hypothesis. Brain 123 (12), 2373–2399 (2000)

Heyvaert, M., Maes, B., Onghena, P.: Mixed methods research synthesis: definition, framework, and potential. Qual. Quant. 47 (2), 659–676 (2013)

Hildebrand, D.: Dewey: A Beginners Guide. Oneworld Oxford, Oxford (2008)

Howe, K.R.: Against the quantitative-qualitative incompatibility thesis or dogmas die hard. Edu. Res. 17 (8), 10–16 (1988)

Hothersall, S.J.: Epistemology and social work: enhancing the integration of theory, practice and research through philosophical pragmatism. Eur. J. Social Work 22 (5), 860–870 (2019)

Hyde, K.F.: Recognising deductive processes in qualitative research. Qual. Market Res. Int. J. 3 (2), 82–90 (2000)

Johnson, R.B., Onwuegbuzie, A.J.: Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educ. Res. 33 (7), 14–26 (2004)

Johnson, R.B., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Turner, L.A.: Toward a definition of mixed methods research. J. Mixed Methods Res. 1 (2), 112–133 (2007)

Kaplan, A.: The Conduct of Inquiry. Chandler, Scranton (1964)

Kolb, S.M.: Grounded theory and the constant comparative method: valid research strategies for educators. J. Emerg. Trends Educ. Res. Policy Stud. 3 (1), 83–86 (2012)

Levers, M.J.D.: Philosophical paradigms, grounded theory, and perspectives on emergence. Sage Open 3 (4), 2158244013517243 (2013)

Lundvall, B.A.: Knowledge management in the learning economy. In: Danish Research Unit for Industrial Dynamics Working Paper Working Paper, vol. 6, pp. 3–5 (2006)

Lundvall, B.-Å., Johnson, B.: Knowledge management in the learning economy. J. Ind. Stud. 1 (2), 23–42 (1994)

Lundvall, B.-Å., Jenson, M.B., Johnson, B., Lorenz, E.: Forms of Knowledge and Modes of Innovation—From User-Producer Interaction to the National System of Innovation. In: Dosi, G., et al. (eds.) Technical Change and Economic Theory. Pinter Publishers, London (1988)

Maanen, J., Manning, P., Miller, M.: Series editors’ introduction. In: Stebbins, R. (ed.) Exploratory research in the social sciences. pp. v–vi. Thousands Oak, CA: SAGE (2001)

Mackenzie, N., Knipe, S.: Research dilemmas: paradigms, methods and methodology. Issues Educ. Res. 16 (2), 193–205 (2006)

Marlow, C.R.: Research Methods for Generalist Social Work. Thomson Brooks/Cole, New York (2005)

Mead, G.H.: The working hypothesis in social reform. Am. J. Sociol. 5 (3), 367–371 (1899)

Milnes, A.G.: Structure of the Pennine Zone (Central Alps): a new working hypothesis. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 85 (11), 1727–1732 (1974)

Morgan, D.L.: Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. J. Mixed Methods Res. 1 (1), 48–76 (2007)

Morse, J.: The significance of saturation. Qual. Health Res. 5 (2), 147–149 (1995)

O’Connor, M.K., Netting, F.E., Thomas, M.L.: Grounded theory: managing the challenge for those facing institutional review board oversight. Qual. Inq. 14 (1), 28–45 (2008)

Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Leech, N.L.: On becoming a pragmatic researcher: The importance of combining quantitative and qualitative research methodologies. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 8 (5), 375–387 (2005)

Oppenheim, P., Putnam, H.: Unity of science as a working hypothesis. In: Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. II, pp. 3–36 (1958)

Patten, M.L., Newhart, M.: Understanding Research Methods: An Overview of the Essentials, 2nd edn. Routledge, New York (2000)

Pearse, N.: An illustration of deductive analysis in qualitative research. In: European Conference on Research Methodology for Business and Management Studies, pp. 264–VII. Academic Conferences International Limited (2019)

Prater, D.N., Case, J., Ingram, D.A., Yoder, M.C.: Working hypothesis to redefine endothelial progenitor cells. Leukemia 21 (6), 1141–1149 (2007)

Ravitch, B., Riggan, M.: Reason and Rigor: How Conceptual Frameworks Guide Research. Sage, Beverley Hills (2012)

Reiter, B.: The epistemology and methodology of exploratory social science research: Crossing Popper with Marcuse. In: Government and International Affairs Faculty Publications. Paper 99. http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/gia_facpub/99 (2013)

Ritchie, J., Lewis, J.: Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. Sage, London (2003)

Schrag, F.: In defense of positivist research paradigms. Educ. Res. 21 (5), 5–8 (1992)

Shields, P.M.: Pragmatism as a philosophy of science: A tool for public administration. Res. Pub. Admin. 41995-225 (1998)

Shields, P.M., Rangarajan, N.: A Playbook for Research Methods: Integrating Conceptual Frameworks and Project Management. New Forums Press (2013)

Shields, P.M., Tajalli, H.: Intermediate theory: the missing link in successful student scholarship. J. Public Aff. Educ. 12 (3), 313–334 (2006)

Shields, P., & Whetsell, T.: Public administration methodology: A pragmatic perspective. In: Raadshelders, J., Stillman, R., (eds). Foundations of Public Administration, pp. 75–92. New York: Melvin and Leigh (2017)

Shields, P., Rangarajan, N., Casula, M.: It is a Working Hypothesis: Searching for Truth in a Post-Truth World (part I). Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya 10 , 39–47 (2019a)

Shields, P., Rangarajan, N., Casula, M.: It is a Working Hypothesis: Searching for Truth in a Post-Truth World (part 2). Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya 11 , 40–51 (2019b)

Smith, J.K.: Quantitative versus qualitative research: an attempt to clarify the issue. Educ. Res. 12 (3), 6–13 (1983a)

Smith, J.K.: Quantitative versus interpretive: the problem of conducting social inquiry. In: House, E. (ed.) Philosophy of Evaluation, pp. 27–52. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (1983b)

Smith, J.K., Heshusius, L.: Closing down the conversation: the end of the quantitative-qualitative debate among educational inquirers. Educ. Res. 15 (1), 4–12 (1986)

Stebbins, R.A.: Exploratory Research in the Social Sciences. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2001)

Book   Google Scholar  

Strydom, H.: An evaluation of the purposes of research in social work. Soc. Work/Maatskaplike Werk 49 (2), 149–164 (2013)

Sutton, R. I., Staw, B.M.: What theory is not. Administrative science quarterly. 371–384 (1995)

Swift, III, J.: Exploring Capital Metro’s Sexual Harassment Training using Dr. Bengt-Ake Lundvall’s taxonomy of knowledge principles. Applied Research Project, Texas State University https://digital.library.txstate.edu/handle/10877/3671 (2010)

Thomas, E., Magilvy, J.K.: Qualitative rigor or research validity in qualitative research. J. Spec. Pediatric Nurs. 16 (2), 151–155 (2011)

Twining, P., Heller, R.S., Nussbaum, M., Tsai, C.C.: Some guidance on conducting and reporting qualitative studies. Comput. Educ. 107 , A1–A9 (2017)

Ulriksen, M., Dadalauri, N.: Single case studies and theory-testing: the knots and dots of the process-tracing method. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 19 (2), 223–239 (2016)

Van Evera, S.: Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science. Cornell University Press, Ithaca (1997)

Whetsell, T.A., Shields, P.M.: The dynamics of positivism in the study of public administration: a brief intellectual history and reappraisal. Adm. Soc. 47 (4), 416–446 (2015)

Willis, J.W., Jost, M., Nilakanta, R.: Foundations of Qualitative Research: Interpretive and Critical Approaches. Sage, Beverley Hills (2007)

Worster, W.T.: The inductive and deductive methods in customary international law analysis: traditional and modern approaches. Georget. J. Int. Law 45 , 445 (2013)

Yin, R.K.: The case study as a serious research strategy. Knowledge 3 (1), 97–114 (1981)

Yin, R.K.: The case study method as a tool for doing evaluation. Curr. Sociol. 40 (1), 121–137 (1992)

Yin, R.K.: Applications of Case Study Research. Sage, Beverley Hills (2011)

Yin, R.K.: Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. Sage Publications, Beverley Hills (2017)

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors contributed equally to this work. The authors would like to thank Quality & Quantity’ s editors and the anonymous reviewers for their valuable advice and comments on previous versions of this paper.

Open access funding provided by Alma Mater Studiorum - Università di Bologna within the CRUI-CARE Agreement. There are no funders to report for this submission.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Political and Social Sciences, University of Bologna, Strada Maggiore 45, 40125, Bologna, Italy

Mattia Casula

Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, USA

Nandhini Rangarajan & Patricia Shields

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mattia Casula .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

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

Rights and permissions

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

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Casula, M., Rangarajan, N. & Shields, P. The potential of working hypotheses for deductive exploratory research. Qual Quant 55 , 1703–1725 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-020-01072-9

Download citation

Accepted : 05 November 2020

Published : 08 December 2020

Issue Date : October 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-020-01072-9

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Exploratory research
• Working hypothesis
• Deductive qualitative research
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Survey Software The world’s leading omnichannel survey software
• Online Survey Tools Create sophisticated surveys with ease.
• Mobile Offline Conduct efficient field surveys.
• Text Analysis
• Close The Loop
• Automated Translations
• NPS Dashboard
• CATI Manage high volume phone surveys efficiently
• Cloud/On-premise Dialer TCPA compliant Cloud & on-premise dialer
• IVR Survey Software Boost productivity with automated call workflows.
• Analytics Analyze survey data with visual dashboards
• Panel Manager Nurture a loyal community of respondents.
• Survey Portal Best-in-class user friendly survey portal.
• Voxco Audience Conduct targeted sample research in hours.

Find the best survey software for you! (Along with a checklist to compare platforms)

Get Buyer’s Guide

• 100+ question types
• Drag-and-drop interface
• Skip logic and branching
• Multi-lingual survey
• Text piping
• Question library
• CSS customization
• White-label surveys
• Customizable ‘Thank You’ page
• Customizable survey theme
• Reminder send-outs
• Survey rewards
• Social media
• Website surveys
• Correlation analysis
• Cross-tabulation analysis
• Trend analysis
• Real-time dashboard
• Customizable report
• Email address validation
• Recaptcha validation
• SSL security

Take a peek at our powerful survey features to design surveys that scale discoveries.

Download feature sheet.

• Hospitality
• Financial Services
• Academic Research
• Customer Experience
• Employee Experience
• Product Experience
• Market Research
• Social Research
• Data Analysis

Explore Voxco 

Need to map Voxco’s features & offerings? We can help!

Watch a Demo 

Download Brochures 

Get a Quote

• NPS Calculator
• CES Calculator
• A/B Testing Calculator
• Margin of Error Calculator
• Sample Size Calculator
• CX Strategy & Management Hub
• Market Research Hub
• Patient Experience Hub
• Employee Experience Hub
• Market Research Guide
• Customer Experience Guide
• The Voxco Guide to Customer Experience
• NPS Knowledge Hub
• Survey Research Guides
• Survey Template Library
• Webinars and Events
• Feature Sheets
• Try a sample survey
• Professional services

Find the best customer experience platform

Uncover customer pain points, analyze feedback and run successful CX programs with the best CX platform for your team.

Get the Guide Now

We’ve been avid users of the Voxco platform now for over 20 years. It gives us the flexibility to routinely enhance our survey toolkit and provides our clients with a more robust dataset and story to tell their clients.

VP Innovation & Strategic Partnerships, The Logit Group

• Client Stories
• Voxco Reviews
• Why Voxco Research?
• Careers at Voxco
• Vulnerabilities and Ethical Hacking

Explore Regional Offices

• Cloud/On-premise Dialer TCPA compliant Cloud on-premise dialer
• Predictive Analytics
• Customer 360
• Customer Loyalty
• Fraud & Risk Management
• AI/ML Enablement Services
• Credit Underwriting

Get Buyer’s Guide

• SMS surveys
• Banking & Financial Services
• Retail Solution
• Risk Management
• Customer Lifecycle Solutions
• Net Promoter Score
• Customer Behaviour Analytics
• Customer Segmentation
• Data Unification

Explore Voxco 

Watch a Demo 

Download Brochures 

• CX Strategy & Management Hub
• Blogs & White papers
• Case Studies

VP Innovation & Strategic Partnerships, The Logit Group

• Why Voxco Intelligence?
• Our clients
• Client stories
• Featuresheets

Navigating the Depths: Exploratory Research vs Explanatory Research

SHARE THE ARTICLE ON

In the dynamic landscape of research methodologies, two distinct approaches stand out – exploratory research and explanatory research. Unveiling the differences between these methods is crucial for researchers seeking to conduct insightful analyses. In this blog, we will dive into the realms of exploratory and explanatory research, exploring when and how each method is applied.

What is exploratory research?

Exploratory research is like a journey into the unknown. It is conducted when the researcher aims to gain a better understanding of a subject with limited prior information. Think of it as an adventure, where the primary goal is to identify potential variables and gather preliminary insights. Exploratory research is often the first step in the research process, helping to shape more focused studies in the future.

Exploratory research is characterized by its flexibility and open-ended nature. Researchers use various methods such as interviews, focus groups, and literature reviews to gather qualitative data. This approach is particularly useful when investigating complex or poorly understood phenomena.

Voxco offers a complete suite of tools for market research.

When to use exploratory research.

Since it is an initial phase study that discovers the depth and establishes best practices, it stands to be the most viable method to go for when the topic under consideration has not been studied much in the past. So, research topics that have little published material and reports are the “go to” for exploratory research .

The purpose of such studies should not be to generate actionable insights but to understand what is the best way that insights can be generated. Since there is no previous literature available, trying to extract conclusions in the first go can be very difficult. The researchers mindset must be to understand how the research being conducted by them can serve as an action plan for any future examination of the research topic. The greater the depth with which this initial research gets carried out, the better will be the quality of future research.

Gather Reliable Market Research Data with Voxco Surveys

Top 50 Market Research Firms across the world trust Voxco for market research.

What is explanatory research?

Explanatory research, as its name suggests, is a methodological approach devoted to deciphering the reasons behind a specific phenomenon. Unlike its exploratory counterpart, which ventures into uncharted territories, explanatory research steps in during the later phases of inquiry. Its primary mission is to connect the dots, establishing cause-and-effect relationships that shed light on the factors influencing the occurrence of a particular event.

Explanatory research uses secondary resources to formulate the reasoning behind the occurrence of an event. Similar to exploratory research, explanatory research does not offer conclusive results. However, conclusive research-based approaches can leverage such explanatory research to formulate concentrated action plans.

Take a guided tour of Voxco Online.

See how easily you can create, test, distribute, and design the surveys.

• Advanced logic 
• White-label
• Auto-translations in 100+ languages

When is explanatory research used?

Explanatory research is typically used in the later stages of the research process, particularly after a phenomenon has been identified and defined. Here are common scenarios and situations where explanatory research is employed:

• After Exploratory Research:

It follows the identification of a phenomenon in exploratory research, providing a deeper understanding.

• When In-Depth Understanding is Needed:

Used to answer “why” and “how” questions, especially when researchers seek profound insights.

• For Cause-and-Effect Relationships:

Applied to establish relationships between variables, revealing factors influencing outcomes.

• In Applied Research Scenarios:

Common in applied research for practical solutions and targeted interventions.

• When Secondary Data is Available:

Utilizes existing data, such as literature reviews, for a more comprehensive understanding.

• For Developing Action Plans:

While not conclusive, insights from explanatory research inform the development of focused strategies.

Also Read https://www.voxco.com/blog/exploratory-research-questions/  

Kickstart your market research with a step-by-step Agile Market Research Guide.

Exploratory research vs explanatory research, stage of study.

Exploratory research studies a new field of research and so is a part of the beginning phase whereas explanatory research is carried out when the concepts have already been explored and defined, but need to be further examined for causal analysis, thus, making it a part of the latter phase.

Exploratory research does not have any premise and so establishing the best practices is a matter of trial and error approach, that is aimed to provide structure. Explanatory research, on the other hand, is a highly structured approach that interconnects various data points to point to independent variables that lead to changes in the concept under question.

Research methodology 

Exploratory research uses questioning mechanisms to identify best practices while explanatory research proceeds with gathering response data that supports or defies a predetermined hypothesis.

Exploratory research is a discovery based study while explanatory research is a relationship based study. Depending on the nature of these respective studies the objective of the research varies accordingly.

In conclusion,The research process involves exploratory and explanatory methods, each with its own unique approach. Exploratory research is a flexible, trial-and-error method, while explanatory research connects data and establishes cause-and-effect relationships. Voxco is a reliable partner in this journey, offering tools for survey creation and agile market research. It empowers researchers to connect, discover, and transform their understanding of the world.

What is the meaning of explanatory research?

Explanatory research is a relationship based research approach that aims to define the cause and effect relationship by identifying reasons behind why certain phenomena occur.

What is exploratory research with an example?

Exploratory research is an investigative approach to researching concepts that haven’t been clearly studied and defined. For example : a study of digital brand touchpoints to determine traffic nature and volume

Is explanatory research quantitative or qualitative?

Explanatory research model is a quantitative method that is used to test a hypothesis by collecting data that supports or defies it.

Explore Voxco Survey Software

+ Omnichannel Survey Software 

+ Online Survey Software 

+ CATI Survey Software 

+ IVR Survey Software 

+ Market Research Tool

+ Customer Experience Tool 

+ Product Experience Software 

+ Enterprise Survey Software 

How to use Member Experience Surveys to Elevate Patient Experience and Improve Organizational Health

How to use Member Experience Surveys to Elevate Patient Experience and Improve Organizational Health? Voxco is trusted by 450+ Global Brands in 40+ countries See

Voxco’s new features set to enhance research capabilities and elevate CX

Voxco’s new features set to enhance research capabilities and elevate CX Today, we have introduced four new features as a part of our ongoing CX

All you need to know about cross-tabulation

All you need to know about cross-tabulation Voxco is trusted by 450+ Global Brands in 40+ countries See what question types are possible with a

All About Customer Segments

Customer Segments: Introduction, Its Types, and Examples SHARE THE ARTICLE ON Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on linkedin Table of Contents Customers include

Data Profiling – How to Perform Data Quality Checks

Data Profiling – How to Perform Data Quality Checks SHARE THE ARTICLE ON Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on linkedin Table of Contents

What is a customer journey?

What is a customer journey? SHARE THE ARTICLE ON Table of Contents A customer journey is just what it sounds like. It is taking your

We use cookies in our website to give you the best browsing experience and to tailor advertising. By continuing to use our website, you give us consent to the use of cookies. Read More

Causal Research (Explanatory research)

Causal research, also known as explanatory research is conducted in order to identify the extent and nature of cause-and-effect relationships. Causal research can be conducted in order to assess impacts of specific changes on existing norms, various processes etc.

Causal studies focus on an analysis of a situation or a specific problem to explain the patterns of relationships between variables. Experiments  are the most popular primary data collection methods in studies with causal research design.

The presence of cause cause-and-effect relationships can be confirmed only if specific causal evidence exists. Causal evidence has three important components:

1. Temporal sequence . The cause must occur before the effect. For example, it would not be appropriate to credit the increase in sales to rebranding efforts if the increase had started before the rebranding.

2. Concomitant variation . The variation must be systematic between the two variables. For example, if a company doesn’t change its employee training and development practices, then changes in customer satisfaction cannot be caused by employee training and development.

3. Nonspurious association . Any covarioaton between a cause and an effect must be true and not simply due to other variable. In other words, there should be no a ‘third’ factor that relates to both, cause, as well as, effect.

The table below compares the main characteristics of causal research to exploratory and descriptive research designs: [1]

Main characteristics of research designs

 Examples of Causal Research (Explanatory Research)

The following are examples of research objectives for causal research design:

• To assess the impacts of foreign direct investment on the levels of economic growth in Taiwan
• To analyse the effects of re-branding initiatives on the levels of customer loyalty
• To identify the nature of impact of work process re-engineering on the levels of employee motivation

Advantages of Causal Research (Explanatory Research)

• Causal studies may play an instrumental role in terms of identifying reasons behind a wide range of processes, as well as, assessing the impacts of changes on existing norms, processes etc.
• Causal studies usually offer the advantages of replication if necessity arises
• This type of studies are associated with greater levels of internal validity due to systematic selection of subjects

Disadvantages of Causal Research (Explanatory Research)

• Coincidences in events may be perceived as cause-and-effect relationships. For example, Punxatawney Phil was able to forecast the duration of winter for five consecutive years, nevertheless, it is just a rodent without intellect and forecasting powers, i.e. it was a coincidence.
• It can be difficult to reach appropriate conclusions on the basis of causal research findings. This is due to the impact of a wide range of factors and variables in social environment. In other words, while casualty can be inferred, it cannot be proved with a high level of certainty.
• It certain cases, while correlation between two variables can be effectively established; identifying which variable is a cause and which one is the impact can be a difficult task to accomplish.

My e-book,  The Ultimate Guide to Writing a Dissertation in Business Studies: a step by step assistance  contains discussions of theory and application of research designs. The e-book also explains all stages of the  research process  starting from the  selection of the research area  to writing personal reflection. Important elements of dissertations such as  research philosophy ,  research approach ,  methods of data collection ,  data analysis  and  sampling  are explained in this e-book in simple words.

John Dudovskiy

[1] Source: Zikmund, W.G., Babin, J., Carr, J. & Griffin, M. (2012) “Business Research Methods: with Qualtrics Printed Access Card” Cengage Learning

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

4.3 Quantitative research questions

Learning objectives.

• Describe how research questions for exploratory, descriptive, and explanatory quantitative questions differ and how to phrase them
• Identify the differences between and provide examples of strong and weak explanatory research questions

Quantitative descriptive questions

The type of research you are conducting will impact the research question that you ask. Probably the easiest questions to think of are quantitative descriptive questions. For example, “What is the average student debt load of MSW students?” is a descriptive question—and an important one. We aren’t trying to build a causal relationship here. We’re simply trying to describe how much debt MSW students carry. Quantitative descriptive questions like this one are helpful in social work practice as part of community scans, in which human service agencies survey the various needs of the community they serve. If the scan reveals that the community requires more services related to housing, child care, or day treatment for people with disabilities, a nonprofit office can use the community scan to create new programs that meet a defined community need.

Quantitative descriptive questions will often ask for percentage, count the number of instances of a phenomenon, or determine an average. Descriptive questions may only include one variable, such as ours about debt load, or they may include multiple variables. Because these are descriptive questions, we cannot investigate causal relationships between variables. To do that, we need to use a quantitative explanatory question.

Quantitative explanatory questions

Most studies you read in the academic literature will be quantitative and explanatory. Why is that? Explanatory research tries to build something called nomothetic causal explanations.Matthew DeCarlo says “com[ing]up with a broad, sweeping explanation that is universally true for all people” is the hallmark of nomothetic causal relationships (DeCarlo, 2018, chapter 7.2, para 5 ). They are generalizable across space and time, so they are applicable to a wide audience. The editorial board of a journal wants to make sure their content will be useful to as many people as possible, so it’s not surprising that quantitative research dominates the academic literature.

Structurally, quantitative explanatory questions must contain an independent variable and dependent variable. Questions should ask about the relation between these variables. A standard format for an explanatory quantitative research question is: “What is the relation between [independent variable] and [dependent variable] for [target population]?” You should play with the wording for your research question, revising it as you see fit. The goal is to make the research question reflect what you really want to know in your study.

Let’s take a look at a few more examples of possible research questions and consider the relative strengths and weaknesses of each. Table 4.1 does just that. While reading the table, keep in mind that it only includes some of the most relevant strengths and weaknesses of each question. Certainly each question may have additional strengths and weaknesses not noted in the table.

Making it more specific

A good research question should also be specific and clear about the concepts it addresses. A group of students investigating gender and household tasks knows what they mean by “household tasks.” You likely also have an impression of what “household tasks” means. But are your definition and the students’ definition the same? A participant in their study may think that managing finances and performing home maintenance are household tasks, but the researcher may be interested in other tasks like childcare or cleaning. The only way to ensure your study stays focused and clear is to be specific about what you mean by a concept. The student in our example could pick a specific household task that was interesting to them or that the literature indicated was important—for example, childcare. Or, the student could have a broader view of household tasks, one that encompasses childcare, food preparation, financial management, home repair, and care for relatives. Any option is probably okay, as long as the researchers are clear on what they mean by “household tasks.”

Table 4.2 contains some “watch words” that indicate you may need to be more specific about the concepts in your research question.

It can be challenging in social work research to be this specific, particularly when you are just starting out your investigation of the topic. If you’ve only read one or two articles on the topic, it can be hard to know what you are interested in studying. Broad questions like “What are the causes of chronic homelessness, and what can be done to prevent it?” are common at the beginning stages of a research project. However, social work research demands that you examine the literature on the topic and refine your question over time to be more specific and clear before you begin your study. Perhaps you want to study the effect of a specific anti-homelessness program that you found in the literature. Maybe there is a particular model to fighting homelessness, like Housing First or transitional housing that you want to investigate further. You may want to focus on a potential cause of homelessness such as LGBTQ discrimination that you find interesting or relevant to your practice. As you can see, the possibilities for making your question more specific are almost infinite.

Quantitative exploratory questions

In exploratory research, the researcher doesn’t quite know the lay of the land yet. If someone is proposing to conduct an exploratory quantitative project, the watch words highlighted in Table 4.2 are not problematic at all. In fact, questions such as “What factors influence the removal of children in child welfare cases?” are good because they will explore a variety of factors or causes. In this question, the independent variable is less clearly written, but the dependent variable, family preservation outcomes, is quite clearly written. The inverse can also be true. If we were to ask, “What outcomes are associated with family preservation services in child welfare?”, we would have a clear independent variable, family preservation services, but an unclear dependent variable, outcomes. Because we are only conducting exploratory research on a topic, we may not have an idea of what concepts may comprise our “outcomes” or “factors.” Only after interacting with our participants will we be able to understand which concepts are important.

Key Takeaways

• Quantitative descriptive questions are helpful for community scans but cannot investigate causal relationships between variables.
• Quantitative explanatory questions must include an independent and dependent variable.

Image attributions

Ask by terimakasih0 cc-0.

Guidebook for Social Work Literature Reviews and Research Questions Copyright © 2020 by Rebecca Mauldin and Matthew DeCarlo is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Learn / Guides / Quantitative data analysis guide

Back to guides

The ultimate guide to quantitative data analysis

Numbers help us make sense of the world. We collect quantitative data on our speed and distance as we drive, the number of hours we spend on our cell phones, and how much we save at the grocery store.

Our businesses run on numbers, too. We spend hours poring over key performance indicators (KPIs) like lead-to-client conversions, net profit margins, and bounce and churn rates.

But all of this quantitative data can feel overwhelming and confusing. Lists and spreadsheets of numbers don’t tell you much on their own—you have to conduct quantitative data analysis to understand them and make informed decisions.

Last updated

Reading time.

This guide explains what quantitative data analysis is and why it’s important, and gives you a four-step process to conduct a quantitative data analysis, so you know exactly what’s happening in your business and what your users need .

Collect quantitative customer data with Hotjar

Use Hotjar’s tools to gather the customer insights you need to make quantitative data analysis a breeze.

What is quantitative data analysis? 

Quantitative data analysis is the process of analyzing and interpreting numerical data. It helps you make sense of information by identifying patterns, trends, and relationships between variables through mathematical calculations and statistical tests. 

With quantitative data analysis, you turn spreadsheets of individual data points into meaningful insights to drive informed decisions. Columns of numbers from an experiment or survey transform into useful insights—like which marketing campaign asset your average customer prefers or which website factors are most closely connected to your bounce rate. 

Without analytics, data is just noise. Analyzing data helps you make decisions which are informed and free from bias.

What quantitative data analysis is not

But as powerful as quantitative data analysis is, it’s not without its limitations. It only gives you the what, not the why . For example, it can tell you how many website visitors or conversions you have on an average day, but it can’t tell you why users visited your site or made a purchase.

For the why behind user behavior, you need qualitative data analysis , a process for making sense of qualitative research like open-ended survey responses, interview clips, or behavioral observations. By analyzing non-numerical data, you gain useful contextual insights to shape your strategy, product, and messaging. 

Quantitative data analysis vs. qualitative data analysis 

Let’s take an even deeper dive into the differences between quantitative data analysis and qualitative data analysis to explore what they do and when you need them.

The bottom line: quantitative data analysis and qualitative data analysis are complementary processes. They work hand-in-hand to tell you what’s happening in your business and why.  

💡 Pro tip: easily toggle between quantitative and qualitative data analysis with Hotjar Funnels . 

The Funnels tool helps you visualize quantitative metrics like drop-off and conversion rates in your sales or conversion funnel to understand when and where users leave your website. You can break down your data even further to compare conversion performance by user segment.

Spot a potential issue? A single click takes you to relevant session recordings , where you see user behaviors like mouse movements, scrolls, and clicks. With this qualitative data to provide context, you'll better understand what you need to optimize to streamline the user experience (UX) and increase conversions .

Hotjar Funnels lets you quickly explore the story behind the quantitative data

4 benefits of quantitative data analysis

There’s a reason product, web design, and marketing teams take time to analyze metrics: the process pays off big time. 

Four major benefits of quantitative data analysis include:

1. Make confident decisions 

With quantitative data analysis, you know you’ve got data-driven insights to back up your decisions . For example, if you launch a concept testing survey to gauge user reactions to a new logo design, and 92% of users rate it ‘very good’—you'll feel certain when you give the designer the green light. 

Since you’re relying less on intuition and more on facts, you reduce the risks of making the wrong decision. (You’ll also find it way easier to get buy-in from team members and stakeholders for your next proposed project. 🙌)

2. Reduce costs

By crunching the numbers, you can spot opportunities to reduce spend . For example, if an ad campaign has lower-than-average click-through rates , you might decide to cut your losses and invest your budget elsewhere. 

Or, by analyzing ecommerce metrics , like website traffic by source, you may find you’re getting very little return on investment from a certain social media channel—and scale back spending in that area.

3. Personalize the user experience

Quantitative data analysis helps you map the customer journey , so you get a better sense of customers’ demographics, what page elements they interact with on your site, and where they drop off or convert . 

These insights let you better personalize your website, product, or communication, so you can segment ads, emails, and website content for specific user personas or target groups.

4. Improve user satisfaction and delight

Quantitative data analysis lets you see where your website or product is doing well—and where it falls short for your users . For example, you might see stellar results from KPIs like time on page, but conversion rates for that page are low. 

These quantitative insights encourage you to dive deeper into qualitative data to see why that’s happening—looking for moments of confusion or frustration on session recordings, for example—so you can make adjustments and optimize your conversions by improving customer satisfaction and delight.

💡Pro tip: use Net Promoter Score® (NPS) surveys to capture quantifiable customer satisfaction data that’s easy for you to analyze and interpret. 

With an NPS tool like Hotjar, you can create an on-page survey to ask users how likely they are to recommend you to others on a scale from 0 to 10. (And for added context, you can ask follow-up questions about why customers selected the rating they did—rich qualitative data is always a bonus!)

Hotjar graphs your quantitative NPS data to show changes over time

4 steps to effective quantitative data analysis 

Quantitative data analysis sounds way more intimidating than it actually is. Here’s how to make sense of your company’s numbers in just four steps:

1. Collect data

Before you can actually start the analysis process, you need data to analyze. This involves conducting quantitative research and collecting numerical data from various sources, including: 

Interviews or focus groups 

Website analytics

Observations, from tools like heatmaps or session recordings

Questionnaires, like surveys or on-page feedback widgets

Just ensure the questions you ask in your surveys are close-ended questions—providing respondents with select choices to choose from instead of open-ended questions that allow for free responses.

Hotjar’s pricing plans survey template provides close-ended questions

 2. Clean data

Once you’ve collected your data, it’s time to clean it up. Look through your results to find errors, duplicates, and omissions. Keep an eye out for outliers, too. Outliers are data points that differ significantly from the rest of the set—and they can skew your results if you don’t remove them.

By taking the time to clean your data set, you ensure your data is accurate, consistent, and relevant before it’s time to analyze. 

3. Analyze and interpret data

At this point, your data’s all cleaned up and ready for the main event. This step involves crunching the numbers to find patterns and trends via mathematical and statistical methods. 

Two main branches of quantitative data analysis exist: 

Descriptive analysis : methods to summarize or describe attributes of your data set. For example, you may calculate key stats like distribution and frequency, or mean, median, and mode.

Inferential analysis : methods that let you draw conclusions from statistics—like analyzing the relationship between variables or making predictions. These methods include t-tests, cross-tabulation, and factor analysis. (For more detailed explanations and how-tos, head to our guide on quantitative data analysis methods.)

Then, interpret your data to determine the best course of action. What does the data suggest you do ? For example, if your analysis shows a strong correlation between email open rate and time sent, you may explore optimal send times for each user segment.

4. Visualize and share data

Once you’ve analyzed and interpreted your data, create easy-to-read, engaging data visualizations—like charts, graphs, and tables—to present your results to team members and stakeholders. Data visualizations highlight similarities and differences between data sets and show the relationships between variables.

Software can do this part for you. For example, the Hotjar Dashboard shows all of your key metrics in one place—and automatically creates bar graphs to show how your top pages’ performance compares. And with just one click, you can navigate to the Trends tool to analyze product metrics for different segments on a single chart. 

Hotjar Trends lets you compare metrics across segments

Discover rich user insights with quantitative data analysis

Conducting quantitative data analysis takes a little bit of time and know-how, but it’s much more manageable than you might think. 

By choosing the right methods and following clear steps, you gain insights into product performance and customer experience —and you’ll be well on your way to making better decisions and creating more customer satisfaction and loyalty.

FAQs about quantitative data analysis

What is quantitative data analysis.

Quantitative data analysis is the process of making sense of numerical data through mathematical calculations and statistical tests. It helps you identify patterns, relationships, and trends to make better decisions.

How is quantitative data analysis different from qualitative data analysis?

Quantitative and qualitative data analysis are both essential processes for making sense of quantitative and qualitative research .

Quantitative data analysis helps you summarize and interpret numerical results from close-ended questions to understand what is happening. Qualitative data analysis helps you summarize and interpret non-numerical results, like opinions or behavior, to understand why the numbers look like they do.

 If you want to make strong data-driven decisions, you need both.

What are some benefits of quantitative data analysis?

Quantitative data analysis turns numbers into rich insights. Some benefits of this process include: 

Making more confident decisions

Identifying ways to cut costs

Personalizing the user experience

Improving customer satisfaction

What methods can I use to analyze quantitative data?

Quantitative data analysis has two branches: descriptive statistics and inferential statistics. 

Descriptive statistics provide a snapshot of the data’s features by calculating measures like mean, median, and mode. 

Inferential statistics , as the name implies, involves making inferences about what the data means. Dozens of methods exist for this branch of quantitative data analysis, but three commonly used techniques are: 

Cross tabulation

Factor analysis