Suits research exploring:• Changing behaviours within health contexts to address patient and carer practices• Changing behaviours regarding environmental concerns• Barriers and enablers to behaviour/ practice/ implementation• Intervention planning and implementation• Post-evaluation• Promoting physical activity
As discussed in Chapter 3, qualitative research is not an absolute science. While not all research may need a framework or theory (particularly descriptive studies, outlined in Chapter 5), the use of a framework or theory can help to position the research questions, research processes and conclusions and implications within the relevant research paradigm. Theories and frameworks also help to bring to focus areas of the research problem that may not have been considered.
Qualitative Research – a practical guide for health and social care researchers and practitioners Copyright © 2023 by Tess Tsindos is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.
Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.
Published on 4 May 2022 by Bas Swaen and Tegan George. Revised on 18 March 2024.
A conceptual framework illustrates the expected relationship between your variables. It defines the relevant objectives for your research process and maps out how they come together to draw coherent conclusions.
Keep reading for a step-by-step guide to help you construct your own conceptual framework.
Developing a conceptual framework in research, step 1: choose your research question, step 2: select your independent and dependent variables, step 3: visualise your cause-and-effect relationship, step 4: identify other influencing variables, frequently asked questions about conceptual models.
A conceptual framework is a representation of the relationship you expect to see between your variables, or the characteristics or properties that you want to study.
Conceptual frameworks can be written or visual and are generally developed based on a literature review of existing studies about your topic.
Your research question guides your work by determining exactly what you want to find out, giving your research process a clear focus.
However, before you start collecting your data, consider constructing a conceptual framework. This will help you map out which variables you will measure and how you expect them to relate to one another.
In order to move forward with your research question and test a cause-and-effect relationship, you must first identify at least two key variables: your independent and dependent variables .
Note that causal relationships often involve several independent variables that affect the dependent variable. For the purpose of this example, we’ll work with just one independent variable (‘hours of study’).
Now that you’ve figured out your research question and variables, the first step in designing your conceptual framework is visualising your expected cause-and-effect relationship.
It’s crucial to identify other variables that can influence the relationship between your independent and dependent variables early in your research process.
Some common variables to include are moderating, mediating, and control variables.
Moderating variable (or moderators) alter the effect that an independent variable has on a dependent variable. In other words, moderators change the ‘effect’ component of the cause-and-effect relationship.
Let’s add the moderator ‘IQ’. Here, a student’s IQ level can change the effect that the variable ‘hours of study’ has on the exam score. The higher the IQ, the fewer hours of study are needed to do well on the exam.
Let’s take a look at how this might work. The graph below shows how the number of hours spent studying affects exam score. As expected, the more hours you study, the better your results. Here, a student who studies for 20 hours will get a perfect score.
But the graph looks different when we add our ‘IQ’ moderator of 120. A student with this IQ will achieve a perfect score after just 15 hours of study.
Below, the value of the ‘IQ’ moderator has been increased to 150. A student with this IQ will only need to invest five hours of study in order to get a perfect score.
Here, we see that a moderating variable does indeed change the cause-and-effect relationship between two variables.
Now we’ll expand the framework by adding a mediating variable . Mediating variables link the independent and dependent variables, allowing the relationship between them to be better explained.
Here’s how the conceptual framework might look if a mediator variable were involved:
In this case, the mediator helps explain why studying more hours leads to a higher exam score. The more hours a student studies, the more practice problems they will complete; the more practice problems completed, the higher the student’s exam score will be.
It’s important not to confuse moderating and mediating variables. To remember the difference, you can think of them in relation to the independent variable:
Lastly, control variables must also be taken into account. These are variables that are held constant so that they don’t interfere with the results. Even though you aren’t interested in measuring them for your study, it’s crucial to be aware of as many of them as you can be.
A mediator variable explains the process through which two variables are related, while a moderator variable affects the strength and direction of that relationship.
No. The value of a dependent variable depends on an independent variable, so a variable cannot be both independent and dependent at the same time. It must be either the cause or the effect, not both.
Yes, but including more than one of either type requires multiple research questions .
For example, if you are interested in the effect of a diet on health, you can use multiple measures of health: blood sugar, blood pressure, weight, pulse, and many more. Each of these is its own dependent variable with its own research question.
You could also choose to look at the effect of exercise levels as well as diet, or even the additional effect of the two combined. Each of these is a separate independent variable .
To ensure the internal validity of an experiment , you should only change one independent variable at a time.
A control variable is any variable that’s held constant in a research study. It’s not a variable of interest in the study, but it’s controlled because it could influence the outcomes.
A confounding variable , also called a confounder or confounding factor, is a third variable in a study examining a potential cause-and-effect relationship.
A confounding variable is related to both the supposed cause and the supposed effect of the study. It can be difficult to separate the true effect of the independent variable from the effect of the confounding variable.
In your research design , it’s important to identify potential confounding variables and plan how you will reduce their impact.
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.
Swaen, B. & George, T. (2024, March 18). What Is a Conceptual Framework? | Tips & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 3 September 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/conceptual-frameworks/
Mediator vs moderator variables | differences & examples, independent vs dependent variables | definition & examples, what are control variables | definition & examples.
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.
Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .
Julie a. luft.
† Department of Mathematics, Social Studies, and Science Education, Mary Frances Early College of Education, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602-7124
‡ Department of Teaching & Learning, College of Education & Human Ecology, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210
§ Department of Biology, Eastern Washington University, Cheney, WA 99004
∥ Department of Biology, Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, TN 37132
To frame their work, biology education researchers need to consider the role of literature reviews, theoretical frameworks, and conceptual frameworks as critical elements of the research and writing process. However, these elements can be confusing for scholars new to education research. This Research Methods article is designed to provide an overview of each of these elements and delineate the purpose of each in the educational research process. We describe what biology education researchers should consider as they conduct literature reviews, identify theoretical frameworks, and construct conceptual frameworks. Clarifying these different components of educational research studies can be helpful to new biology education researchers and the biology education research community at large in situating their work in the broader scholarly literature.
Discipline-based education research (DBER) involves the purposeful and situated study of teaching and learning in specific disciplinary areas ( Singer et al. , 2012 ). Studies in DBER are guided by research questions that reflect disciplines’ priorities and worldviews. Researchers can use quantitative data, qualitative data, or both to answer these research questions through a variety of methodological traditions. Across all methodologies, there are different methods associated with planning and conducting educational research studies that include the use of surveys, interviews, observations, artifacts, or instruments. Ensuring the coherence of these elements to the discipline’s perspective also involves situating the work in the broader scholarly literature. The tools for doing this include literature reviews, theoretical frameworks, and conceptual frameworks. However, the purpose and function of each of these elements is often confusing to new education researchers. The goal of this article is to introduce new biology education researchers to these three important elements important in DBER scholarship and the broader educational literature.
The first element we discuss is a review of research (literature reviews), which highlights the need for a specific research question, study problem, or topic of investigation. Literature reviews situate the relevance of the study within a topic and a field. The process may seem familiar to science researchers entering DBER fields, but new researchers may still struggle in conducting the review. Booth et al. (2016b) highlight some of the challenges novice education researchers face when conducting a review of literature. They point out that novice researchers struggle in deciding how to focus the review, determining the scope of articles needed in the review, and knowing how to be critical of the articles in the review. Overcoming these challenges (and others) can help novice researchers construct a sound literature review that can inform the design of the study and help ensure the work makes a contribution to the field.
The second and third highlighted elements are theoretical and conceptual frameworks. These guide biology education research (BER) studies, and may be less familiar to science researchers. These elements are important in shaping the construction of new knowledge. Theoretical frameworks offer a way to explain and interpret the studied phenomenon, while conceptual frameworks clarify assumptions about the studied phenomenon. Despite the importance of these constructs in educational research, biology educational researchers have noted the limited use of theoretical or conceptual frameworks in published work ( DeHaan, 2011 ; Dirks, 2011 ; Lo et al. , 2019 ). In reviewing articles published in CBE—Life Sciences Education ( LSE ) between 2015 and 2019, we found that fewer than 25% of the research articles had a theoretical or conceptual framework (see the Supplemental Information), and at times there was an inconsistent use of theoretical and conceptual frameworks. Clearly, these frameworks are challenging for published biology education researchers, which suggests the importance of providing some initial guidance to new biology education researchers.
Fortunately, educational researchers have increased their explicit use of these frameworks over time, and this is influencing educational research in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. For instance, a quick search for theoretical or conceptual frameworks in the abstracts of articles in Educational Research Complete (a common database for educational research) in STEM fields demonstrates a dramatic change over the last 20 years: from only 778 articles published between 2000 and 2010 to 5703 articles published between 2010 and 2020, a more than sevenfold increase. Greater recognition of the importance of these frameworks is contributing to DBER authors being more explicit about such frameworks in their studies.
Collectively, literature reviews, theoretical frameworks, and conceptual frameworks work to guide methodological decisions and the elucidation of important findings. Each offers a different perspective on the problem of study and is an essential element in all forms of educational research. As new researchers seek to learn about these elements, they will find different resources, a variety of perspectives, and many suggestions about the construction and use of these elements. The wide range of available information can overwhelm the new researcher who just wants to learn the distinction between these elements or how to craft them adequately.
Our goal in writing this paper is not to offer specific advice about how to write these sections in scholarly work. Instead, we wanted to introduce these elements to those who are new to BER and who are interested in better distinguishing one from the other. In this paper, we share the purpose of each element in BER scholarship, along with important points on its construction. We also provide references for additional resources that may be beneficial to better understanding each element. Table 1 summarizes the key distinctions among these elements.
Comparison of literature reviews, theoretical frameworks, and conceptual reviews
Literature reviews | Theoretical frameworks | Conceptual frameworks | |
---|---|---|---|
Purpose | To point out the need for the study in BER and connection to the field. | To state the assumptions and orientations of the researcher regarding the topic of study | To describe the researcher’s understanding of the main concepts under investigation |
Aims | A literature review examines current and relevant research associated with the study question. It is comprehensive, critical, and purposeful. | A theoretical framework illuminates the phenomenon of study and the corresponding assumptions adopted by the researcher. Frameworks can take on different orientations. | The conceptual framework is created by the researcher(s), includes the presumed relationships among concepts, and addresses needed areas of study discovered in literature reviews. |
Connection to the manuscript | A literature review should connect to the study question, guide the study methodology, and be central in the discussion by indicating how the analyzed data advances what is known in the field. | A theoretical framework drives the question, guides the types of methods for data collection and analysis, informs the discussion of the findings, and reveals the subjectivities of the researcher. | The conceptual framework is informed by literature reviews, experiences, or experiments. It may include emergent ideas that are not yet grounded in the literature. It should be coherent with the paper’s theoretical framing. |
Additional points | A literature review may reach beyond BER and include other education research fields. | A theoretical framework does not rationalize the need for the study, and a theoretical framework can come from different fields. | A conceptual framework articulates the phenomenon under study through written descriptions and/or visual representations. |
This article is written for the new biology education researcher who is just learning about these different elements or for scientists looking to become more involved in BER. It is a result of our own work as science education and biology education researchers, whether as graduate students and postdoctoral scholars or newly hired and established faculty members. This is the article we wish had been available as we started to learn about these elements or discussed them with new educational researchers in biology.
Purpose of a literature review.
A literature review is foundational to any research study in education or science. In education, a well-conceptualized and well-executed review provides a summary of the research that has already been done on a specific topic and identifies questions that remain to be answered, thus illustrating the current research project’s potential contribution to the field and the reasoning behind the methodological approach selected for the study ( Maxwell, 2012 ). BER is an evolving disciplinary area that is redefining areas of conceptual emphasis as well as orientations toward teaching and learning (e.g., Labov et al. , 2010 ; American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2011 ; Nehm, 2019 ). As a result, building comprehensive, critical, purposeful, and concise literature reviews can be a challenge for new biology education researchers.
There are different ways to approach and construct a literature review. Booth et al. (2016a) provide an overview that includes, for example, scoping reviews, which are focused only on notable studies and use a basic method of analysis, and integrative reviews, which are the result of exhaustive literature searches across different genres. Underlying each of these different review processes are attention to the s earch process, a ppraisa l of articles, s ynthesis of the literature, and a nalysis: SALSA ( Booth et al. , 2016a ). This useful acronym can help the researcher focus on the process while building a specific type of review.
However, new educational researchers often have questions about literature reviews that are foundational to SALSA or other approaches. Common questions concern determining which literature pertains to the topic of study or the role of the literature review in the design of the study. This section addresses such questions broadly while providing general guidance for writing a narrative literature review that evaluates the most pertinent studies.
The literature review process should begin before the research is conducted. As Boote and Beile (2005 , p. 3) suggested, researchers should be “scholars before researchers.” They point out that having a good working knowledge of the proposed topic helps illuminate avenues of study. Some subject areas have a deep body of work to read and reflect upon, providing a strong foundation for developing the research question(s). For instance, the teaching and learning of evolution is an area of long-standing interest in the BER community, generating many studies (e.g., Perry et al. , 2008 ; Barnes and Brownell, 2016 ) and reviews of research (e.g., Sickel and Friedrichsen, 2013 ; Ziadie and Andrews, 2018 ). Emerging areas of BER include the affective domain, issues of transfer, and metacognition ( Singer et al. , 2012 ). Many studies in these areas are transdisciplinary and not always specific to biology education (e.g., Rodrigo-Peiris et al. , 2018 ; Kolpikova et al. , 2019 ). These newer areas may require reading outside BER; fortunately, summaries of some of these topics can be found in the Current Insights section of the LSE website.
In focusing on a specific problem within a broader research strand, a new researcher will likely need to examine research outside BER. Depending upon the area of study, the expanded reading list might involve a mix of BER, DBER, and educational research studies. Determining the scope of the reading is not always straightforward. A simple way to focus one’s reading is to create a “summary phrase” or “research nugget,” which is a very brief descriptive statement about the study. It should focus on the essence of the study, for example, “first-year nonmajor students’ understanding of evolution,” “metacognitive prompts to enhance learning during biochemistry,” or “instructors’ inquiry-based instructional practices after professional development programming.” This type of phrase should help a new researcher identify two or more areas to review that pertain to the study. Focusing on recent research in the last 5 years is a good first step. Additional studies can be identified by reading relevant works referenced in those articles. It is also important to read seminal studies that are more than 5 years old. Reading a range of studies should give the researcher the necessary command of the subject in order to suggest a research question.
Given that the research question(s) arise from the literature review, the review should also substantiate the selected methodological approach. The review and research question(s) guide the researcher in determining how to collect and analyze data. Often the methodological approach used in a study is selected to contribute knowledge that expands upon what has been published previously about the topic (see Institute of Education Sciences and National Science Foundation, 2013 ). An emerging topic of study may need an exploratory approach that allows for a description of the phenomenon and development of a potential theory. This could, but not necessarily, require a methodological approach that uses interviews, observations, surveys, or other instruments. An extensively studied topic may call for the additional understanding of specific factors or variables; this type of study would be well suited to a verification or a causal research design. These could entail a methodological approach that uses valid and reliable instruments, observations, or interviews to determine an effect in the studied event. In either of these examples, the researcher(s) may use a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods methodological approach.
Even with a good research question, there is still more reading to be done. The complexity and focus of the research question dictates the depth and breadth of the literature to be examined. Questions that connect multiple topics can require broad literature reviews. For instance, a study that explores the impact of a biology faculty learning community on the inquiry instruction of faculty could have the following review areas: learning communities among biology faculty, inquiry instruction among biology faculty, and inquiry instruction among biology faculty as a result of professional learning. Biology education researchers need to consider whether their literature review requires studies from different disciplines within or outside DBER. For the example given, it would be fruitful to look at research focused on learning communities with faculty in STEM fields or in general education fields that result in instructional change. It is important not to be too narrow or too broad when reading. When the conclusions of articles start to sound similar or no new insights are gained, the researcher likely has a good foundation for a literature review. This level of reading should allow the researcher to demonstrate a mastery in understanding the researched topic, explain the suitability of the proposed research approach, and point to the need for the refined research question(s).
The literature review should include the researcher’s evaluation and critique of the selected studies. A researcher may have a large collection of studies, but not all of the studies will follow standards important in the reporting of empirical work in the social sciences. The American Educational Research Association ( Duran et al. , 2006 ), for example, offers a general discussion about standards for such work: an adequate review of research informing the study, the existence of sound and appropriate data collection and analysis methods, and appropriate conclusions that do not overstep or underexplore the analyzed data. The Institute of Education Sciences and National Science Foundation (2013) also offer Common Guidelines for Education Research and Development that can be used to evaluate collected studies.
Because not all journals adhere to such standards, it is important that a researcher review each study to determine the quality of published research, per the guidelines suggested earlier. In some instances, the research may be fatally flawed. Examples of such flaws include data that do not pertain to the question, a lack of discussion about the data collection, poorly constructed instruments, or an inadequate analysis. These types of errors result in studies that are incomplete, error-laden, or inaccurate and should be excluded from the review. Most studies have limitations, and the author(s) often make them explicit. For instance, there may be an instructor effect, recognized bias in the analysis, or issues with the sample population. Limitations are usually addressed by the research team in some way to ensure a sound and acceptable research process. Occasionally, the limitations associated with the study can be significant and not addressed adequately, which leaves a consequential decision in the hands of the researcher. Providing critiques of studies in the literature review process gives the reader confidence that the researcher has carefully examined relevant work in preparation for the study and, ultimately, the manuscript.
A solid literature review clearly anchors the proposed study in the field and connects the research question(s), the methodological approach, and the discussion. Reviewing extant research leads to research questions that will contribute to what is known in the field. By summarizing what is known, the literature review points to what needs to be known, which in turn guides decisions about methodology. Finally, notable findings of the new study are discussed in reference to those described in the literature review.
Within published BER studies, literature reviews can be placed in different locations in an article. When included in the introductory section of the study, the first few paragraphs of the manuscript set the stage, with the literature review following the opening paragraphs. Cooper et al. (2019) illustrate this approach in their study of course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs). An introduction discussing the potential of CURES is followed by an analysis of the existing literature relevant to the design of CUREs that allows for novel student discoveries. Within this review, the authors point out contradictory findings among research on novel student discoveries. This clarifies the need for their study, which is described and highlighted through specific research aims.
A literature reviews can also make up a separate section in a paper. For example, the introduction to Todd et al. (2019) illustrates the need for their research topic by highlighting the potential of learning progressions (LPs) and suggesting that LPs may help mitigate learning loss in genetics. At the end of the introduction, the authors state their specific research questions. The review of literature following this opening section comprises two subsections. One focuses on learning loss in general and examines a variety of studies and meta-analyses from the disciplines of medical education, mathematics, and reading. The second section focuses specifically on LPs in genetics and highlights student learning in the midst of LPs. These separate reviews provide insights into the stated research question.
A well-conceptualized, comprehensive, and critical literature review reveals the understanding of the topic that the researcher brings to the study. Literature reviews should not be so big that there is no clear area of focus; nor should they be so narrow that no real research question arises. The task for a researcher is to craft an efficient literature review that offers a critical analysis of published work, articulates the need for the study, guides the methodological approach to the topic of study, and provides an adequate foundation for the discussion of the findings.
In our own writing of literature reviews, there are often many drafts. An early draft may seem well suited to the study because the need for and approach to the study are well described. However, as the results of the study are analyzed and findings begin to emerge, the existing literature review may be inadequate and need revision. The need for an expanded discussion about the research area can result in the inclusion of new studies that support the explanation of a potential finding. The literature review may also prove to be too broad. Refocusing on a specific area allows for more contemplation of a finding.
It should be noted that there are different types of literature reviews, and many books and articles have been written about the different ways to embark on these types of reviews. Among these different resources, the following may be helpful in considering how to refine the review process for scholarly journals:
Purpose of theoretical frameworks.
As new education researchers may be less familiar with theoretical frameworks than with literature reviews, this discussion begins with an analogy. Envision a biologist, chemist, and physicist examining together the dramatic effect of a fog tsunami over the ocean. A biologist gazing at this phenomenon may be concerned with the effect of fog on various species. A chemist may be interested in the chemical composition of the fog as water vapor condenses around bits of salt. A physicist may be focused on the refraction of light to make fog appear to be “sitting” above the ocean. While observing the same “objective event,” the scientists are operating under different theoretical frameworks that provide a particular perspective or “lens” for the interpretation of the phenomenon. Each of these scientists brings specialized knowledge, experiences, and values to this phenomenon, and these influence the interpretation of the phenomenon. The scientists’ theoretical frameworks influence how they design and carry out their studies and interpret their data.
Within an educational study, a theoretical framework helps to explain a phenomenon through a particular lens and challenges and extends existing knowledge within the limitations of that lens. Theoretical frameworks are explicitly stated by an educational researcher in the paper’s framework, theory, or relevant literature section. The framework shapes the types of questions asked, guides the method by which data are collected and analyzed, and informs the discussion of the results of the study. It also reveals the researcher’s subjectivities, for example, values, social experience, and viewpoint ( Allen, 2017 ). It is essential that a novice researcher learn to explicitly state a theoretical framework, because all research questions are being asked from the researcher’s implicit or explicit assumptions of a phenomenon of interest ( Schwandt, 2000 ).
Theoretical frameworks are one of the most contemplated elements in our work in educational research. In this section, we share three important considerations for new scholars selecting a theoretical framework.
The first step in identifying a theoretical framework involves reflecting on the phenomenon within the study and the assumptions aligned with the phenomenon. The phenomenon involves the studied event. There are many possibilities, for example, student learning, instructional approach, or group organization. A researcher holds assumptions about how the phenomenon will be effected, influenced, changed, or portrayed. It is ultimately the researcher’s assumption(s) about the phenomenon that aligns with a theoretical framework. An example can help illustrate how a researcher’s reflection on the phenomenon and acknowledgment of assumptions can result in the identification of a theoretical framework.
In our example, a biology education researcher may be interested in exploring how students’ learning of difficult biological concepts can be supported by the interactions of group members. The phenomenon of interest is the interactions among the peers, and the researcher assumes that more knowledgeable students are important in supporting the learning of the group. As a result, the researcher may draw on Vygotsky’s (1978) sociocultural theory of learning and development that is focused on the phenomenon of student learning in a social setting. This theory posits the critical nature of interactions among students and between students and teachers in the process of building knowledge. A researcher drawing upon this framework holds the assumption that learning is a dynamic social process involving questions and explanations among students in the classroom and that more knowledgeable peers play an important part in the process of building conceptual knowledge.
It is important to state at this point that there are many different theoretical frameworks. Some frameworks focus on learning and knowing, while other theoretical frameworks focus on equity, empowerment, or discourse. Some frameworks are well articulated, and others are still being refined. For a new researcher, it can be challenging to find a theoretical framework. Two of the best ways to look for theoretical frameworks is through published works that highlight different frameworks.
When a theoretical framework is selected, it should clearly connect to all parts of the study. The framework should augment the study by adding a perspective that provides greater insights into the phenomenon. It should clearly align with the studies described in the literature review. For instance, a framework focused on learning would correspond to research that reported different learning outcomes for similar studies. The methods for data collection and analysis should also correspond to the framework. For instance, a study about instructional interventions could use a theoretical framework concerned with learning and could collect data about the effect of the intervention on what is learned. When the data are analyzed, the theoretical framework should provide added meaning to the findings, and the findings should align with the theoretical framework.
A study by Jensen and Lawson (2011) provides an example of how a theoretical framework connects different parts of the study. They compared undergraduate biology students in heterogeneous and homogeneous groups over the course of a semester. Jensen and Lawson (2011) assumed that learning involved collaboration and more knowledgeable peers, which made Vygotsky’s (1978) theory a good fit for their study. They predicted that students in heterogeneous groups would experience greater improvement in their reasoning abilities and science achievements with much of the learning guided by the more knowledgeable peers.
In the enactment of the study, they collected data about the instruction in traditional and inquiry-oriented classes, while the students worked in homogeneous or heterogeneous groups. To determine the effect of working in groups, the authors also measured students’ reasoning abilities and achievement. Each data-collection and analysis decision connected to understanding the influence of collaborative work.
Their findings highlighted aspects of Vygotsky’s (1978) theory of learning. One finding, for instance, posited that inquiry instruction, as a whole, resulted in reasoning and achievement gains. This links to Vygotsky (1978) , because inquiry instruction involves interactions among group members. A more nuanced finding was that group composition had a conditional effect. Heterogeneous groups performed better with more traditional and didactic instruction, regardless of the reasoning ability of the group members. Homogeneous groups worked better during interaction-rich activities for students with low reasoning ability. The authors attributed the variation to the different types of helping behaviors of students. High-performing students provided the answers, while students with low reasoning ability had to work collectively through the material. In terms of Vygotsky (1978) , this finding provided new insights into the learning context in which productive interactions can occur for students.
Another consideration in the selection and use of a theoretical framework pertains to its orientation to the study. This can result in the theoretical framework prioritizing individuals, institutions, and/or policies ( Anfara and Mertz, 2014 ). Frameworks that connect to individuals, for instance, could contribute to understanding their actions, learning, or knowledge. Institutional frameworks, on the other hand, offer insights into how institutions, organizations, or groups can influence individuals or materials. Policy theories provide ways to understand how national or local policies can dictate an emphasis on outcomes or instructional design. These different types of frameworks highlight different aspects in an educational setting, which influences the design of the study and the collection of data. In addition, these different frameworks offer a way to make sense of the data. Aligning the data collection and analysis with the framework ensures that a study is coherent and can contribute to the field.
New understandings emerge when different theoretical frameworks are used. For instance, Ebert-May et al. (2015) prioritized the individual level within conceptual change theory (see Posner et al. , 1982 ). In this theory, an individual’s knowledge changes when it no longer fits the phenomenon. Ebert-May et al. (2015) designed a professional development program challenging biology postdoctoral scholars’ existing conceptions of teaching. The authors reported that the biology postdoctoral scholars’ teaching practices became more student-centered as they were challenged to explain their instructional decision making. According to the theory, the biology postdoctoral scholars’ dissatisfaction in their descriptions of teaching and learning initiated change in their knowledge and instruction. These results reveal how conceptual change theory can explain the learning of participants and guide the design of professional development programming.
The communities of practice (CoP) theoretical framework ( Lave, 1988 ; Wenger, 1998 ) prioritizes the institutional level , suggesting that learning occurs when individuals learn from and contribute to the communities in which they reside. Grounded in the assumption of community learning, the literature on CoP suggests that, as individuals interact regularly with the other members of their group, they learn about the rules, roles, and goals of the community ( Allee, 2000 ). A study conducted by Gehrke and Kezar (2017) used the CoP framework to understand organizational change by examining the involvement of individual faculty engaged in a cross-institutional CoP focused on changing the instructional practice of faculty at each institution. In the CoP, faculty members were involved in enhancing instructional materials within their department, which aligned with an overarching goal of instituting instruction that embraced active learning. Not surprisingly, Gehrke and Kezar (2017) revealed that faculty who perceived the community culture as important in their work cultivated institutional change. Furthermore, they found that institutional change was sustained when key leaders served as mentors and provided support for faculty, and as faculty themselves developed into leaders. This study reveals the complexity of individual roles in a COP in order to support institutional instructional change.
It is important to explicitly state the theoretical framework used in a study, but elucidating a theoretical framework can be challenging for a new educational researcher. The literature review can help to identify an applicable theoretical framework. Focal areas of the review or central terms often connect to assumptions and assertions associated with the framework that pertain to the phenomenon of interest. Another way to identify a theoretical framework is self-reflection by the researcher on personal beliefs and understandings about the nature of knowledge the researcher brings to the study ( Lysaght, 2011 ). In stating one’s beliefs and understandings related to the study (e.g., students construct their knowledge, instructional materials support learning), an orientation becomes evident that will suggest a particular theoretical framework. Theoretical frameworks are not arbitrary , but purposefully selected.
With experience, a researcher may find expanded roles for theoretical frameworks. Researchers may revise an existing framework that has limited explanatory power, or they may decide there is a need to develop a new theoretical framework. These frameworks can emerge from a current study or the need to explain a phenomenon in a new way. Researchers may also find that multiple theoretical frameworks are necessary to frame and explore a problem, as different frameworks can provide different insights into a problem.
Finally, it is important to recognize that choosing “x” theoretical framework does not necessarily mean a researcher chooses “y” methodology and so on, nor is there a clear-cut, linear process in selecting a theoretical framework for one’s study. In part, the nonlinear process of identifying a theoretical framework is what makes understanding and using theoretical frameworks challenging. For the novice scholar, contemplating and understanding theoretical frameworks is essential. Fortunately, there are articles and books that can help:
Purpose of a conceptual framework.
A conceptual framework is a description of the way a researcher understands the factors and/or variables that are involved in the study and their relationships to one another. The purpose of a conceptual framework is to articulate the concepts under study using relevant literature ( Rocco and Plakhotnik, 2009 ) and to clarify the presumed relationships among those concepts ( Rocco and Plakhotnik, 2009 ; Anfara and Mertz, 2014 ). Conceptual frameworks are different from theoretical frameworks in both their breadth and grounding in established findings. Whereas a theoretical framework articulates the lens through which a researcher views the work, the conceptual framework is often more mechanistic and malleable.
Conceptual frameworks are broader, encompassing both established theories (i.e., theoretical frameworks) and the researchers’ own emergent ideas. Emergent ideas, for example, may be rooted in informal and/or unpublished observations from experience. These emergent ideas would not be considered a “theory” if they are not yet tested, supported by systematically collected evidence, and peer reviewed. However, they do still play an important role in the way researchers approach their studies. The conceptual framework allows authors to clearly describe their emergent ideas so that connections among ideas in the study and the significance of the study are apparent to readers.
Including a conceptual framework in a research study is important, but researchers often opt to include either a conceptual or a theoretical framework. Either may be adequate, but both provide greater insight into the research approach. For instance, a research team plans to test a novel component of an existing theory. In their study, they describe the existing theoretical framework that informs their work and then present their own conceptual framework. Within this conceptual framework, specific topics portray emergent ideas that are related to the theory. Describing both frameworks allows readers to better understand the researchers’ assumptions, orientations, and understanding of concepts being investigated. For example, Connolly et al. (2018) included a conceptual framework that described how they applied a theoretical framework of social cognitive career theory (SCCT) to their study on teaching programs for doctoral students. In their conceptual framework, the authors described SCCT, explained how it applied to the investigation, and drew upon results from previous studies to justify the proposed connections between the theory and their emergent ideas.
In some cases, authors may be able to sufficiently describe their conceptualization of the phenomenon under study in an introduction alone, without a separate conceptual framework section. However, incomplete descriptions of how the researchers conceptualize the components of the study may limit the significance of the study by making the research less intelligible to readers. This is especially problematic when studying topics in which researchers use the same terms for different constructs or different terms for similar and overlapping constructs (e.g., inquiry, teacher beliefs, pedagogical content knowledge, or active learning). Authors must describe their conceptualization of a construct if the research is to be understandable and useful.
There are some key areas to consider regarding the inclusion of a conceptual framework in a study. To begin with, it is important to recognize that conceptual frameworks are constructed by the researchers conducting the study ( Rocco and Plakhotnik, 2009 ; Maxwell, 2012 ). This is different from theoretical frameworks that are often taken from established literature. Researchers should bring together ideas from the literature, but they may be influenced by their own experiences as a student and/or instructor, the shared experiences of others, or thought experiments as they construct a description, model, or representation of their understanding of the phenomenon under study. This is an exercise in intellectual organization and clarity that often considers what is learned, known, and experienced. The conceptual framework makes these constructs explicitly visible to readers, who may have different understandings of the phenomenon based on their prior knowledge and experience. There is no single method to go about this intellectual work.
Reeves et al. (2016) is an example of an article that proposed a conceptual framework about graduate teaching assistant professional development evaluation and research. The authors used existing literature to create a novel framework that filled a gap in current research and practice related to the training of graduate teaching assistants. This conceptual framework can guide the systematic collection of data by other researchers because the framework describes the relationships among various factors that influence teaching and learning. The Reeves et al. (2016) conceptual framework may be modified as additional data are collected and analyzed by other researchers. This is not uncommon, as conceptual frameworks can serve as catalysts for concerted research efforts that systematically explore a phenomenon (e.g., Reynolds et al. , 2012 ; Brownell and Kloser, 2015 ).
Sabel et al. (2017) used a conceptual framework in their exploration of how scaffolds, an external factor, interact with internal factors to support student learning. Their conceptual framework integrated principles from two theoretical frameworks, self-regulated learning and metacognition, to illustrate how the research team conceptualized students’ use of scaffolds in their learning ( Figure 1 ). Sabel et al. (2017) created this model using their interpretations of these two frameworks in the context of their teaching.
Conceptual framework from Sabel et al. (2017) .
A conceptual framework should describe the relationship among components of the investigation ( Anfara and Mertz, 2014 ). These relationships should guide the researcher’s methods of approaching the study ( Miles et al. , 2014 ) and inform both the data to be collected and how those data should be analyzed. Explicitly describing the connections among the ideas allows the researcher to justify the importance of the study and the rigor of the research design. Just as importantly, these frameworks help readers understand why certain components of a system were not explored in the study. This is a challenge in education research, which is rooted in complex environments with many variables that are difficult to control.
For example, Sabel et al. (2017) stated: “Scaffolds, such as enhanced answer keys and reflection questions, can help students and instructors bridge the external and internal factors and support learning” (p. 3). They connected the scaffolds in the study to the three dimensions of metacognition and the eventual transformation of existing ideas into new or revised ideas. Their framework provides a rationale for focusing on how students use two different scaffolds, and not on other factors that may influence a student’s success (self-efficacy, use of active learning, exam format, etc.).
In constructing conceptual frameworks, researchers should address needed areas of study and/or contradictions discovered in literature reviews. By attending to these areas, researchers can strengthen their arguments for the importance of a study. For instance, conceptual frameworks can address how the current study will fill gaps in the research, resolve contradictions in existing literature, or suggest a new area of study. While a literature review describes what is known and not known about the phenomenon, the conceptual framework leverages these gaps in describing the current study ( Maxwell, 2012 ). In the example of Sabel et al. (2017) , the authors indicated there was a gap in the literature regarding how scaffolds engage students in metacognition to promote learning in large classes. Their study helps fill that gap by describing how scaffolds can support students in the three dimensions of metacognition: intelligibility, plausibility, and wide applicability. In another example, Lane (2016) integrated research from science identity, the ethic of care, the sense of belonging, and an expertise model of student success to form a conceptual framework that addressed the critiques of other frameworks. In a more recent example, Sbeglia et al. (2021) illustrated how a conceptual framework influences the methodological choices and inferences in studies by educational researchers.
Sometimes researchers draw upon the conceptual frameworks of other researchers. When a researcher’s conceptual framework closely aligns with an existing framework, the discussion may be brief. For example, Ghee et al. (2016) referred to portions of SCCT as their conceptual framework to explain the significance of their work on students’ self-efficacy and career interests. Because the authors’ conceptualization of this phenomenon aligned with a previously described framework, they briefly mentioned the conceptual framework and provided additional citations that provided more detail for the readers.
Within both the BER and the broader DBER communities, conceptual frameworks have been used to describe different constructs. For example, some researchers have used the term “conceptual framework” to describe students’ conceptual understandings of a biological phenomenon. This is distinct from a researcher’s conceptual framework of the educational phenomenon under investigation, which may also need to be explicitly described in the article. Other studies have presented a research logic model or flowchart of the research design as a conceptual framework. These constructions can be quite valuable in helping readers understand the data-collection and analysis process. However, a model depicting the study design does not serve the same role as a conceptual framework. Researchers need to avoid conflating these constructs by differentiating the researchers’ conceptual framework that guides the study from the research design, when applicable.
Explicitly describing conceptual frameworks is essential in depicting the focus of the study. We have found that being explicit in a conceptual framework means using accepted terminology, referencing prior work, and clearly noting connections between terms. This description can also highlight gaps in the literature or suggest potential contributions to the field of study. A well-elucidated conceptual framework can suggest additional studies that may be warranted. This can also spur other researchers to consider how they would approach the examination of a phenomenon and could result in a revised conceptual framework.
It can be challenging to create conceptual frameworks, but they are important. Below are two resources that could be helpful in constructing and presenting conceptual frameworks in educational research:
Literature reviews, theoretical frameworks, and conceptual frameworks are all important in DBER and BER. Robust literature reviews reinforce the importance of a study. Theoretical frameworks connect the study to the base of knowledge in educational theory and specify the researcher’s assumptions. Conceptual frameworks allow researchers to explicitly describe their conceptualization of the relationships among the components of the phenomenon under study. Table 1 provides a general overview of these components in order to assist biology education researchers in thinking about these elements.
It is important to emphasize that these different elements are intertwined. When these elements are aligned and complement one another, the study is coherent, and the study findings contribute to knowledge in the field. When literature reviews, theoretical frameworks, and conceptual frameworks are disconnected from one another, the study suffers. The point of the study is lost, suggested findings are unsupported, or important conclusions are invisible to the researcher. In addition, this misalignment may be costly in terms of time and money.
Conducting a literature review, selecting a theoretical framework, and building a conceptual framework are some of the most difficult elements of a research study. It takes time to understand the relevant research, identify a theoretical framework that provides important insights into the study, and formulate a conceptual framework that organizes the finding. In the research process, there is often a constant back and forth among these elements as the study evolves. With an ongoing refinement of the review of literature, clarification of the theoretical framework, and articulation of a conceptual framework, a sound study can emerge that makes a contribution to the field. This is the goal of BER and education research.
https://doi.org/10.1136/ebnurs-2019-103077
Request permissions.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Often the most difficult part of a research study is preparing the proposal based around a theoretical or philosophical framework. Graduate students ‘…express confusion, a lack of knowledge, and frustration with the challenge of choosing a theoretical framework and understanding how to apply it’. 1 However, the importance in understanding and applying a theoretical framework in research cannot be overestimated.
The choice of a theoretical framework for a research study is often a reflection of the researcher’s ontological (nature of being) and epistemological (theory of knowledge) perspective. We will not delve into these concepts, or personal philosophy in this article. Rather we will focus on how a theoretical framework can be integrated into research.
The theoretical framework is a blueprint for your research project 1 and serves several purposes. It informs the problem you have identified, the purpose and significance of your research demonstrating how your research fits with what is already known (relationship to existing theory and research). This provides a basis for your research questions, the literature review and the methodology and analysis that you choose. 1 Evidence of your chosen theoretical framework should be visible in every aspect of your research and should demonstrate the contribution of this research to knowledge. 2
A theory is an explanation of a concept or an abstract idea of a phenomenon. An example of a theory is Bandura’s middle range theory of self-efficacy, 3 or the level of confidence one has in achieving a goal. Self-efficacy determines the coping behaviours that a person will exhibit when facing obstacles. Those who have high self-efficacy are likely to apply adequate effort leading to successful outcomes, while those with low self-efficacy are more likely to give up earlier and ultimately fail. Any research that is exploring concepts related to self-efficacy or the ability to manage difficult life situations might apply Bandura’s theoretical framework to their study.
Example 1: the big five theoretical framework.
The first example includes research which integrates the ‘Big Five’, a theoretical framework that includes concepts related to teamwork. These include team leadership, mutual performance monitoring, backup behaviour, adaptability and team orientation. 4 In order to conduct research incorporating a theoretical framework, the concepts need to be defined according to a frame of reference. This provides a means to understand the theoretical framework as it relates to a specific context and provides a mechanism for measurement of the concepts.
In this example, the concepts of the Big Five were given a conceptual definition, that provided a broad meaning and then an operational definition, which was more concrete. 4 From here, a survey was developed that reflected the operational definitions related to teamwork in nursing: the Nursing Teamwork Survey (NTS). 5 In this case, the concepts used in the theoretical framework, the Big Five, were the used to develop a survey specific to teamwork in nursing.
The NTS was used in research of nurses at one hospital in northeastern Ontario. Survey questions were grouped into subscales for analysis, that reflected the concepts of the Big Five. 6 For example, one finding of this study was that the nurses from the surgical unit rated the items in the subscale of ’team leadership' (one of the concepts in the Big Five) significantly lower than in the other units. The researchers looked back to the definition of this concept in the Big Five in their interpretation of the findings. Since the definition included a person(s) who has the leadership skills to facilitate teamwork among the nurses on the unit, the conclusion in this study was that the surgical unit lacked a mentor, or facilitator for teamwork. In this way, the theory of teamwork was presented through a set of concepts in a theoretical framework. The Theoretical Framework (TF)was the foundation for development of a survey related to a specific context, used to measure each of the concepts within the TF. Then, the analysis and results circled back to the concepts within the TF and provided a guide for the discussion and conclusions arising from the research.
In another study which explored adherence to intravenous chemotherapy in African-American and Caucasian Women with early stage breast cancer, an adapted version of the Health Decisions Model (HDM) was used as the theoretical basis for the study. 7 The HDM, a revised version of the Health Belief Model, incorporates some aspects of the Health Belief Model and factors relating to patient preferences. 8 The HDM consists of six interrelated constituents that might predict how well a person adheres to a health decision. These include sociodemographic, social interaction, experience, knowledge, general and specific health beliefs and patient preferences, and are clearly defined. The HDM model was used to explore factors which might influence adherence to chemotherapy in women with breast cancer. Sociodemographic, social interaction, knowledge, personal experience and specific health beliefs were used as predictors of adherence to chemotherapy.
The findings were reported using the theoretical framework to discuss results. The study found that delay to treatment, health insurance, depression and symptom severity were predictors to starting chemotherapy which could potentially be adapted with clinical interventions. The findings from the study contribute to the existing body of literature related to cancer nursing.
In this final example, research was conducted to determine the nursing processes that were associated with unexpected intensive care unit admissions. 9 The framework was the Nursing Role Effectiveness Model. In this theoretical framework, the concepts within Donabedian’s Quality Framework of Structure, Process and Outcome were each defined according to nursing practice. 10 11 Processes defined in the Nursing Role Effectiveness Model were used to identify the nursing process variables that were measured in the study.
A theoretical framework should be logically presented and represent the concepts, variables and relationships related to your research study, in order to clearly identify what will be examined, described or measured. It involves reading the literature and identifying a research question(s) while clearly defining and identifying the existing relationship between concepts and theories (related to your research questions[s] in the literature). You must then identify what you will examine or explore in relation to the concepts of the theoretical framework. Once you present your findings using the theoretical framework you will be able to articulate how your study relates to and may potentially advance your chosen theory and add to knowledge.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Patient and public involvement Not required.
A conceptual framework in research is not just a tool but a vital roadmap that guides the entire research process. It integrates various theories, assumptions, and beliefs to provide a structured approach to research. By defining a conceptual framework, researchers can focus their inquiries and clarify their hypotheses, leading to more effective and meaningful research outcomes.
A conceptual framework is essentially an analytical tool that combines concepts and sets them within an appropriate theoretical structure. It serves as a lens through which researchers view the complexities of the real world. The importance of a conceptual framework lies in its ability to serve as a guide, helping researchers to not only visualize but also systematically approach their study.
Together, these components help to define the conceptual framework that directs the research towards its ultimate goal. This structured approach not only improves clarity but also enhances the validity and reliability of the research outcomes. By using a conceptual framework, researchers can avoid common pitfalls and focus on essential variables and relationships.
For practical examples and to see how different frameworks can be applied in various research scenarios, you can Explore Conceptual Framework Examples .
Understanding the various types of conceptual frameworks is crucial for researchers aiming to align their studies with the most effective structure. Conceptual frameworks in research vary primarily between theoretical and operational frameworks, each serving distinct purposes and suiting different research methodologies.
Theoretical frameworks are built upon existing theories and literature, providing a broad and abstract understanding of the research topic. They help in forming the basis of the study by linking the research to already established scholarly works. On the other hand, operational frameworks are more practical, focusing on how the study’s theories will be tested through specific procedures and variables.
Selecting the appropriate conceptual framework is pivotal for the success of a research project. It involves matching the research questions with the framework that best addresses the methodological needs of the study. For instance, a theoretical framework might be chosen for studies that aim to generate new theories, while an operational framework would be better suited for testing specific hypotheses.
Benefits of choosing the right framework include enhanced clarity, better alignment with research goals, and improved validity of research outcomes. Tools like Table Chart Maker can be instrumental in visually comparing the strengths and weaknesses of different frameworks, aiding in this crucial decision-making process.
Understanding the practical application of conceptual frameworks in research can significantly enhance the clarity and effectiveness of your studies. Here, we explore several real-world case studies that demonstrate the pivotal role of conceptual frameworks in achieving robust research conclusions.
Adapting conceptual frameworks based on evolving research data is also critical. As new information becomes available, it’s essential to revisit and adjust the framework to maintain its relevance and accuracy, ensuring that the research remains aligned with real-world conditions.
For those looking to visualize and better comprehend their research frameworks, Graphic Organizers for Conceptual Frameworks can be an invaluable tool. These organizers help in structuring and presenting research findings clearly, enhancing both the process and the presentation of your research.
Creating a conceptual framework is a critical step in structuring your research to ensure clarity and focus. This guide will walk you through the process of building a robust framework, from identifying key concepts to refining your approach as your research evolves.
Using visual tools can significantly enhance the clarity and effectiveness of your conceptual framework. Decision Tree Templates for Conceptual Frameworks can be particularly useful in mapping out the relationships between variables and hypotheses.
Map Your Framework: Utilize tools like Creately’s visual canvas to diagram your framework. This visual representation helps in identifying gaps or overlaps in your framework and provides a clear overview of your research structure.
Analyze and Refine: As your research progresses, continuously evaluate and refine your framework. Adjustments may be necessary as new data comes to light or as initial assumptions are challenged.
By following these steps, you can ensure that your conceptual framework is not only well-defined but also adaptable to the changing dynamics of your research.
Effectively utilizing a conceptual framework in research not only streamlines the process but also enhances the clarity and coherence of your findings. Here are some practical tips to maximize the use of conceptual frameworks in your research endeavors.
By adhering to these tips and utilizing tools like 7 Essential Visual Tools for Social Work Assessment , researchers can ensure that their conceptual frameworks are not only robust but also practically applicable in their studies.
Creating a robust conceptual framework is pivotal for effective research, and Creately’s suite of visual tools offers unparalleled support in this endeavor. By leveraging Creately’s features, researchers can visualize, organize, and analyze their research frameworks more efficiently.
Moreover, the ability t Explore Conceptual Framework Examples directly within Creately inspires researchers by providing practical templates and examples that can be customized to suit specific research needs. This not only saves time but also enhances the quality of the conceptual framework developed.
In conclusion, Creately’s tools for creating and managing conceptual frameworks are indispensable for researchers aiming to achieve clear, structured, and impactful research outcomes.
Join over thousands of organizations that use Creately to brainstorm, plan, analyze, and execute their projects successfully.
Chiraag George is a communication specialist here at Creately. He is a marketing junkie that is fascinated by how brands occupy consumer mind space. A lover of all things tech, he writes a lot about the intersection of technology, branding and culture at large.
Thesis dialogue blueprint, writing wizard's template, research proposal compass.
Starting a research project can feel overwhelming, but breaking it down into manageable steps can make it easier. This guide will walk you through each stage, from choosing a topic to preparing for your final presentation. By following these steps, you'll be well on your way to completing a successful research project.
Identifying research interests.
Start by thinking about what excites you. Pick a topic that you find fun and fulfilling . This will keep you motivated throughout your research. Make a list of subjects you enjoy and see how they can relate to your field of study.
Once you have a few ideas, check if they are too broad or too narrow. A good topic should be manageable within the time you have. Ask yourself if you can cover all aspects of the topic in your thesis.
If you have difficulty finding a topic, consult with your advisors. Present your ideas to them and seek their guidance. They can provide valuable insights and help you refine your topic to ensure it is both engaging and manageable.
Formulating research questions.
Once you have a topic, the next step is to formulate research questions . These questions should target what you want to find out. They can focus on describing, comparing, evaluating, or explaining the research problem. A strong research question should be specific enough to be answered thoroughly using appropriate methods. Avoid questions that can be answered with a simple "yes" or "no".
After formulating your research questions, you need to justify why your research problem is important . Explain the significance of your research in the context of existing literature. Highlight the gaps your research aims to fill and how it will contribute to the field. This step is crucial for crafting a compelling research proposal.
Finally, set clear research objectives. These are the specific goals you aim to achieve through your research. They should align with your research questions and provide a roadmap for your study. Establishing well-defined objectives will make it easier to create a research plan and stay on track throughout the research process.
Finding credible sources.
Start by gathering reliable sources for your research. Use academic databases, libraries, and journals to find books, articles, and papers related to your topic. Make sure to evaluate the credibility of each source. Primary sources like published articles or autobiographies are firsthand accounts, while secondary sources like critical reviews are more removed.
Once you have your sources, read through them and take notes on key points. Look for different viewpoints and how they relate to your research question. This will help you understand the current state of research in your field. Skimming sources initially can save time; set aside useful ones for a full read later.
Identify areas that haven't been explored or questions that haven't been answered. These gaps can provide a direction for your own research. For example, if you're studying the impact of WhatsApp on communication, look for what hasn't been covered in existing studies. This will make your research more valuable and original.
Creating a solid research plan is crucial for the success of your thesis . It helps you stay organized and ensures that you cover all necessary aspects of your research.
Identifying key stakeholders.
To start, you need to identify all the key stakeholders involved in your research project. Stakeholders can include funders, academic supervisors, and anyone who will be affected by your study. Identifying potential resistance early on can help you address concerns before they become major issues.
Once you have identified your stakeholders, the next step is to conduct meetings with them. These meetings are crucial for understanding their needs and expectations. Here are some steps to ensure productive meetings:
Engaging stakeholders allows organizations to identify potential sources of resistance early in the change process. Incorporating their feedback is essential for the success of your project. Make sure to document all feedback and adjust your research plan accordingly. This will not only improve the quality of your research but also ensure that all stakeholders are on board with your project.
When choosing research methods , you need to decide between qualitative and quantitative approaches. Qualitative methods involve collecting non-numerical data, such as interviews and focus groups, to understand experiences and opinions. On the other hand, quantitative methods focus on numerical data and statistical analysis, like surveys and experiments. Sometimes, a mixed-method approach, combining both qualitative and quantitative techniques, can provide a more comprehensive understanding of your research problem.
Selecting the right data collection tools is crucial for gathering accurate and reliable data. Common tools include:
Each tool has its strengths and weaknesses, so choose the one that best aligns with your research objectives.
Ethical compliance is a fundamental aspect of any research project. Make sure to obtain informed consent from all participants and ensure their privacy and confidentiality. Additionally, consider any potential risks to participants and take steps to minimize them. Ethical research not only protects participants but also enhances the credibility of your study.
To start, you need to establish clear data collection procedures . This involves selecting the right tools and methods for gathering data. Whether you choose surveys, interviews, or experiments, ensure that your methods align with your research objectives. It's crucial to define the purpose of your project and identify research objectives before diving into data collection.
Once data is collected, the next step is to analyze it. Choose appropriate data analysis techniques that suit your research design. This could involve statistical analysis for quantitative data or thematic analysis for qualitative data. Remember, the goal is to derive meaningful insights that address your research questions.
Maintaining research integrity is essential throughout the implementation phase. This means adhering to ethical guidelines, ensuring data accuracy, and avoiding any form of bias. By maintaining high standards, you ensure the credibility and reliability of your research findings.
Structuring the proposal.
Creating a well-structured research proposal is essential for clearly communicating your research plan. Start with an introduction that outlines the background and significance of your study. Follow this with a literature review that situates your research within the existing body of work. Next, detail your research design and methodology, explaining how you will collect and analyze data. Finally, include a timeline and budget if required. A clear structure helps reviewers understand your research plan and its feasibility.
Your research statement is the heart of your proposal. It should clearly define the problem you aim to address and why it is important. Make sure your statement is specific, measurable, and achievable. This will guide your entire research process and help you stay focused. A strong research statement is crucial for convincing reviewers of the value of your study.
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and metrics are essential for measuring the success of your research. Identify the specific outcomes you aim to achieve and how you will measure them. Common metrics include data accuracy, response rates, and completion times. Including KPIs in your proposal shows that you have a clear plan for evaluating your research's impact.
Setting milestones.
Creating a timeline with specific milestones is essential for tracking your progress. For example, aim to complete your literature review by the end of the first month. These milestones will help you stay on track and make adjustments as needed. Regularly review and update your timeline to reflect your current status and any changes in your schedule.
To ensure that you are meeting your milestones, it's important to track your progress consistently. Use tools like Gantt charts or project management software to visualize your progress. Regular check-ins with your team can also help identify any issues early on and keep everyone aligned with the project goals.
Flexibility is key in managing a research project. Unexpected challenges may arise, requiring you to adjust your plan. Be prepared to reallocate resources or extend deadlines if necessary. Consulting with your advisors can provide valuable insights and help you make informed decisions when adjustments are needed.
Organizing the paper.
Start by creating a clear structure for your paper. This includes an introduction, body, and conclusion. Use a mind map or outline to group your ideas logically . This will help you stay organized and ensure that your paper flows smoothly.
Revising is a crucial part of the writing process. Read your paper out loud to catch any awkward sentences or unclear points. Make sure each paragraph supports your thesis statement and that your ideas are clearly organized. Don't hesitate to remove or revise sections that don't fit.
Always cite your sources correctly to avoid plagiarism. Use a consistent citation style and double-check your references. This not only upholds academic standards but also enhances the credibility of your work.
Creating visual aids.
Visual aids are essential for making your presentation engaging and easy to follow. Use slides, charts, and graphs to highlight key points . Ensure that your visuals are clear and not cluttered with too much information. Effective visual aids can make complex data more understandable and keep your audience engaged.
Practice is crucial for a successful presentation. Rehearse multiple times to get comfortable with the material and the flow of your talk. Consider practicing in front of friends or family to get feedback. This will help you refine your delivery and timing. Remember, the goal is to communicate your research clearly and confidently.
Anticipate questions that your audience might ask and prepare answers in advance. This will help you handle the Q&A session smoothly. Be honest if you don't know an answer and offer to follow up later. Handling questions well can demonstrate your deep understanding of the topic and leave a positive impression on your audience.
Getting ready for your final presentation can be nerve-wracking, but it doesn't have to be. Start by organizing your main points and practicing your delivery. Remember, confidence comes from preparation. For more tips and a step-by-step guide to ace your presentation, visit our website today !
Starting a research project may seem daunting, but breaking it down into manageable steps can make the process much more approachable. By clearly defining your research subject, engaging with stakeholders, crafting a precise research statement, and establishing key performance indicators, you set a strong foundation for your project. Choosing the right methodology and creating a detailed timeline will help ensure that your research is well-organized and on track. Remember, the key to a successful research project is thorough planning and consistent effort. With these steps, you can confidently navigate your research journey and achieve meaningful results.
How do i choose a good research topic.
Start by thinking about what interests you. Pick a topic that you find fun and fulfilling. This will keep you motivated throughout your research. Make a list of subjects you enjoy and see how they can relate to your field of study.
Your introduction should set the stage for your research. Provide some background information and clearly state what your research will cover. This helps readers understand the context and significance of your work.
Break down your research into smaller tasks and assign time frames to each. This helps you manage your time and stay organized throughout the project. Use a table or chart to keep track of deadlines.
Review the data you have and reorganize it so that the most important parts are central to your research. Set aside any information that is less relevant. Use digital folders or reference management software to keep everything organized.
Look for a supervisor who is supportive and knowledgeable in your area of study. Good communication is key, so make sure you establish a good rapport with them from the start.
A good place for your thesis statement is at the end of your introduction. This helps to clearly outline your main argument or point right from the start.
If you feel stuck, take a break and revisit your work with fresh eyes. Talk to your advisor or peers for new perspectives. Sometimes, stepping away for a bit can help you see things more clearly.
Make sure your research complies with ethical guidelines. This includes getting consent from participants, ensuring their privacy, and being honest about your findings. Consult your institution's ethics board if you have questions.
© 2024 Research Rebels, All rights reserved.
Your cart is currently empty.
I’m getting enough of the pieces of AgentM in place that I’m able to get it to do useful things. I wrote a small program (ok AgentM wrote part of it) that fetches the last days worth of research papers from arxiv.org , filters them to the papers related to topics I care about, and then projects those filtered papers to a uniform markdown format for easy scanning:
It uses gpt-4o-mini so it’s cost effective to run and it took 6 or 7 minutes in total to process 553 papers. Here’s the meat of the code:
I did another pass other the 81 papers it selected as being on topic and had the model select the top 10 papers for the day using another projection:
Read more This paper introduces a novel framework combining large language models (LLMs) with a dual-agent system to enhance knowledge extraction from scientific literature, achieving significant improvements in annotation accuracy.
why The integration of LLMs with a dual-agent system for knowledge extraction is a significant advancement, potentially transforming how scientific literature is analyzed and utilized.
Read more This work proposes an AI-based approach for synthesizing travel surveys using LLMs, addressing privacy concerns and demonstrating effectiveness across various U.S. metropolitan areas.
why The application of LLMs in urban mobility assessment offers a novel solution to privacy issues in travel surveys, with implications for urban planning and policy-making.
Read more The paper presents a multi-agent framework for interpreting process diagrams, enhancing data privacy and explainability while achieving superior performance in open-domain question answering tasks.
why This research enhances the understanding of complex engineering schematics, which is crucial for industries relying on process engineering, improving both privacy and explainability.
Read more This research develops an LLM-based classifier to categorize safety records at nuclear power stations, aiming to improve the efficiency and accuracy of safety classification processes.
why Improving safety classification at nuclear sites is critical for operational safety and regulatory compliance, making this application of LLMs highly impactful.
Read more The paper explores a novel approach to fine-tuning LLMs for instruction-following capabilities using non-instructional data, potentially broadening the scope of LLM applications.
why This approach could significantly expand the versatility of LLMs, allowing them to perform tasks without explicit instruction-following data, which is a major step forward in AI development.
Read more This study benchmarks vision-language models’ zero-shot visual reasoning capabilities, revealing insights into their performance and limitations in complex reasoning tasks.
why Understanding the zero-shot capabilities of vision-language models is crucial for their application in areas requiring complex visual reasoning, such as autonomous vehicles and robotics.
Read more The research assesses the impact of prompt engineering on LLMs delivering psychotherapy, highlighting the potential of AI in addressing mental health needs.
why The potential use of LLMs in psychotherapy could revolutionize mental health care, making therapy more accessible and personalized.
Read more This paper introduces HoneyComb, an LLM-based agent system tailored for materials science, significantly improving task performance and accuracy.
why The application of LLMs in materials science could accelerate research and development in this field, leading to faster innovation and discovery.
Read more The study proposes a novel reward modeling method that enhances reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) by utilizing language feedback, improving alignment with human preferences.
why Enhancing RLHF with language feedback could improve the alignment of AI systems with human values and preferences, which is essential for ethical AI development.
Read more This research develops a framework for generating valid creativity assessments using LLMs, demonstrating their potential in automating creativity testing processes.
why Automating creativity assessments with LLMs could transform educational and psychological testing, making it more efficient and accessible.
This is pretty awesome! I am tempted to write the underlying library in python.
I setup a placeholder GitHub project and would happily add you as a contributor.
That would be awesome!
My git user is icdev2dev. Thanks !
This is what I was thinking about:
I was just chatting with a long time Microsoft colleague (we created the Microsoft Bot Framework together) and he’s excited to create a .NET version of AgentM.
We were discussing that achieving absolute parity across languages isn’t super critical because you really want to lean into the strengths and paradigms of each language. What feels natural to a JavaScript developer isn’t going to feel as natural to a Python developer and it’s definitely not going to feel natural to a .net developer.
The important part is to maintain the spirit of AgentM across languages. To that end I’ll leave it up to you and others to determine what that means for Python.
That’s right.
But as I am thinking more about it, I believe that we shou;d also build in failure tolerance into the framework.
For example, if I have shown a set of sentences (amongst many such sets) to the LLM for the purpose of doing some labeling on sentences,I don’t want to lose that showing if the (distributed) job suddenly fails in between. It should be able to restart for the remaining jobs, complete those and then return the function to the caller.
The semantics of the threads allows for this distibuted jobs to fail and be restarted, I think.
I believe that that might be also what openAI might be pursuing as well (long lived jobs).
Yeah that’s a good suggestion…
@icdev2dev I just finished getting AgentM to convert all of its JS code to Python and it actually didn’t do too bad of a job. It’s easily 80% of the way there.
It got paths to some of the components wrong because it assumed everything was relative and in the same folder but given that it could only see one file at a time I think it did a good job. I told it which libraries I wanted it to use and it followed all of that guidance:
I’ll check the generated code into the python repo shortly.
Topic | Replies | Views | Activity | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Community | 7 | 133 | September 3, 2024 | |
Community , , | 3 | 407 | July 3, 2024 | |
Community | 1 | 3424 | May 7, 2024 | |
Community | 1 | 977 | May 3, 2023 | |
Community | 4 | 613 | January 3, 2024 |
An official website of the United States government
Here’s how you know
Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) funds a social and behavioral science research portfolio on public safety and violence prevention (PSVP) that supports the DHS Countering Terrorism and Targeted Violence Strategic Framework and the National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism. S&T funds research in other areas within its social science portfolio; however, this Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) focuses on the research activities performed by extramural performers as part of the portfolio’s ongoing data development for public safety and violence prevention research which may impact the privacy of individuals. This research addresses acts of terrorism and targeted violence, terrorist organizations, and domestic violent extremism (DVE). The S&T-funded projects in the public safety and violence prevention research area include data development for DHS and the broader homeland security enterprise. This Privacy Impact Assessment will address the privacy risks associated with this privacy sensitive research, and the steps S&T takes to ensure this S&T-funded research sustains and does not erode privacy protections. S&T-funded research does not collect personally identifiable information (PII) that DHS would be prohibited from collecting, including information based on the content of the individual’s speech or how they express themselves non-violently, their associations, how and whether they choose to worship, or how they choose to non-violently express their concerns or positions to government.The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) funds a social and behavioral science research portfolio on public safety and violence prevention (PSVP) that supports the DHS Countering Terrorism and Targeted Violence Strategic Framework and the National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism. S&T funds research in other areas within its social science portfolio; however, this Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) focuses on the research activities performed by extramural performers as part of the portfolio’s ongoing data development for public safety and violence prevention research which may impact the privacy of individuals. This research addresses acts of terrorism and targeted violence, terrorist organizations, and domestic violent extremism (DVE). The S&T-funded projects in the public safety and violence prevention research area include data development for DHS and the broader homeland security enterprise. This Privacy Impact Assessment will address the privacy risks associated with this privacy sensitive research, and the steps S&T takes to ensure this S&T-funded research sustains and does not erode privacy protections. S&T-funded research does not collect personally identifiable information (PII) that DHS would be prohibited from collecting, including information based on the content of the individual’s speech or how they express themselves non-violently, their associations, how and whether they choose to worship, or how they choose to non-violently express their concerns or positions to government.
Attachment | Ext. | Size | Date |
---|---|---|---|
684 KB | 09/03/2024 |
Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University
Why do prices rise like rockets … but fall like feathers, behavioral psychology sheds light on a longstanding economic puzzle..
Sergio Rebelo
Pedro Teles
Miguel Santana
Even if you’re unfamiliar with the economic term “rockets and feathers,” it describes a phenomenon you’ve likely encountered recently. When production costs increase, companies raise prices quickly, like a rocket. But when production costs fall, prices fall slowly, like a feather.
While there are some explanations for rockets and feathers, none are very satisfying, says Sergio Rebelo , a professor of finance at the Kellogg School. So, together with coauthors Miguel Santana, a graduate student in economics at Northwestern, and Pedro Teles, a professor at the Portuguese Catholic University, he set out to better understand the phenomenon by borrowing a framework used in psychology to model the process of making decisions.
This framework, popularized in Daniel Kahneman’s book Thinking Fast and Slow , stipulates that we make decisions using one of two systems: either we run on autopilot and make choices based on past decisions that have been working well enough (system 1), or we think more deeply about our choices, which is mentally taxing but likely gets us to a better decision (system 2).
In a recent working paper , Rebelo, Santana, and Teles study how firms would behave if consumers made choices according to the dual system. They find that the resulting model provides a natural explanation for the rockets and feathers phenomenon, as well as some other economic puzzles, like “shrinkflation.”
According to the dual-system framework, “when prices are stable, consumers find themselves in a familiar setting and make decisions using the automatic system 1,” says Rebelo. When prices change, however, the consumer is in an unfamiliar situation, so they turn on system 2 and make the mental effort to compare their regular brand with other alternatives.
“You [as a policymaker] don’t really want to keep prices stable. You’d like prices to change so that there’s a jolt to the consumer.” — Sergio Rebelo
All firms raise prices when costs go up significantly, because otherwise they would have a negative margin. But when costs fall, companies with solid sales have an incentive to keep prices constant, given that price changes could lead customers to turn on system 2 and potentially switch brands.
In this way, the strategic interaction between firms and near-rational consumers generates the rockets and feathers phenomenon.
Consumers, of course, could benefit from turning on system 2 from time to time.
If you decide which brand to buy and then never revisit that choice, you may not be getting the best deal, Rebelo explains. The goal isn’t to be thinking about every purchase decision using system 2; that would be too taxing. And, indeed, the cognitive burden on consumers during hyperinflation is substantial, as people spend a lot of brain power deciding what to buy.
But a little jolt every now and then by way of an inflationary or deflationary price change could actually help consumers, says Rebelo—adding a twist to current thinking on monetary policy.
“You [as a policymaker] don’t really want to keep prices stable. You’d like prices to change so that there’s a jolt to the consumer,” he says. “It’s a trade-off: you don’t want the cognitive burden of people in hyperinflation, but you don’t want people to get stuck in their old ways where whatever errors they’ve been making are going to be with them forever. You want to jolt people into optimizing a little bit.”
The researchers’ model also helps explain some other odd pricing behaviors.
Take shrinkflation, for example. This happens when companies keep the price of a product stable but reduce its size. They’re willing to incur the cost of changing their packaging to avoid changing the sticker price. “It’s truly bizarre,” Rebelo says, until you think of it as a way of preventing consumers from turning on system 2.
The model also helps explain why subscription services like Netflix or Amazon Prime change their prices so rarely. Even though there’s almost no cost to changing their price—it’s just an email to customers—the prices of these services have remained remarkably stable over the years.
The rationale, Rebelo says, “is that they don’t want me to revisit the decision of subscribing to Netflix.”
“We think this system 1 and system 2 framework is a good way to think about a range of economic phenomena,” Rebelo says.
Another nice feature of the model, Rebelo says, is that it brings together two different fields: macroeconomics and behavioral psychology.
Marketers often employ cognitive psychology to understand how consumers make their decisions and to nudge them toward a particular choice. On the other hand, macroeconomists generally presume that consumers make optimal choices.
Rebelo says this dichotomy is on display if you walk from one department at Kellogg to another.
“If you go to a marketing class, you hear about deviations from optimal behavior and how they can be used to market a product. If you go to a macroeconomics class, you learn about models in which consumers are incredibly rational,” Rebelo says. Instead of having dichotomy, “maybe we should bring these two perspectives together.”
MUFG Bank Distinguished Professor of International Finance; Professor of Finance
Emily Stone is a writer in Chicago. She is the former senior editor at Insight .
Rebelo, Sergio, Pedro Teles, and Miguel Santana. 2024. “Behavioral Sticky Prices.” Working paper.
Read the original
We’ll send you one email a week with content you actually want to read, curated by the Insight team.
Here’s how you know
.header_greentext{color:greenimportant;font-size:24pximportant;font-weight:500important;}.header_bluetext{color:blueimportant;font-size:18pximportant;font-weight:500important;}.header_redtext{color:redimportant;font-size:28pximportant;font-weight:500important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2fimportant;font-size:28pximportant;font-weight:500important;}.header_purpletext{color:purpleimportant;font-size:31pximportant;font-weight:500important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellowimportant;font-size:20pximportant;font-weight:500important;}.header_blacktext{color:blackimportant;font-size:22pximportant;font-weight:500important;}.header_whitetext{color:whiteimportant;font-size:22pximportant;font-weight:500important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2fimportant;}.green_header{color:greenimportant;font-size:24pximportant;font-weight:500important;}.blue_header{color:blueimportant;font-size:18pximportant;font-weight:500important;}.red_header{color:redimportant;font-size:28pximportant;font-weight:500important;}.purple_header{color:purpleimportant;font-size:31pximportant;font-weight:500important;}.yellow_header{color:yellowimportant;font-size:20pximportant;font-weight:500important;}.black_header{color:blackimportant;font-size:22pximportant;font-weight:500important;}.white_header{color:whiteimportant;font-size:22pximportant;font-weight:500important;} what is whole person health.
Whole person health involves looking at the whole person—not just separate organs or body systems—and considering multiple factors that promote either health or disease. It means helping and empowering individuals, families, communities, and populations to improve their health in multiple interconnected biological, behavioral, social, and environmental areas. Instead of just treating a specific disease, whole person health focuses on restoring health, promoting resilience, and preventing diseases across a lifespan.
Health and disease are not separate, disconnected states but instead occur on a path that can move in two different directions, either toward health or toward disease.
On this path, many factors, including one’s biological makeup; some unhealthy behaviors, such as poor diet, sedentary lifestyle, chronic stress, and poor sleep; as well as social aspects of life—the conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work, and age—can lead to chronic diseases of more than one organ system. On the other hand, self-care, lifestyle, and behavioral interventions may help with the return to health.
Chronic diseases, such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease, obesity, and degenerative joint disease, can also occur with chronic pain, depression, and opioid misuse—all conditions exacerbated by chronic stress. Some chronic diseases increase the immediate and long-term risks with COVID-19 infection. Understanding the condition in which a person has lived, addressing behaviors at an early stage, and managing stress can not only prevent multiple diseases but also help restore health and stop the progression to disease across a person’s lifespan.
Some health care systems and programs are now focusing more on whole person health.
The VA’s Whole Health System of Care and Whole Health approach aims to improve the health and well-being of veterans and to address lifestyle and environmental root causes of chronic disease. The approach shifts from a disease-centered focus to a more personalized approach that engages and empowers veterans early in and throughout their lives to prioritize healthy lifestyle changes in areas like nutrition, activity, sleep, relationships, and surroundings. Conventional testing and treatment are combined with complementary and integrative health approaches that may include acupuncture, biofeedback, massage therapy, yoga, and meditation.
The Total Force Fitness program arose within the U.S. Department of Defense Military Health System in response to the need for a more holistic approach—a focus on the whole person instead of separate parts or only symptoms—to the demands of multiple deployments and the strains on the U.S. Armed Forces and their family members. The focus extends the idea of total fitness to include the health, well-being, and resilience of the whole person, family, community, and U.S. military.
Established in 2020, the Whole Health Institute’s Whole Health model helps people identify what matters most to them and build a plan for their journey to whole health. The model provides tools to help people take good care of their body, mind, and spirit, and involves working with a health care team as well as tapping into the support of family, friends, and communities.
The North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services has incorporated a whole person health approach into its health care system by focusing on integrating physical, behavioral, and social health. The state has taken steps to encourage collaborative behavioral health care and help resolve widespread inequities in social conditions, such as housing and nutritious food access.
The Ornish Program for Reversing Heart Disease is an intensive cardiac rehabilitation program that has been shown to reverse the progression of coronary heart disease through lifestyle changes, without drugs or surgery. The program is covered by Medicare and some health insurance companies. The program’s lifestyle changes include exercise, smoking cessation, stress management, social support, and a whole-foods, plant-based diet low in total fat. The program is offered by a team of health care professionals who provide the support that individuals need to make and maintain lasting changes in lifestyle.
A growing body of research suggests the benefits of healthy behaviors, environments, and policies to maintain health and prevent, treat, and reverse chronic diseases. This research includes several large, long-term epidemiological studies—such as the Framingham Heart Study, Nurses’ Health Study, and Adventist Health Studies—that have evaluated the connections between lifestyle, diet, genetics, health, and disease.
There is a lack, however, of randomized controlled trials and other types of research on multicomponent interventions and whole person health. Challenges come with conducting this type of research and with finding appropriate ways to assess the evidence. But opportunities are emerging to explore new paths toward reliable and rigorous research on whole person health.
Yes, NCCIH plans to fund research on whole person health . (Details can be found in the NCCIH Strategic Plan FY 2021–2025: Mapping a Pathway to Research on Whole Person Health . )
By deepening the scientific understanding of the connections that exist across the different areas of human health, researchers can better understand how conditions interrelate, identify multicomponent interventions that address these problems, and determine the best ways to support individuals through the full continuum of their health experience, including the return to health.
Nccih clearinghouse.
The NCCIH Clearinghouse provides information on NCCIH and complementary and integrative health approaches, including publications and searches of Federal databases of scientific and medical literature. The Clearinghouse does not provide medical advice, treatment recommendations, or referrals to practitioners.
Toll-free in the U.S.: 1-888-644-6226
Telecommunications relay service (TRS): 7-1-1
Website: https://www.nccih.nih.gov
Email: [email protected] (link sends email)
NCCIH and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) provide tools to help you understand the basics and terminology of scientific research so you can make well-informed decisions about your health. Know the Science features a variety of materials, including interactive modules, quizzes, and videos, as well as links to informative content from Federal resources designed to help consumers make sense of health information.
Explaining How Research Works (NIH)
Know the Science: How To Make Sense of a Scientific Journal Article
Understanding Clinical Studies (NIH)
A service of the National Library of Medicine, PubMed® contains publication information and (in most cases) brief summaries of articles from scientific and medical journals. For guidance from NCCIH on using PubMed, see How To Find Information About Complementary Health Approaches on PubMed .
Website: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
NCCIH thanks Mary Beth Kester, M.S., and Helene M. Langevin, M.D., NCCIH, for their review of this publication.
This publication is not copyrighted and is in the public domain. Duplication is encouraged.
NCCIH has provided this material for your information. It is not intended to substitute for the medical expertise and advice of your health care provider(s). We encourage you to discuss any decisions about treatment or care with your health care provider. The mention of any product, service, or therapy is not an endorsement by NCCIH.
Related Topics
NCCIH Strategic Plan FY 2021–2025 Mapping a Pathway to Research on Whole Person Health
Methodological Approaches for Whole Person Research Workshop
Transforming Veterans’ Health: Implementing a Whole Health System of Care
Complementary, Alternative, or Integrative Health: What’s In a Name?
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
A theoretical framework guides the research process like a roadmap for the study, so you need to get this right. Theoretical framework 1,2 is the structure that supports and describes a theory. A theory is a set of interrelated concepts and definitions that present a systematic view of phenomena by describing the relationship among the variables for explaining these phenomena.
A theoretical framework is a foundational review of existing theories that serves as a roadmap for developing the arguments you will use in your own work. Theories are developed by researchers to explain phenomena, draw connections, and make predictions. In a theoretical framework, you explain the existing theories that support your research ...
A conceptual framework illustrates the expected relationship between your variables. It defines the relevant objectives for your research process and maps out how they come together to draw coherent conclusions. Tip. You should construct your conceptual framework before you begin collecting your data.
Theoretical Framework. Definition: Theoretical framework refers to a set of concepts, theories, ideas, and assumptions that serve as a foundation for understanding a particular phenomenon or problem. It provides a conceptual framework that helps researchers to design and conduct their research, as well as to analyze and interpret their findings.
A theoretical framework is a foundational review of existing theories that serves as a roadmap for developing the arguments you will use in your own work. Theories are developed by researchers to explain phenomena, draw connections, and make predictions. In a theoretical framework, you explain the existing theories that support your research ...
A conceptual framework in research is used to understand a research problem and guide the development and analysis of the research. It serves as a roadmap to conceptualize and structure the work by providing an outline that connects different ideas, concepts, and theories within the field of study. A conceptual framework pictorially or verbally ...
The theoretical framework adds context around the theory itself based on how scholars had previously tested the theory in relation their overall research design [i.e., purpose of the study, methods of collecting data or information, methods of analysis, the time frame in which information is collected, study setting, and the methodological ...
Theoretical Framework Example for a Thesis or Dissertation. Published on October 14, 2015 by Sarah Vinz. Revised on July 18, 2023 by Tegan George. Your theoretical framework defines the key concepts in your research, suggests relationships between them, and discusses relevant theories based on your literature review.
The theoretical framework is where you explain the theories that support your research, showing that your work is grounded in established ideas. Writing one ...
Abstract. Theoretical frameworks can be confounding. They are supposed to be very important, but it is not always clear what they are or why you need them. Using ideas from Chaps. 1 and 2, we describe them as local theories that are custom-designed for your study. Although they might use parts of larger well-known theories, they are created by ...
hole come together and build on and into each other. Ideally, a conceptual framework helps you become more discerning and selective in terms of methods, grounding theories, and. pproaches to your research (Ravitch & Riggan, 2016).Collaboration is a horizontal value in qualitative research, and we strongly cri-tique.
Research frameworks provide a foundation for your study and keeps it focused and concise. Think of a framework as a roadmap or blueprint for developing your study and supporting research. This short video series will help you help you identify, locate, and retrieve theoretical and conceptual frameworks through the library databases and/or Google.
Frameworks are important research tools across nearly all fields of science. They are critically important for structuring empirical inquiry and theoretical development in the environmental social sciences, governance research and practice, the sustainability sciences and fields of social-ecological systems research in tangent with the associated disciplines of those fields (Binder et al. 2013 ...
Imenda (2014) contends that the framework "is the soul of every research project" (p.185). Essentially, it determines how the researcher formulates the research problem, goes about investigating the problem, and what meaning or significance the research lends to the data collected and analyzed investigating the problem.
The Importance of Research Frameworks. Researchers may draw on several elements to frame their research. Generally, a framework is regarded as "a set of ideas that you use when you are forming your decisions and judgements" 13 or "a system of rules, ideas, or beliefs that is used to plan or decide something." 14 Research frameworks may consist of a single formal theory or part thereof ...
A framework is not prescriptive, but it needs to be suitable for the research question(s), setting and participants. Therefore, the researcher might use different frameworks to guide different research studies. A framework informs the study's recruitment and sampling, and informs, guides or structures how data is collected and analysed.
A conceptual framework illustrates the expected relationship between your variables. It defines the relevant objectives for your research process and maps out how they come together to draw coherent conclusions. Tip. You should construct your conceptual framework before you begin collecting your data.
Including a conceptual framework in a research study is important, but researchers often opt to include either a conceptual or a theoretical framework. Either may be adequate, but both provide greater insight into the research approach. For instance, a research team plans to test a novel component of an existing theory. ...
A research framework provides an underlying structure or model to support our collective research efforts. Up until now, we've referenced, referred to and occasionally approached research as more of an amalgamated set of activities. But as we know, research comes in many different shapes and sizes, is variable in scope, and can be used to ...
Often the most difficult part of a research study is preparing the proposal based around a theoretical or philosophical framework. Graduate students '…express confusion, a lack of knowledge, and frustration with the challenge of choosing a theoretical framework and understanding how to apply it'.1 However, the importance in understanding and applying a theoretical framework in research ...
A conceptual framework in research is not just a tool but a vital roadmap that guides the entire research process. It integrates various theories, assumptions, and beliefs to provide a structured approach to research. By defining a conceptual framework, researchers can focus their inquiries and clarify their hypotheses, leading to more ...
Here's how to create a theoretical framework for your study or research paper in four steps: 1. Define your objective. The first step in creating a theoretical framework is to define your research objective and then gather supporting documents. Consider what you hope to achieve with your study and what new information you aim to bring to your ...
How do I choose a good research topic? Start by thinking about what interests you. Pick a topic that you find fun and fulfilling. This will keep you motivated throughout your research. Make a list of subjects you enjoy and see how they can relate to your field of study. What should I include in the introduction of my research paper?
I'm getting enough of the pieces of AgentM in place that I'm able to get it to do useful things. I wrote a small program (ok AgentM wrote part of it) that fetches the last days worth of research papers from arxiv.org, filters them to the papers related to topics I care about, and then projects those filtered papers to a uniform markdown format for easy scanning: It uses gpt-4o-mini so it ...
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) funds a social and behavioral science research portfolio on public safety and violence prevention (PSVP) that supports the DHS Countering Terrorism and Targeted Violence Strategic Framework and the National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism.
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to examine how mindfulness reduces consumers' buy-now-pay-later (BNPL) payment scheme usage and how that relates to their overall well-being. Design/methodology/approach: This study uses partial least squares structural equation modeling to test the hypotheses of a conceptual framework which is rooted in the extant literature, using an approximately ...
According to the dual-system framework, "when prices are stable, consumers find themselves in a familiar setting and make decisions using the automatic system 1," says Rebelo. When prices change, however, the consumer is in an unfamiliar situation, so they turn on system 2 and make the mental effort to compare their regular brand with other ...
The Total Force Fitness program arose within the U.S. Department of Defense Military Health System in response to the need for a more holistic approach—a focus on the whole person instead of separate parts or only symptoms—to the demands of multiple deployments and the strains on the U.S. Armed Forces and their family members.