2. To determine the value for undertaking a full systematic review.
3. To summarize and disseminate research findings.
4. To identify research gaps in the existing literature. [[ ] p. 21]
Researchers can undertake a scoping study to examine the extent, range, and nature of research activity, determine the value of undertaking a full systematic review, summarize and disseminate research findings, or identify gaps in the existing literature [ 6 ]. As such, researchers can use scoping studies to clarify a complex concept and refine subsequent research inquiries [ 1 ]. Scoping studies may be particularly relevant to disciplines with emerging evidence, such as rehabilitation science, in which the paucity of randomized controlled trials makes it difficult for researchers to undertake systematic reviews. In these situations, scoping studies are ideal because researchers can incorporate a range of study designs in both published and grey literature, address questions beyond those related to intervention effectiveness, and generate findings that can complement the findings of clinical trials.
In an effort to provide guidance to authors undertaking scoping studies, Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] developed a six-stage methodological framework: identifying the research question, searching for relevant studies, selecting studies, charting the data, collating, summarizing, and reporting the results, and consulting with stakeholders to inform or validate study findings (Table (Table2). 2 ). While this framework provided an excellent methodological foundation, published scoping studies continue to lack sufficient methodological description or detail about the data analysis process, making it challenging for readers to understand how study findings were determined [ 1 ]. Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] encouraged other authors to refine their framework in order to enhance the methodology.
Overview of the Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework for conducting a scoping study
Arksey and O'Malley Framework Stage | Description |
---|---|
1: Identifying the research question | Identifying the research question provides the roadmap for subsequent stages. Relevant aspects of the question must be clearly defined as they have ramifications for search strategies. Research questions are broad in nature as they seek to provide breadth of coverage. |
2: Identifying relevant studies | This stage involves identifying the relevant studies and developing a decision plan for where to search, which terms to use, which sources are to be searched, time span, and language. Comprehensiveness and breadth is important in the search. Sources include electronic databases, reference lists, hand searching of key journals, and organizations and conferences. Breadth is important; however, practicalities of the search are as well. Time, budget and personnel resources are potential limiting factors and decisions need to be made upfront about how these will impact the search. |
3: Study selection | Study selection involves inclusion and exclusion criteria. These criteria are based on the specifics of the research question and on new familiarity with the subject matter through reading the studies. |
4: Charting the data | A data-charting form is developed and used to extract data from each study. A 'narrative review' or 'descriptive analytical' method is used to extract contextual or process oriented information from each study. |
5: Collating, summarizing, and reporting results | An analytic framework or thematic construction is used to provide an overview of the breadth of the literature but not a synthesis. A numerical analysis of the extent and nature of studies using tables and charts is presented. A thematic analysis is then presented. Clarity and consistency are required when reporting results. |
6: Consultation (optional) | Provides opportunities for consumer and stakeholder involvement to suggest additional references and provide insights beyond those in the literature. |
In this paper, we apply our experiences using the Arksey and O'Malley framework to build on the existing methodological framework. Specifically, we propose recommendations for each stage of the framework, followed by considerations for the advancement, application, and relevance of scoping studies in health research. Continual refinement of the framework stages may provide greater clarity about scoping study methodology, encourage researchers and clinicians to engage in this process, and help to enhance the methodological rigor with which authors undertake and report scoping studies [ 1 ].
We each completed a scoping study in separate areas of rehabilitation using the Arksey and O'Malley framework [ 6 ]. Goals of these studies included: identifying research priorities within HIV and rehabilitation [ 7 ], applying motor learning strategies within pediatric physical and occupational therapy intervention approaches [ 8 ], and exploring the use of theory within studies of knowledge translation [ 9 ]. The amount of literature reviewed in our studies ranged from 31 (DL) to 146 (KO) publications. Upon discovering that we had similar challenges implementing the scoping study methodology, we decided to use our experiences to further develop the existing framework. We conducted an informal literature search on scoping study methodology. We searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, ERIC, PsycInfo, and Web of Science databases using the search terms 'scoping,' 'scoping study,' 'scoping review,' and 'scoping methodology' for papers published in English between January 1990 and May 2010. Reference lists of pertinent papers were also searched. This search yielded seven citations that reflected on scoping study methodology, which were reviewed by one author (DL). After independently considering our own experiences utilizing the Arskey and O'Malley [ 6 ] framework, we met on seven occasions to discuss the challenges and develop recommendations for each stage of the methodological framework.
We outline the challenges and recommendations associated with each stage of the methodological framework (Table (Table3 3 ).
Summary of challenges and recommendations for scoping studies
Framework Stage | Challenges | Recommendations for clarification or additional steps |
---|---|---|
#1 Identifying the research question | 1. Scoping study questions are broad. 2. Establishing scoping study purpose is not associated with a framework stage. 3. The four purposes of scoping studies lack clarity. | 1. Clearly articulate the research question that will guide the scope of inquiry. Consider the concept, target population, and health outcomes of interest to clarify the focus of the scoping study and establish an effective search strategy. 2. Mutually consider the purpose of the scoping study with the research question. Envision the intended outcome ( ., framework, list of recommendations) to help determine the purpose of the study. 3. Consider rationale for conducting the scoping study to help clarify the purpose. |
#2 Identifying relevant studies | 1. Balancing breadth and comprehensiveness of the scoping study with feasibility of resources can be challenging. | 1a. Research question and purpose should guide decision-making around the scope of the study. 1b. Assemble a suitable team with content and methodological expertise that will ensure successful completion of the study. 1c. When limiting scope is unavoidable, justify decisions and acknowledge the potential limitations to the study. |
#3 Study selection | 1. The linearity of this stage is misleading. 2. The process of decision making for study selection is unclear. | 1. This stage should be considered an iterative process involving searching the literature, refining the search strategy, and reviewing articles for study inclusion. 2a. At the beginning of the process, the team should meet to discuss decisions surrounding study inclusion and exclusion. At least two reviewers should independently review abstracts for inclusion. 2b. Reviewers should meet at the beginning, midpoint and final stages of the abstract review process to discuss challenges and uncertainties related to study selection and to go back and refine the search strategy if needed. 2c. Two researchers should independently review full articles for inclusion. 2d. When disagreements on study inclusion occur, a third reviewer can determine final inclusion. |
#4 Charting the data | 1. The nature and extent of data to extract from included studies is unclear. 2. The 'descriptive analytical method' of charting data is poorly defined. | 1a. The research team should collectively develop the data-charting form and determine which variables to extract in order to answer the research question. 1b. Charting should be considered an iterative process in which researchers continually extract data and update the data-charting form. 1c. Two authors should independently extract data from the first five to ten included studies using the data-charting form and meet to determine whether their approach to data extraction is consistent with the research question and purpose. 2. Process-oriented data may require extra planning for analysis. A qualitative content analysis approach is suggested. |
#5 Collating, summarizing, and reporting the results | 1. Little detail provided and multiple steps are summarized as one framework stage. | Researchers should break this stage into three distinct steps: 1a. Analysis (including descriptive numerical summary analysis and qualitative thematic analysis); 1b. Reporting the results and producing the outcome that refers to the overall purpose or research question; 1c. Consider the meaning of the findings as they relate to the overall study purpose; discuss implications for future research, practice and policy. |
#6 Consultation | 1. This stage is optional. 2. Lack of clarity exists about when, how and why to consult with stakeholders and how to integrate the information with study findings. | 1. Consultation should be an essential component of scoping study methodology. 2a. Clearly establish a purpose for the consultation. 2b. Preliminary findings can be used as a foundation to inform the consultation. 2c. Clearly articulate the type of stakeholders to consult and how data will be collected, analyzed, reported and integrated within the overall study outcome. 2d. Incorporate opportunities for knowledge transfer and exchange with stakeholders in the field. |
Scoping study research questions are broad in nature as the focus is on summarizing breadth of evidence. Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] acknowledge the need to maintain a broad scope to research questions, however we found our research questions lacked the direction, clarity, and focus needed to inform subsequent stages of the research process, such as identifying studies and making decisions about study inclusion. To clarify this stage, we recommend that researchers combine a broad research question with a clearly articulated scope of inquiry. This includes defining the concept, target population, and health outcomes of interest to clarify the focus of the scoping study and establish an effective search strategy. For example, in one author's (KO) scoping study, the research question was broadly 'what is known about HIV and rehabilitation?' Defining the concept of 'rehabilitation' was essential in order to establish a clear scope to the study, guide the search strategy, and establish parameters around study selection in subsequent stages of the process [ 7 ].
Although Arskey and O'Malley [ 6 ] outline four main purposes for undertaking a scoping study, they do not articulate that purpose be specified within a specific framework stage. We recommend researchers simultaneously consider the purpose of the scoping study when articulating the research question. Linking a clear purpose for undertaking a scoping study to a well-defined research question at the first stage of the framework will help to provide a clear rationale for completing the study and facilitate decision making about study selection and data extraction later in the methodological process. A helpful strategy may be to envision the content and format of the intended outcome that may assist researchers to clearly determine the purpose at the beginning of a study. In the abovementioned HIV study, authors linked the broadly stated research question with a more specific purpose 'to identify the key research priorities in HIV and rehabilitation to advance policy and practice for people living with HIV in Canada' [ 7 ]. The envisioned outcome was a thematic framework that represented strengths and opportunities in HIV rehabilitation research, followed by a list of the key research priorities to pursue in future work.
Finally, the purposes put forth by Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] require more debate. We concur with Anderson et al. [ 2 ] and Davis et al. [ 1 ], who state that researchers may benefit from further clarification of the purposes for undertaking a scoping study. The first purpose, as articulated by Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ], is to summarize the extent, range, and nature of research activity; however, researchers are not required to reflect on their underlying motivation for doing so. We recommend that researchers consider the rationale for why they should summarize the activity in a field and the implications that this will have on research, practice, or policy. The second purpose is to assess the need for a full systematic review. However, it is difficult to determine whether a systematic review is advantageous when a scoping study does not involve methodological quality assessment of included studies. Furthermore, it is unclear how this purpose differs from existing methods of determining feasibility for a systematic review. The third purpose is to summarize and disseminate research findings, but we question how this differs from other narrative or systematic literature reviews. Lastly, the fourth purpose of undertaking a scoping study -- to identify gaps in the existing literature -- may yield false conclusions about the nature and extent of those gaps if the quality of the evidence is not assessed. The purpose 'to identify the key research priorities in HIV and rehabilitation to advance policy and practice for people living with HIV in Canada' does not explicitly align with one of the four Arskey and O'Malley purposes [ 7 ]. However, it appears authors inherently first summarized the extent, range, and nature of research (purpose one) and identified gaps in the existing literature (purpose four) in order to subsequently identify the key research priorities in HIV and rehabilitation (author purpose). This suggests authors might have an overall study purpose with multiple objectives articulated by Arksey and O'Malley that are required in order to help achieve their overall purpose.
A strength of scoping studies includes the breadth and depth, or comprehensiveness, of evidence covered in a given field [ 1 ]. However, practical issues related to time, funding, and access to resources often require researchers to consider the balance between feasibility, breadth, and comprehensiveness. Brien et al. [ 5 ] reported that their search strategy yielded a vast amount of literature, making it difficult to determine how in depth to carry out the information synthesis. Although Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] identify these concerns and provide some suggestions to support these decisions, we also struggled with the trade-off between breadth and comprehensiveness and feasibility in our scoping studies. As such, we recommend that researchers ensure decisions surrounding feasibility do not compromise their ability to answer the research question or achieve the study purpose. Second, we recommend that a scoping study team be assembled whose members provide the methodological and context expertise needed for decisions regarding breadth and comprehensiveness. When limiting scope is unavoidable, researchers should justify their decisions and acknowledge the potential limitations of their study.
Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] provide suggestions to manage the time-consuming process of determining which studies to include in a scoping study. We experienced this stage as more iterative and requiring additional steps than implied in the original framework. While Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] do not indicate a team approach is imperative, we agree with others and suggest scoping studies involve multidisciplinary teams using a transparent and replicable process [ 2 , 10 ]. In two of our studies (HC and DL) where decision making was primarily completed by a single author, we faced several challenges, including uncertainty about which studies to include, variables to extract on the data-charting form, and the nature and extent of detail to conduct the data extraction process. This raised questions related to rigor and led to our recommendations for undertaking a systematic team approach to conducting a scoping study.
Specifically, we recommend that the team meet to discuss decisions surrounding study inclusion and exclusion at the beginning of the scoping process. Refining the search strategy based on abstracts retrieved from the search and reviewing full articles for study inclusion is also a critical step. We recommend that at least two researchers each independently review abstracts yielded from the search strategy for study selection. Reviewers should meet at the beginning, midpoint, and final stages of the abstract review process to discuss any challenges or uncertainties related to study selection and to go back and refine the search strategy if needed. This can help to alleviate potential ambiguity with a broad research question and to ensure that abstracts selected are relevant for full article review. Next, two reviewers should independently review the full articles for inclusion. When disagreements occur, a third reviewer can be consulted to determine final inclusion.
This stage involves extracting data from included studies. Based on our experiences, we were uncertain about the nature and extent of information to extract from the included studies. To clarify this stage, we recommend that the research team collectively develop the data-charting form to determine which variables to extract that will help to answer the research question. Secondly, we recommend that charting be considered an iterative process in which researchers continually update the data-charting form. This is particularly true for process-oriented data, such as understanding how a theory or model has been used within a study. Uncertainty about the nature and extent of data that should be extracted may be resolved by researchers beginning the charting process and becoming familiar with study data, and then meeting again to refine the form. We recommend an additional step to charting the data in which two researchers independently extract data from the first five to ten studies using the data-charting form and meet to determine whether their approach to data extraction is consistent with the research question and purpose. Researchers may review one study several times within this stage. The number of researchers involved in the data extraction process will likely depend upon the number of included studies. For example, in one study, authors had difficulty developing one data-charting form that could apply to all included studies representing a range study designs, reviews, reports, and commentaries [ 7 ]. As a preliminary step, authors decided to classify the included studies into three areas --HIV disability, interventions, and roles of rehabilitation professionals in HIV care -- to help determine the nature and extent of information to extract from each of the types of studies [ 7 ].
Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] refer to a 'descriptive analytical method' that involves summarizing process information, such as the use of a theory or model in a meaningful format. Our experiences indicated that this is a highly valuable, though challenging aspect of scoping studies, as we struggled to chart and summarize complex concepts in a meaningful way. Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] indicate that synthesis of material is critical as scoping studies are not a short summary of many articles. We agree, and feel that additional direction in the framework might help to navigate this crucial but challenging stage. Perhaps synthesizing process information may benefit from utilization of qualitative content analysis approaches to make sense of the wealth of extracted data [ 11 ]. This issue also highlights the overlap with the next analytical stage. The role and relevance of analyzing process data and using qualitative content analysis within scoping study methodology requires further discussion.
Stage five is the most extensive in the scoping process, yet it lacks detail in the Arksey and O'Malley framework. Scoping studies have been criticized for rarely providing methodological detail about how results were achieved [ 1 ]. We appreciate the importance of breaking the analysis phase into meaningful and systematic steps so that researchers can provide this undertake scoping studies and report on findings in a rigorous manner. As a result, we recommend three distinct steps in framework stage five to increase the consistency with which researchers undertake and report scoping study methodology: analyzing the data, reporting results, and applying meaning to the results. As described in the existing framework, analysis (otherwise referred to as collating and summarizing) should involve a descriptive numerical summary and a thematic analysis. Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] describe the need to provide a descriptive numerical summary, stating that researchers should describe the characteristics of included studies, such as the overall number of studies included, types of study design, years of publication, types of interventions, characteristics of the study populations, and countries where studies were conducted. However, the description of thematic analysis requires additional detail to assist authors in understanding and completing this step. In our experience, this analytical stage resembled qualitative data analytical techniques, and researchers may consider using qualitative content analytical techniques [ 10 ] and qualitative software to facilitate this process.
Second, when reporting results, we recommend that researchers consider the best approach to stating the outcome or end product of the study and how the scoping study findings will be articulated to readers ( e.g ., through themes, a framework, or a table of strengths and gaps in the evidence). This product should be tied to the purpose of the scoping study as recommended in framework stage one.
Finally, in order to advance the legitimacy of scoping study methodology, we must consider the implications of findings within the broader context. As a result, we recommend that researchers consider the meaning of their scoping study results and the broader implications for research, policy, and practice. For example, for the question 'how are motor-learning strategies used within contemporary physical and occupational therapy intervention approaches for children with neuromotor conditions?,' the author (DL) presented themes that described strategy use. Results yielded insights into how researchers should better describe interventions in their publications and provided further considerations for clinicians to make informed decisions about which therapeutic approach might best fit their clients' needs. Considering the overall implications of the results as an explicit framework stage will help to ensure that scoping study results have practical implications for future clinical practice, research, and policy. This recommendation leads to the final stage of the framework.
Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] suggest that consultation is an optional stage in conducting a scoping study. Although only one of our three scoping studies incorporated this stage, we argue that it adds methodological rigor and should be considered a required component. Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] suggest that the purposes of consulting with stakeholders are to offer additional sources of information, perspectives, meaning, and applicability to the scoping study. However, it is unclear when, how, and why to consult with stakeholders, and how to analyze and integrate these data with the findings. We recommend researchers clearly establish a purpose for the consultation, which may include sharing preliminary findings with stakeholders, validating the findings, or informing future research. We suggest researchers use preliminary findings from stage five (either in the form of a framework, themes, or list of findings) as a foundation from which to inform the consultation. This will enable stakeholders to build on the evidence and offer a higher level of meaning, content expertise, and perspective to the preliminary findings. We also recommend that researchers clearly articulate the type of stakeholders with whom they wish to consult, how they will collect the data ( e.g ., focus groups, interviews, surveys), and how these data will be analyzed, reported, and integrated within the overall study outcome.
Finally, given that consultation requires researchers to orient stakeholders on the scoping study purpose, research question, preliminary findings, and plans for dissemination, we recommend that this stage additionally be considered a knowledge transfer mechanism. This may address Brien et al .'s [ 5 ] concern about the usefulness of scoping studies for stakeholders and how to translate knowledge about scoping studies. Given the importance of knowledge transfer and exchange in the uptake of research evidence [ 12 , 13 ], the consultation stage can be used to specifically translate the preliminary scoping study findings and develop effective dissemination strategies with stakeholders in the field, offering additional value to a scoping study.
One scoping study included a consultation phase comprised of focus groups and interviews with 28 stakeholders including people living with HIV, researchers, educators, clinicians, and policy makers [ 7 ]. Authors shared preliminary findings from the literature review phase of the scoping study with stakeholders and asked whether they may be able to identify any additional emerging issues related to HIV and rehabilitation not yet published in the evidence. The team proceeded to conduct a second consultation with 17 new and returning stakeholders whereby the team presented a preliminary framework of HIV and rehabilitation research and stakeholders refined the framework to further identify six key research priorities on HIV and rehabilitation. This series of consultations engaged community members in the development of the study outcome and provided opportunities for knowledge transfer about HIV and rehabilitation research. This process offered an ideal mechanism to enhance the validity of the study outcome while translating findings with the community. Nevertheless, further development of steps for undertaking knowledge translation as a part of the scoping study framework is required.
Scoping study terminology.
Discrepancies in nomenclature between 'scoping reviews,' 'scoping studies,' 'scoping literature reviews,' and 'scoping exercises' lead to confusion. Despite our collective use of the Arksey and O'Malley framework, two authors (DL, HC) titled their studies as 'scoping reviews' while the other used 'scoping study.' In this paper, we use 'scoping studies' for consistency with Arksey and O'Malley's original framework. Nevertheless, the potential differences (if any) among the terms merit clarification. Lack of a universal definition for scoping studies is also problematic to researchers trying to clearly articulate their reasons for undertaking a scoping study. Finally, we advocate for labeling the methodology as the 'Arksey and O'Malley framework' to provide consistency for future use.
Another consideration for scoping study methodology is the potential need to assess included studies for methodological quality. Brien et al. [ 5 ] state that this lack of quality assessment makes the results of scoping studies more challenging to interpret. Grant and Booth [ 4 ] imply that a lack of quality assessment limits the uptake of scoping study findings into policy and practice. While our research questions did not directly relate to any quality assessment debate, we recognize the challenges in assessing quality among the vast range of published and grey literature that may be included in scoping studies. This also raises the question of whether and how evidence from stakeholder consultation is evaluated in the scoping study process. It remains unclear whether the lack of quality assessment impacts the uptake and relevance of scoping study findings.
A final consideration for legitimization of scoping study methodology includes the development of a critical appraisal tool for scoping study quality [ 5 ]. Anderson et al. [ 2 ] offer criteria for assessing the value and utility of a commissioned scoping study in health policy contexts, but these criteria are not necessarily applicable to scoping studies in other areas of health research. Developing a critical appraisal tool would require the elements of a methodologically rigorous scoping study to be defined. This could include, but would not be limited to, the minimum level of analysis required and the requirements for reporting results. Overall, the issues surrounding quality assessment of included studies and subsequent scoping studies require further discussion.
This paper responds to Arksey and O'Malley's [ 6 ] request for feedback to their proposed methodological framework. However, the recommendations that we propose are derived from our subjective experiences undertaking scoping studies of varying sizes in the rehabilitation field, and we recognize that they may not represent the opinions of all scoping study authors. Other than our individual experiences with our own studies, we have not yet implemented the full framework recommendations. Hence, readers can determine how strongly to interpret and implement these recommendations in their scoping study research. We invite others to trial our recommendations and continue the process of refining and improving this methodology.
Scoping studies present an increasingly popular option for synthesizing health evidence. Brien et al. [ 5 ] argue that guidelines are required to facilitate scoping review reporting and transparency. In this paper, we build on the existing methodological framework for scoping studies outlined by Arksey and O'Malley [ 6 ] and provide recommendations to clarify and enhance each stage, which may increase the consistency with which researchers undertake and report scoping studies. Recommendations include: clarifying and linking the purpose and research question; balancing feasibility with breadth and comprehensiveness of the scoping process; using an iterative team approach to selecting studies and extracting data; incorporating a numerical summary and qualitative thematic analysis; identifying the implications of the study findings for policy, practice, or research; and adopting consultation as a required component of scoping study methodology. Ongoing considerations include: establishing a common accepted definition and purpose(s) of scoping studies; defining methodological rigor for the assessment of scoping study quality; debating the need for quality assessment of included studies; and formalizing knowledge translation as a required element of scoping methodology. Continued debate and development about scoping study methodology will help to maximize the usefulness of scoping study findings within healthcare research and practice.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
DL and HC conceived of this paper. DL undertook the literature review process. DL, HC and KO developed challenges and recommendations. All authors drafted the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
DL is a physical therapist and doctoral candidate in the School of Rehabilitation Science at McMaster University. HC is an occupational therapist and doctoral candidate in the School of Rehabilitation Science at McMaster University. KO is a clinical epidemiologist, physical therapist, and postdoctoral fellow in the School of Rehabilitation Science at McMaster University. She is also a Lecturer in the Department of Physical Therapy at the University of Toronto.
DL is supported by a Doctoral Award from the Canadian Child Health Clinician Scientist Program, a strategic training initiative of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), and the McMaster Child Health Research Institute. HC is supported by a Doctoral Award from the CIHR, the CIHR Quality of Life Strategic Training Program in Rehabilitation Research and the Canadian Occupational Therapy Foundation. KO is supported by a Fellowship from the CIHR, HIV/AIDS Research Program and a Michael DeGroote Postdoctoral Fellowship (McMaster University). The authors acknowledge the helpful feedback of Dr. Cheryl Missiuna on an earlier draft of this manuscript.
Home » Significance of the Study – Examples and Writing Guide
Table of Contents
Definition:
Significance of the study in research refers to the potential importance, relevance, or impact of the research findings. It outlines how the research contributes to the existing body of knowledge, what gaps it fills, or what new understanding it brings to a particular field of study.
In general, the significance of a study can be assessed based on several factors, including:
The significance of the Study can be divided into the following types:
Theoretical significance refers to the contribution that a study makes to the existing body of theories in a specific field. This could be by confirming, refuting, or adding nuance to a currently accepted theory, or by proposing an entirely new theory.
Practical significance refers to the direct applicability and usefulness of the research findings in real-world contexts. Studies with practical significance often address real-life problems and offer potential solutions or strategies. For example, a study in the field of public health might identify a new intervention that significantly reduces the spread of a certain disease.
This pertains to the potential of a study to inspire further research. A study might open up new areas of investigation, provide new research methodologies, or propose new hypotheses that need to be tested.
Here’s a guide to writing an effective “Significance of the Study” section in research paper, thesis, or dissertation:
The Significance of the Study in a research paper refers to the importance or relevance of the research topic being investigated. It answers the question “Why is this research important?” and highlights the potential contributions and impacts of the study.
The significance of the study can be presented in the introduction or background section of a research paper. It typically includes the following components:
Suppose a researcher is conducting a study on the “Effects of social media use on the mental health of adolescents”.
The significance of the study may be:
“The present study is significant because it addresses a pressing public health issue of the negative impact of social media use on adolescent mental health. Given the widespread use of social media among this age group, understanding the effects of social media on mental health is critical for developing effective prevention and intervention strategies. This study will contribute to the existing literature by examining the moderating factors that may affect the relationship between social media use and mental health outcomes. It will also shed light on the potential benefits and risks of social media use for adolescents and inform the development of evidence-based guidelines for promoting healthy social media use among this population. The limitations of this study include the use of self-reported measures and the cross-sectional design, which precludes causal inference.”
The significance of the study in a thesis refers to the importance or relevance of the research topic and the potential impact of the study on the field of study or society as a whole. It explains why the research is worth doing and what contribution it will make to existing knowledge.
For example, the significance of a thesis on “Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare” could be:
The significance of a study in a research proposal refers to the importance or relevance of the research question, problem, or objective that the study aims to address. It explains why the research is valuable, relevant, and important to the academic or scientific community, policymakers, or society at large. A strong statement of significance can help to persuade the reviewers or funders of the research proposal that the study is worth funding and conducting.
Here is an example of a significance statement in a research proposal:
Title : The Effects of Gamification on Learning Programming: A Comparative Study
Significance Statement:
This proposed study aims to investigate the effects of gamification on learning programming. With the increasing demand for computer science professionals, programming has become a fundamental skill in the computer field. However, learning programming can be challenging, and students may struggle with motivation and engagement. Gamification has emerged as a promising approach to improve students’ engagement and motivation in learning, but its effects on programming education are not yet fully understood. This study is significant because it can provide valuable insights into the potential benefits of gamification in programming education and inform the development of effective teaching strategies to enhance students’ learning outcomes and interest in programming.
Here are some examples of the significance of a study that indicates how you can write this into your research paper according to your research topic:
Research on an Improved Water Filtration System : This study has the potential to impact millions of people living in water-scarce regions or those with limited access to clean water. A more efficient and affordable water filtration system can reduce water-borne diseases and improve the overall health of communities, enabling them to lead healthier, more productive lives.
Study on the Impact of Remote Work on Employee Productivity : Given the shift towards remote work due to recent events such as the COVID-19 pandemic, this study is of considerable significance. Findings could help organizations better structure their remote work policies and offer insights on how to maximize employee productivity, wellbeing, and job satisfaction.
Investigation into the Use of Solar Power in Developing Countries : With the world increasingly moving towards renewable energy, this study could provide important data on the feasibility and benefits of implementing solar power solutions in developing countries. This could potentially stimulate economic growth, reduce reliance on non-renewable resources, and contribute to global efforts to combat climate change.
Research on New Learning Strategies in Special Education : This study has the potential to greatly impact the field of special education. By understanding the effectiveness of new learning strategies, educators can improve their curriculum to provide better support for students with learning disabilities, fostering their academic growth and social development.
Examination of Mental Health Support in the Workplace : This study could highlight the impact of mental health initiatives on employee wellbeing and productivity. It could influence organizational policies across industries, promoting the implementation of mental health programs in the workplace, ultimately leading to healthier work environments.
Evaluation of a New Cancer Treatment Method : The significance of this study could be lifesaving. The research could lead to the development of more effective cancer treatments, increasing the survival rate and quality of life for patients worldwide.
The Significance of the Study section is an integral part of a research proposal or a thesis. This section is typically written after the introduction and the literature review. In the research process, the structure typically follows this order:
In the Significance of the Study section, you will discuss why your study is important, who it benefits, and how it adds to existing knowledge or practice in your field. This section is your opportunity to convince readers, and potentially funders or supervisors, that your research is valuable and worth undertaking.
The Significance of the Study section in a research paper has multiple advantages:
The Significance of the Study section plays an essential role in any research. However, it is not without potential limitations. Here are some that you should be aware of:
Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer
Global urban population growth appears to challenge governments’ ability to ensure access to essential urban services, such as policing. This situation is impeding the achievement of SDG target 11.1. However, citizens’ role in co-producing safe and secure neighbourhoods has been instrumental in augmenting limited governments’ efforts in the provision of adequate security. Acknowledging the relevance of co-producing community policing (CP) outcomes in neighbourhood crime management, this study critically examines the awareness, knowledge, understanding, and effectiveness of community policing strategies in North-Western Ghana. In a mixed methods research design, the study revealed a low level of awareness of community policing strategies in North-Western Ghana, which constrains the efforts to initiate and benefit from the outcomes of co-producing community policing. Consequently, knowledge, understanding, and effectiveness of community policing strategies appear very limited and, therefore, draw back the desire for inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable cities as detailed in SDG 11. Restoring community watch committees and enkindling effective co-production of community policing outcomes are critical parts to the global crime management strategies.
Adu-Mireku, S. (2002). Fear of crime among residents of three communities in Accra, Ghana. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 43(2), 153–168.
Åkerlind, G. S. (2005). Variation and commonality in phenomenographic research methods. Higher Education Research & Development, 24(4), 321–334.
Alford, J. (2014). The multiple facets of co-production: Building on the work of Elinor Ostrom. Public Management Review, 16(3), 299–316.
Alford, J., & Yates, S. (2010). Co-production and Australian public policy. In T. Brandsen, T. Steen, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), Co-production and Co-creation: Engaging Citizens in Public Services (pp. 19–38). ANU Press.
Alford, J., & Yates, S. (2016). Co‐Production of public services in australia: The roles of government organisations and Co‐Producers. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 75(2), 159–175.
Appiahene-Gyamfi, J. (2003). Urban crime trends and patterns in Ghana: The case of Accra. Journal of Criminal Justice, 31(1), 13–23.
Aropet, O. G. (2012). Community policing as a strategy for crime prevention in Uganda: A case study of Lira District 1998-2008. Makerere University.
Bagson, E. (2018). Analysis of informal crime prevention strategies in urban Ghana: the case of Kumasi and Tamale. doctoral dissertation, University of Ghana.
Bagson, E., & Owusu, A. Y. (2016). Securing the urban space: On whose terms? Insights from poverty and crime baseline survey in Tamale, Ghana. Ghana Journal of Geography, 8(1), 124–147.
Baker, B. (2004). Protection from crime: what is on offer for Africans? Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 22(2), 165–188.
Baker, B. (2008). Multi-choice policing in Africa. Nordiska Afrikainstitutet.
Bank, W. (2020). Demographic trends and urbanization. The World Bank.
Beresford, P. (2019). Public participation in health and social care: exploring the co-production of knowledge. Frontiers in Sociology, 3, 41.
Bolaji, M. H. A. (2021). Mutual complicity, state irrelevance, and restorative justice: Dagbon’s future in dire need of reciprocal royal forgiveness. Contemporary Justice Review, 24(2), 218–244.
Borovec, K., Balgač, I., & Mraović, I. C. (2019). Police visibility as an influencing factor on citizens’ perception of safety. Journal of Criminal Justice and Security, 2, 135–160.
Bovaird, T., & Loeffler, E. (2012). From engagement to co-production: The contribution of users and communities to outcomes and public value. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23, 1119–1138.
Bovaird, T., & Loeffler, E. (2022). Co-production: theoretical roots and conceptual frameworks. In Handbook on Theories of Governance (pp. 446–461). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Braga, A. A., Turchan, B. S., Papachristos, A. V, & Hureau, D. M. (2019). Hot spots policing and crime reduction: An update of an ongoing systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 15, 289–311.
Braga, A. A., & Weisburd, D. (2010). Policing problem places: Crime hot spots and effective prevention. Oxford University Press.
Brenya, E., & Warden, E. (2014). Bridging the great divide: A case study of Ghana community policing as a statesociety synergetic developmental approach. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS), 5(2), 242–247.
Burns, H. (2013). Assets for health. In E. Loeffler, G. Power, T. Bovaird, & F. Hine-Hughes (Eds.), Co-Production of Health and Wellbeing in Scotland (pp. 28–33). Governance International: Edinburgh.
Clark, B. Y., Brudney, J. L., & Jang, S. (2013). Coproduction of government services and the new information technology: Investigating the distributional biases. Public Administration Review, 73(5), 687–701.
Cordner, G., & Biebel, E. P. (2005). Problem‐oriented policing in practice. Criminology & Public Policy, 4(2), 155–180.
Creswell, J. w. (2014). Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed method approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications, Inc. USA.
Degu, Y. (2014). Community Policing or Policing the Community? The Emerging Police Practice in Ethiopia. International Journal of Science and Research, 3(9), 1195–1948.
Dewinter, M., Vandeviver, C., Vander Beken, T., & Witlox, F. (2020). Analysing the police patrol routing problem: A review. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 9(3), 157.
Diphoorn, T., & van Stapele, N. (2021). What Is Community Policing?: Divergent Agendas, Practices, and Experiences of Transforming the Police in Kenya. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 15(1), 399–411.
Evans, S., Hills, S., & Orme, J. (2012). Doing more for less? Developing sustainable systems of social care in the context of climate change and public spending cuts. British Journal of Social Work, 42(4), 744–764.
Fuglsang, L. (2008). Capturing the benefits of open innovation in public innovation: A case study. International Journal of Services Technology and Management, 9(3–4), 234–248.
Garland, R. (1991). The mid-point on a rating scale: Is it desirable? Marketing Bulletin, 2(1), 66–70.
Ghana News Agency. (2021, July). Sefwi Bodi inaugurates watchdog committee. https://newsghana.com.gh/sefwi-bodi-inaugurates-watchdog-committee/
Ghana Police Service. (2017). community policing unit. https://police.gov.gh/en/index.php/community-policing/
Ghana Statistical Service. (2002). 2000 Population and housing census: Summary report of final results. Ghana Statistical Service.
Ghana Statistical Service. (2013). 2010 population & housing census: National analytical report. Ghana Statistics Service.
Ghana Statistical Service (GSS). (2012). 2010 population and housing census. Ghana Statistical Service.
Ghana Statistical Service (GSS). (2013). 2010 population and housing census: regional analytical report, Northern Region.
Ghana Statistical Service (GSS). (2019). 2010 population and housing census. Ghana Statistical Service.
Ghana Statistical Service (GSS). (2021). Ghana 2021 population and housing census: general report volume 3A. Ghana Statistical Service, GSS.
Jagannathan, K., Arnott, J. C., Wyborn, C., Klenk, N., Mach, K. J., Moss, R. H., & Sjostrom, K. D. (2020). Great expectations? Reconciling the aspiration, outcome, and possibility of co-production. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 42, 22–29.
Joshi, A., Kale, S., Chandel, S., & Pal, D. K. (2015). Likert scale: Explored and explained. British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 7(4), 396–403.
Kasali, M. A. (2016). Alternative approach to policing in Nigeria: Analyzing the need to redefine community policing in tackling the nation’s security challenges. African Journal of Criminology and Justice Studies, 9(1), 8.
Khine, P. K., Mi, J., & Shahid, R. (2021). A comparative analysis of co-production in public services. Sustainability, 13(12), 6730.
Lersch, K. M. (2007). Space, time, and crime. Carolina Academic Press.
Lum, C., & Nagin, D. S. (2017). Reinventing American policing. Crime and Justice, 46(1), 339–393.
Mach, K. J., Lemos, M. C., Meadow, A. M., Wyborn, C., Klenk, N., Arnott, J. C., Ardoin, N. M., Fieseler, C., Moss, R. H., & Nichols, L. (2020). Actionable knowledge and the art of engagement. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 42, 30–37.
Maiello, A., Viegas, C. V, Frey, M., & Ribeiro, J. L. D. (2013). Public managers as catalysts of knowledge co-production? Investigating knowledge dynamics in local environmental policy. Environmental Science & Policy, 27, 141–150.
Mastrofski, S. D., Weisburd, D., & Graga, A. A. (2001). Problem-solving and community policing. Crime and Justice, 28(1), 151–218.
Mugenda, O. M., & Mugenda, A. G. (2003). Research methods: Quantitative & qualitative apporaches (Vol. 2, Issue 2). Acts press Nairobi.
Okoro, J. P. (2020). Community Policing and Crime Management in the Wa Municipality, Upper West Region of Ghana. University for Development Studies.
Ostrom, E. (1996). Crossing the great divide: Coproduction, synergy, and development. World Development, 24(6), 1073–1087.
Oteng-Ababio, M., & Arguello, J. E. M. (2014). Paradigm of mediocrity: poverty and risk accumulation in urban Africa–the case of Korle Gonno, Accra. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 7(1), 45–61.
Oteng-Ababio, M., Owusu, G., Wrigley-Asante, C., & Owusu, A. (2016). Longitudinal analysis of trends and patterns of crime in Ghana (1980–2010): A new perspective. African Geographical Review, 35(3), 193–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/19376812.2016.1208768
Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS. Routledge.
Peak, K. J., & Glensor, R. W. (1999). Community policing and problem solving: Strategies and practices. Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Peprah, K. (2013). Sand winning and land degradation perspective of indigenous sand winners of Wa Ghana. 3(14), 185–194.
Pestoff, V. (2012). Co-production and third sector social services in Europe: Some concepts and evidence. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23, 1102–1118.
Quayson, J. (2017, July). Is lynching Ghanaian culture? My personal experience. https://www.modernghana.com/news/781408/is-lynching-ghanaian-culture-my-personal-experie.html
Ramirez, R. (1999). Value co‐production: intellectual origins and implications for practice and research. Strategic Management Journal, 20(1), 49–65.
Rich, R. C. (1981). Interaction of the voluntary and governmental sectors: Toward an understanding of the coproduction of municipal services. Administration & Society, 13(1), 59–76.
Robert, G., Donetto, S., & Willians, O. (2021). Co-designing healthcare services with patients. In E. Loeffler & T. Bovaird (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Co-Production of Public Services and Outcomes (pp. 313–333). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Roberts, A., Townsend, S., Morris, J., Rushbrooke, E., Greenhill, B., Whitehead, R., Matthews, T., & Golding, L. (2013). Treat me right, treat me equal: Using national policy and legislation to create positive changes in local health services for people with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 26(1), 14–25.
Roth, J. A., Roehl, J., & Johnson, C. C. (2004). Trends in the adoption of community policing. Community Policing: Can It Work, 1(3), 3–29.
Sampson, R. J., & Raudenbush, S. W. (2004). Seeing Disorder: Neighborhood Stigma and the Social Construction of “Broken Windows.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 41(3), 277–312.
Skilling, L. (2016). Community policing in Kenya: The application of democratic policing principles. The Police Journal, 89(1), 3–17.
Skogan, W. G. (2006). Asymmetry in the impact of encounters with police. Policing & Society, 16(02), 99–126.
Smith, J. A., & Osborn, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In J. A. Smith, P. Flowers, & M. Larkin (Eds.), Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research (pp. 53–80). Sage Publications Sage CA: Thousand Oaks, CA.
Songsore, J. (1985). Intra-regional commodity flows within a centre-periphery structure: The case of Wa town and North-Western Ghana. Geo Books.
Sowatey, E. A., & Atuguba, R. A. (2014). Community policing in Accra: The complexities of local notions of (in) security and (in) justice. In Policing and the politics of order-making (pp. 74–90). Routledge.
Steinmetz, H. (2019). Should we assign 3 or 0 for No opinion in a five-point Likert scale? https://www.researchgate.net/post/Should_we_assign_3_or_0_for_No_opinion_in_a_five-point_Likert_scale/5c6836dc4921eeb05e29a591/citation/download
Stephanie, E. (2003). Slovin’s formula sampling techniques. HoughtonMifflin, New York, USA.
Talsma, L., & Molenbroek, J. F. M. (2012). User-centered ecotourism development. Work, 41(Supplement 1), 2147–2154.
Tankebe, J. (2008). Police effectiveness and police trustworthiness in Ghana: An empirical appraisal. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 8(2), 185–202.
Tankebe, J. (2013). In search of moral recognition? Policing and eudaemonic legitimacy in Ghana. Law & Social Inquiry, 38(3), 576–597.
Teye, J. K. (2012). Benefits, challenges, and dynamism of positionalities associated with mixed methods research in developing countries: Evidence from Ghana. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(4), 379–391.
Tyler, T. R. (2006). Psychological perspectives on legitimacy and legitimation. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 57, 375–400.
United Nation Population Fund (UNFPA). (2007, June). Urban population to double. The New Humanitarian. https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news/2007/06/27/urban-population-double-unfpa
United Nations Development Programme, (UNDP). (2011). Wa Municipality Human Development Report: Resource Endowment, Investment Opportunities and the Attainment of MDGs. https://www.undp.org/sites/g/files/zskgke326/files/migration/gh/UNDP_GH_INCGRO_DHDR2011_Wa-Municipal-Assembly.pdf
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36, 1–10.
Voorberg, W. H., Bekkers, V. J. J. M., & Tummers, L. G. (2015). A systematic review of co-creation and co-production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1333–1357.
Wanjohi, D. M. (2014). Influence of community policing on crime reduction in Kenya: A case of Machakos County. University of Nairobi. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Wanjohi%2C+D.+M.+%282014%29.+Influence+of+Community+Policing+on+Crime+Reduction+In+Kenya %3A+A+Case+of+Machakos+County.+&btnG=
Yesberg, J., Brunton-Smith, I., & Bradford, B. (2023). Police visibility, trust in police fairness, and collective efficacy: A multilevel Structural Equation Model. European Journal of Criminology, 20(2), 712–737.
Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of Planning and Land Management
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License .
Make a submission, information.
Our latest Disability Price Tag research for 2023 looks at the extra costs faced by disabled households.
We found that:
Disability price tag 2023: the extra cost of disability.
Our latest research shows the extra costs disabled households face.
The Disability Price Tag 2019 report reveals the extra costs disabled people and their families face.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Scope of Research: This study will assess the usability of a mobile app for managing personal finances. The research will involve conducting a usability test with a group of participants, evaluating the app's ease of use, efficiency, and user satisfaction. The study aims to identify areas of the app that need improvement, and to provide ...
How to Write the Scope of the Study. Take home message. The scope of the study is defined at the start of the research project before data collection begins. It is used by researchers to set the boundaries and limitations within which the study will be performed. In this post you will learn exactly what the scope of the study means, why it is ...
The scope of the study can come down to any number of things, including the researchers' interest, the current state of theoretical development on the subject of mental health, and the design of the study, particularly how the data is collected. It might even boil down to influences like geographical location, which can determine the kind of ...
Your study's scope and delimitations are the sections where you define the broader parameters and boundaries of your research. The scope details what your study will explore, such as the target population, extent, or study duration. Delimitations are factors and variables not included in the study. Scope and delimitations are not methodological ...
What is scope and delimitation in research. The scope of a research paper explains the context and framework for the study, outlines the extent, variables, or dimensions that will be investigated, and provides details of the parameters within which the study is conducted.Delimitations in research, on the other hand, refer to the limitations imposed on the study.
The scope of your project sets clear parameters for your research. A scope statement will give basic information about the depth and breadth of the project. It tells your reader exactly what you want to find out, how you will conduct your study, the reports and deliverables that will be part of the outcome of the study, and the responsibilities ...
The scope of research is a crucial element in any academic study, defining the boundaries and focus of your investigation, which is crucial for the scope of the study. This article will guide you through the process of writing a well-defined scope, ensuring your research paper is manageable, impactful, and achievable.
A scope is needed for all types of research: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. To define your scope of research, consider the following: Budget constraints or any specifics of grant funding; Your proposed timeline and duration; Specifics about your population of study, your proposed sample size, and the research methodology you'll ...
The scope and delimitations of a thesis, dissertation or research paper define the topic and boundaries of the research problem to be investigated. The scope details how in-depth your study is to explore the research question and the parameters in which it will operate in relation to the population and timeframe.
Scope of research is determined at the beginning of your research process, prior to the data collection stage. Sometimes called "scope of study," your scope delineates what will and will not be covered in your project. It helps you focus your work and your time, ensuring that you'll be able to achieve your goals and outcomes. ...
Example 1. Research question: What are the effects of social media on mental health? Scope: The scope of the study will focus on the impact of social media on the mental health of young adults aged 18-24 in the United States. Delimitation: The study will specifically examine the following aspects of social media: frequency of use, types of social media platforms used, and the impact of social ...
The scope of research delineates its extent or range of inquiry, setting clear parameters for what the study will cover. It's a foundational aspect that guides every step of the research process, from the formulation of research questions to the interpretation of results. Defining the scope helps in focusing the research efforts, ensuring ...
Answer: The scope of a study explains the extent to which the research area will be explored in your work, and it specifies the parameters within which the study will be operating. In other words, you will have to define what the study will cover and what it focuses on. Similarly, you also have to explain what the study will not cover.
To write your scope of the study, you need to restate the research problem and objectives of your study. You should state the period in which your study focuses on. The research methods utilized in your study should also be stated. This incorporates data such as sample size, geographical location, variables, and the method of analysis.
In academic research, defining the scope and delimitations is a pivotal step in designing a robust and effective study. The scope outlines the breadth and depth of the investigation, offering a clear direction for the research. Meanwhile, delimitations set the boundaries of the study, ensuring that the research remains focused and manageable.
Defining Scope. Once you decide on a research topic, you need to determine the scope of your topic. The scope of a research topic is determined by how detailed you want your project to be. This process will tell you if your topic is already too narrow or too broad. Consider the following when determining the scope of your research topic ...
Delimitations refer to the specific boundaries or limitations that are set in a research study in order to narrow its scope and focus. Delimitations may be related to a variety of factors, including the population being studied, the geographical location, the time period, the research design, and the methods or tools being used to collect data.
A well-defined research or study scope enables a researcher to give clarity to the study outcomes that are to be investigated. It makes clear why specific data points have been collected whilst others have been excluded. Without this, it is difficult to define an end point for a research project since no limits have been defined on the work ...
Scoping study research questions are broad in nature as the focus is on summarizing breadth of evidence. Arksey and O'Malley acknowledge the need to maintain a broad scope to research questions, however we found our research questions lacked the direction, clarity, and focus needed to inform subsequent stages of the research process, such as ...
Significance of the study in research refers to the potential importance, relevance, or impact of the research findings. It outlines how the research contributes to the existing body of knowledge, what gaps it fills, or what new understanding it brings to a particular field of study. ... Scope and limitations: This outlines the boundaries and ...
Scope of social research is to make research manageable, handy, researchable, optimal. and SMART. Researchers need to determine the scope very early enough in the research cycle. Aside from the ...
The scope of a study, as you may know, establishes the extent to which you will study the topic in question. It's done, quite simply, to keep the study practical. If the scope is too broad, the study may go on a long time. If it's too narrow, it may not yield sufficient data. For examples of the scope, you may refer to the following queries ...
1 Answer to this question. Answer: The scope of a study explains the extent to which the research area will be explored in the study and specifies the parameters within which the study will be operating. Thus, the scope of a study will define the purpose of the study, the population size and characteristics, geographical location, the time ...
In a mixed methods research design, the study revealed a low level of awareness of community policing strategies in North-Western Ghana, which constrains the efforts to initiate and benefit from the outcomes of co-producing community policing. Consequently, knowledge, understanding, and effectiveness of community policing strategies appear very ...
Our latest Disability Price Tag research for 2023 looks at the extra costs faced by disabled households. We found that: disabled households with at least 1 disabled adult or child, face extra costs of £975 a month on average; for households with 2 disabled adults and at least 2 children, these average extra costs increase to £1,248 a month; disability related extra costs are equivalent to 63 ...